2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.10.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Agri-environment schemes: Farmers’ acceptance and perception of potential ‘Payment by Results’ in grassland—A case study in England

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
46
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
46
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For example the current study identifies the contrasting situation of a THM site containing only five positive indicator species and >50% cover of negative indicator species being in receipt of the same payment rate (€314/ha) as a THM site with 19 positive indicator species and <10% cover of negative indicator species. A possible approach to address these challenges is to progress towards measures and schemes that are based on "payment by results", as opposed to "payment by action" (Schroeder et al, 2013). Payment-by-results approaches are based directly on the delivery of an ecosystem service; the more of the service that is provided, the higher the payment.…”
Section: Payment By Actions or Payment By Results?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example the current study identifies the contrasting situation of a THM site containing only five positive indicator species and >50% cover of negative indicator species being in receipt of the same payment rate (€314/ha) as a THM site with 19 positive indicator species and <10% cover of negative indicator species. A possible approach to address these challenges is to progress towards measures and schemes that are based on "payment by results", as opposed to "payment by action" (Schroeder et al, 2013). Payment-by-results approaches are based directly on the delivery of an ecosystem service; the more of the service that is provided, the higher the payment.…”
Section: Payment By Actions or Payment By Results?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These studies include a broad range of topics, including deforestation restrictions (SCHMIDT; MCDERMOTT, 2015), forest restoration (GONÇALVES; GOMES, 2014), agroenvironmental measures (GUILLEM; BARNES, 2013;SCHROEDER, 2011), participation in environmental governance (ATARI et al, 2009;DAVIES;HODGE, 2006;DEFRANCESCO et al, 2008;GREINER;GREGG, 2011) and maintenance of ecosystem services (POPPENBORG; KOELLNER, 2013;VIGNOLA et al, 2010). These studies observe various factors that influence the rate and extent of the adoption of conservation practices by rural producers, including (1) economic and financial factors (e.g.…”
Section: Adherence To Environmental Policiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many authors have discussed this issue from ecological Whittingham, 2007;Concepción et al, 2008), social and psychological (Beedell and Rehman, 1999;Willock et al, 1999;Wilson and Hart, 2000;Siebert et al, 2006;Guillem and Barnes, 2013) and economic (Falconer, 2000;Mettepenningen et al, 2011) perspectives. With respect to the social and psychological aspects, there are numerous studies on farmers' attitudes, perceptions and behaviour towards AES (Herzon and Mikk, 2007;Fjellstad et al, 2009;Giannoccaro and Berbel, 2013;Guillem and Barnes, 2013), the factors affecting farmers' willingness to participate (Sattler and Nagel, 2010;Schroeder et al, 2013) and the design of agri-environmental measures (Schroeder et al, 2013).…”
Section: Research Needs and Objectives Of This Papermentioning
confidence: 99%