Analysis of EU support for managed succession of agricultural land in the Czech Republic

Jarský, Vilém; Pulkrab, Karel

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.020

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some others have focused on specific programmes related to agroforestry (Brescancin et al, 2017, Desjeux et al, 2014, Sarvašová et al 2017 or to specific measures that address agriculture and forestry jointly (Caruso et al, 2015, Sin andNowak, 2014). The economic advantages of subsidies from the rural development programmes for afforestation of agricultural lands for forest owners and farmers have been emphasized by Jarský and Pulkrab (2013) in Czech Republic; Lawrence and Dandy (2014) Empirical studies on subsidized forest management have often come to contrasting conclusions. Some authors have found that governmental subsidies had an adverse effect on economic performance of the forestry sector (Aoyagi and Managi, 2004), while others found that subsidies had a positive influence on the technical efficiency of forest products (Aclkgoz and Mack, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies?

Quiroga¹,

Suárez²,

Ficko³

et al. 2019

Forest Policy and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study analyses the linkages between private forest owners' perceptions of forest management, and their affinity for subsidies, in a range of European countries. Society increasingly requires the provision of ecosystem services from forests, but the willingness of forest owners to redirect management goals from wood production to the provision of public goods is crucial for sustaining ecosystem services. EU incentives in the forestry sector are still mainly oriented towards an anthropocentric vision of forest management. Forest owners and managers are diverse, and although many efforts have been made to understand the role of forest subsidies in private forest management, it is still necessary to analyse the different perspectives on forest subsidies with a regional comparative approach. This paper explores European private forest owners' affinity for subsidiesthrough survey data at European leveland estimates an ordered probit model to (i) analyse how private forest owners in Europe respond to subsidies in forestry, including regional differences in terms of affinity for subsidies, (ii) characterise the factors that influence these responses and (iii) discuss lessons learned related to forest owners' attitudes on subsidies and the implications for introducing similar kind of incentives such as payments for ecosystem services. Simulations were conducted to examine the potential effects of changes in property fragmentation or the time allotted to forest activities. Forest owners with an utilitarian view of forest management, bigger forest holdings, full or part-time farmers and forest owners from East Europe are most in favour of forest subsidies. Property fragmentation and absenteeism decreases affinity for subsidies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies?

Quiroga¹,

Suárez²,

Ficko³

et al. 2019

Forest Policy and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the last few years, many research studies focused on issues of land reform, land policies, land market, land leasing arrangements and emerging market economies in Central and Eastern Europe (Csaki, Lerman, 2000;Bičík, Jančák, 2006;Bojnec, 2011;Jarský, Pulkrab, 2013;Lieskovský et al, 2013;Skokanová et al, 2012;Hartvigsen, 2014;Kanianska et al, 2014;Munteanu et al, 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification of Land Use Changes (Model Area: Nitra Town)

Haladová

Petrovič

2015

Ekológia (Bratislava)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Haladová I., Petrovič F.: Classification of land use changes (model area: Nitra town). Ekológia (Bratislava), Vol. 34, No. 3, p. 249-259, 2015. This paper deals with the new classification of land use changes. We chose Nitra town in Slovakia as a model area. We examined changes of land use for the period 2003-2013. The main result of this work is a table for types of land use changes and a map that shows the location of these changes in Nitra town. Nitra is constantly expanding its area and it is also significantly changing within its borders. Agriculturally used surroundings of the town are being transformed into build-up areas and industrial parks. This transformation causes a loss of agricultural land and vegetation, in general. Agriculture in this region has been gradually declining and disappearing in the past years. On the other side, urbanisation, technicisation and industrialisation are highly supported.

show abstract

“…Jarský and Pulkrab (2013) found that in 12% of 43 groups of forest habitat types (FHTs), all rates of the Czech afforestation subsidy are higher than costs, and costs are lower than incentives in 32% of combinations of a FHT group and a subsidy rate. This discrepancy is consistent with some, albeit relatively marginal, results of this research, especially the relatively large share of pine afforestation (9% against 3% 'natural' share), where subsidy rate exceeds actual costs in 88% of Jarský and Pulkrab's (2013) FHT/rate combinations. Other than that, results suggest that market forces and other non-policy factors, such as professional norms and values, largely appear to shape afforestation projects.…”

Section: Tree Speciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Niskanen, 1999;Anthon et al, 2005;Mogas et al, 2005;Pahkasalo et al, 2005;Nájera et al, 2005Nájera et al, , 2007Moons and Rousseau, 2007;Clinch, 2000;Jarský and Pulkrab, 2013), performance of incentives in, and barriers to, generating afforestation output (Selby and Petäjistö, 2000;Madsen, 2003;McCarthy et al, 2003;Kassioumis et al, 2004;Praestholm et al, 2006;Moons and Rousseau, 2007;Moons et al, 2008;van Gossum et al, 2008;Wynne-Jones, 2013;Duesberg et al, 2013Duesberg et al, , 2014aVedel et al, 2015), and environmental outcomes, including adverse impact of some subsidy schemes on local biodiversity (e.g. Plantinga and Wu, 2003;Díaz et al, 1998;Pedrini and Sergio, 2001) and afforestation schemes' role in creating carbon sinks (van Kooten et al, 1995;Cacho et al, 2003;Tassone et al, 2004;Ovando et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contribution of afforestation subsidies policy to climate change adaptation in the Czech Republic

Kotecký

2015

Land Use Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis of EU support for managed succession of agricultural land in the Czech Republic

Cited by 15 publications

References 31 publications

What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies?

What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies?

Classification of Land Use Changes (Model Area: Nitra Town)

Contribution of afforestation subsidies policy to climate change adaptation in the Czech Republic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About