“Flowering Meadows”, a result-oriented agri-environmental measure: Technical and value changes in favour of biodiversity

Fleury, Philippe; Sérès, Claire; Dobremez, Laurent; Nettier, Baptiste; Pauthenet, Yves

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.02.007

Cited by 60 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…CFP flowers have particular significance: their aesthetic appeal provides a sense of satisfaction for farmers but they are also a visible, comparable medium denoting conservation farmer expertise through familiar criteria such as yield and acreage, mirroring farmers’ behaviour in wildflower projects described by de Sainte Marie () and Fleury et al . ().…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Annual surveys, farm visits and discussions about how many acres, seeds and species they have are processes through which the farmers judge one another's performance, and contribute to the symbolic value with which they determine 'good farmer' status (Burton 2004). CFP flowers have particular significance: their aesthetic appeal provides a sense of satisfaction for farmers but they are also a visible, comparable medium denoting conservation farmer expertise through familiar criteria such as yield and acreage, mirroring farmers' behaviour in wildflower projects described by de Sainte Marie (2014) and Fleury et al (2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

‘Farming on the Edge’: Wellbeing and Participation in Agri‐Environmental Schemes

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates aspects of farmers' wellbeing in the context of their participation in an agro-environmental scheme (AES), the North Yorkshire Cornfield Flowers Project (CFP) in the North East of England. Recent developments in wellbeing studies have informed data collection and analysis. Ethnographic data was gathered via observation, field notes and semi-structured interviews with farmers and non-farmer volunteers. The article discusses how farmers' social activity, identity, status and place belonging are enhanced through participation in CFP, and how this might promote their continued AES work. Recognising the potential for AES participation to enhance farmer's wellbeing may demonstrate added value of AES and strengthen the argument for AES funding once the UK leaves the European Union. There is currently little existing evidence in the literature to support this since with only a few exceptions, wellbeing has been characteristically neglected in rural studies research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

‘Farming on the Edge’: Wellbeing and Participation in Agri‐Environmental Schemes

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Chapman found a parallel result among participants in Costa Rica's PES, where most providers describe the payments as an 'ayuda', a type of help or assistance to protect the forest and support rural landowners (Chapman et al, in prep). The 'Flowering Meadows' PES in France focuses on outcomes while leaving farmers flexibility to determine means, allowing farmers to demonstrate their competence while also helping to change farmer's perspectives on biodiversity (Fleury et al, 2015).…”

Section: Reward Stewardship Not Particular Actions [Vs New Externalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Flexibility not only makes PES programs more attractive to land managers but also allows them to apply their place-specific knowledge to achieve program goals, e.g., targeting riparian plantings to maximize shading of rivers or filtering of runoff (see also 7 below). For example, programs where farmers propose their own solutions to achieve ES goals or are involved collaboratively with other stakeholders to define the goals and means may be more motivating (Fleury et al, 2015). It is not only important to allow flexibility to find creative solutions in order to find synergies between conservation and land managers' other goals, but also because the process of problem-solving is in itself enjoyable and motivating for many (Kaplan, 2000).…”

Section: Reward Stewardship Not Particular Actions [Vs New Externalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential—For Transformation Towards Sustainability

Chan

Anderson

Chapman

et al. 2017

Ecological Economics

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Payments for ecosystem services (PES) programs are one prominent strategy to address economic externalities of resource extraction and commodity production, improving both social and ecological outcomes. But do PES and related incentive programs achieve that lofty goal? Along with considerable enthusiasm, PES has faced a wide range of substantial critiques. In this paper, we characterize seven major classes of concerns associated with common PES designs, and use these as inspiration to consider potential avenues for improvements in PES outcomes and uptake. The problems include (1) new externalities, (2) misplacement of rights and responsibilities, (3) crowding out existing motivations, (4) efficiency-equity tradeoffs, (5) monitoring costs, (6) limited applicability, and (7) top-down prescription/alienating agency. As currently practiced, many PES programs are thus of limited benefit and even potentially detrimental to sustainability. From this dire conclusion, we highlight several innovations that might be combined and extended in a novel approach to PES that may address all seven problems. Recognizing that PES necessarily articulate and even normalize values, our proposed approach entails designing these institutions intentionally to articulate rights and responsibilities conducive to sustainability-those we might collectively seek to entrench. Problems remain, and new ones may arise, but the proposed approach may offer a way to reimagine PES as a major social and economic tool for enabling sustainable relationships with nature, conserving and restoring ecosystems and their benefits for people now and in the future.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, evidence from the "Burren Farming for Conservation Programme" and further afield (Fleury et al, 2015;Russi et al, 2016) indicate that these limitations can be addressed (especially for grassland habitats) and that the benefits outweigh the limitations. Matzdorf et al (2008) concluded that AE schemes could be improved by refocusing on a payment by result approach, as opposed to the more traditional payment by action method.…”

Section: Targeting and Value For Moneymentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of grassland vegetation from three agri-environment conservation measures

hUallacháin¹,

Finn²,

Keogh³

et al. 2016

Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Semi-natural grassland habitats have declined significantly throughout Europe. To halt the decline, grassland conservation measures have been included in most European agri-environment schemes. This is the first study to compare the botanical composition of grassland habitats managed under the Irish Agri-Environment Options Scheme (AEOS). Sixty fields on drystock pastoral farms in receipt of agri-environment payments for grassland conservation were surveyed, with 20 fields being enrolled in each of the following AEOS options: Traditional Hay Meadow (THM), Species-Rich Grassland (SRG) and Natura 2000 species-rich grassland (Natura). The vegetation quality of sites enrolled in the Natura measure was higher than the quality of those enrolled in the THM and SRG measures. Natura sites had the greatest species richness, with a mean >40 species per site, which included approximately 17 species indicative of high botanical quality. Traditional Hay Meadows sites had the lowest species richness (mean: 29 species per site) and were dominated by species associated with improved grassland. Some THM sites had good levels of botanical richness and were similar in composition to Natura sites, with some Natura sites having lower vegetation quality, more similar to that of THM sites. Species-Rich Grassland had botanical richness that was intermediate between THM and Natura sites. A thorough assessment of the effectiveness of these measures was confounded by a lack of quantitative objectives for the target community composition to be attained. We discuss limitations and potential opportunities regarding the design, targeting, implementation and cost-effectiveness of these agri-environment measures.

show abstract

“Flowering Meadows”, a result-oriented agri-environmental measure: Technical and value changes in favour of biodiversity

Cited by 60 publications

References 36 publications

‘Farming on the Edge’: Wellbeing and Participation in Agri‐Environmental Schemes

‘Farming on the Edge’: Wellbeing and Participation in Agri‐Environmental Schemes

Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential—For Transformation Towards Sustainability

A comparison of grassland vegetation from three agri-environment conservation measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About