Impacts of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy “Greening” Reform on Agricultural Development, Biodiversity, and Ecosystem Services

Hristov, Jordan; Clough, Yann; Sahlin, Ullrika; Smith, Henrik G.; Stjernman, Martin; Olsson, Ola; Sahrbacher, Amanda; Brady, Mark

doi:10.1002/aepp.13037

Cited by 41 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In areas with higher population density, such as Orrevassdraget, immaterial FES dominate, even in areas that are mostly covered by agricultural land use. This reinforces the notion of farmers serving as landscape stewards; the management of their lands serving not only their private interests, but a broader value of the landscape, as reflected in for instance the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy [53] and Norwegian subsidies to farmers for buffer strips along streams [54]. The spatial shift in dominance from material to immaterial services linked to population density can be most clearly seen in Odense (Fig 4).…”

Section: Testing Our Hypothesessupporting

confidence: 57%

Estimating societal benefits from Nordic catchments: An integrative approach using a final ecosystem services framework

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nordic catchments provide a variety of ecosystem services, from harvestable goods to mitigation of climate change and recreational possibilities. Flows of supplied ecosystem services depend on a broad range of factors, including climate, hydrology, land management and human population density. The aims of this study were: 1) to quantify the total economic value (TEV) of consumed ecosystem services across Nordic catchments, 2) to explain variation in ecosystem service value using socio-geographic and natural factors as explanatory variables in multiple linear regression, and 3) to determine which societal groups benefit from these ecosystem services. Furthermore, we tested the scientific rigour of our framework based on the concept of final ecosystem services (FES). We used a spatially explicit, integrative framework for ecosystem services quantification to compile data on final ecosystem services provision from six catchments across Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Our estimates showed a broad variation in TEV and in the proportion contributed by separate services, with the highest TEV of €7,199 ± 4,561 ha-1 y-1 (mean ± standard deviation) in the Norwegian Orrevassdraget catchment, and the lowest TEV of €183 ± 517 ha-1 y-1 in the Finnish Simojoki catchment. The value of material services was dependent on both geographic factors and land management practices, while the value of immaterial services was strongly dependent on population density and the availability of water. Using spatial data on land use, forest productivity and population density in a GIS analysis showed where hotspots of ecosystem services supply are located, and where specific stakeholder groups benefit most. We show that our framework is applicable to a broad variety of data sources and across countries, making international comparative analyses possible.

show abstract

Section: Testing Our Hypothesessupporting

confidence: 57%

Estimating societal benefits from Nordic catchments: An integrative approach using a final ecosystem services framework

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The green direct payment, in turn, has failed to generate significant environmental benefits, due to its flaws as an environmental policy instrument (e.g., high levels of exceptions and lack of potential for spatial targeting). 35 , 36 In addition, insufficient monitoring and low sanctioning levels have historically hampered conditionality, but the Commission has not addressed these flaws. Consequently, it is unrealistic to expect conditionality to greatly improve the environment, but it may provide some simplification for administrators.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Billions in Misspent EU Agricultural Subsidies Could Support the Sustainable Development Goals

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is the guiding policy for agriculture and the largest single budget item in the European Union (EU). Agriculture is essential to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), but the CAP's contribution to do so is uncertain. We analyzed the distribution of €59.4 billion of 2015 CAP payments and show that current CAP spending exacerbates income inequality within agriculture, while little funding supports climate-friendly and biodiverse farming regions. More than €24 billion of 2015 CAP direct payments went to regions where average farm incomes are already above the EU median income. A further €2.5 billion in rural development payments went to primarily urban areas. Effective monitoring indicators are also missing. We recommend redirecting and better monitoring CAP payments toward achieving the environmental, sustainability, and rural development goals stated in the CAP's new objectives, which would support the SDGs, the European Green Deal, and green COVID-19 recovery.

show abstract

“…The results in this direction are very confused, because some researchers state that, due to the voluntary adoption of the second pillar-in particular, farmers tend to adopt this type of measure with simple management actions, with limited results in terms of biodiversity-the spread of more complex actions is very limited [51,52]. To address these limitations, many studies have been conducted in order to assess the relationship between biodiversity and CAP, in order to provide some information that will assist the implementation of CAP 2021-2027, because the effects of the CAP reforms on biodiversity could be different depending on the complexity of the farm enterprise [27], the countries where the agricultural holdings are located [53,54], the landscape characteristic of the country [55,56], and the compatibility of direct payment schemes [57,58].…”

Section: Blue Cluster: Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty Years of Common Agricultural Policy in Europe: A Bibliometric Analysis

Fusco

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The last few years have been marked by the increasing attention paid by policymakers to agricultural policies. Within this scenario, the Common Agricultural Policy represents one of the main initiatives developed by the European Commission to enhance the agricultural sector. Academics have actively contributed to the debate through empirical studies in order to evaluate the main strengths and weakness related to the public investments made by the European Commission. However, despite the relevance of the topic, the scientific debate is characterized by a high degree of fragmentation caused by the involvement of academics with different scientific backgrounds. Building on this evidence, this paper aims to contribute to the scientific debate on Common Agricultural Policy through a bibliometric analysis. The findings reveal the existence of three independent and complementary research clusters.

show abstract

Impacts of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy “Greening” Reform on Agricultural Development, Biodiversity, and Ecosystem Services

Cited by 41 publications

References 35 publications

Estimating societal benefits from Nordic catchments: An integrative approach using a final ecosystem services framework

Estimating societal benefits from Nordic catchments: An integrative approach using a final ecosystem services framework

Billions in Misspent EU Agricultural Subsidies Could Support the Sustainable Development Goals

Twenty Years of Common Agricultural Policy in Europe: A Bibliometric Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About