Learning from agri-environment schemes in Australia. Investing in biodiversity and other ecosystem services on farms

Ansell, Dean; Gibson, Fiona; Salt, David E.

doi:10.26530/oapen_610749

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Private landholders typically have larger properties, stronger literacy, and greater financial resources; these socioeconomic characteristics have been associated with early adoption of other innovations (e.g., Daba, 2003; Garcia De Jalón, Iglesias, & Barnes, 2016; Ghadim, Pannell, & Burton, 2005; Prager & Posthumus, 2010). Alignment with the landholder's objectives is also known to be critical for adoption (Ansell, Gibson, & Salt, 2016; Greiner, Patterson, & Miller, 2009; Pannell et al, 2006). Landholders adopted UMAs for diverse reasons, including economic benefit, conserving social traditions (e.g., subsistence hunting), or restoring land condition; participants suggested that this flexibility increased the likelihood of adoption.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of adoption and spread of wildlife management initiatives in Mexico

Romero-de-Diego

Dean

Jagadish

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation initiatives rarely achieve the scale required to respond to ongoing biodiversity loss. Understanding what drives the adoption of conservation initiatives provides key insights into how initiatives expand to a scale necessary for effective conservation outcomes. In this article, we identified characteristics of conservation initiatives, adopters, and context that influenced the adoption of extensive Wildlife Management Units (UMAs) in Mexico. We interviewed

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of adoption and spread of wildlife management initiatives in Mexico

Romero-de-Diego

Dean

Jagadish

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Voluntary schemes have been found to deliver cost‐effective outcomes, but ownership by landholders during and after the initiative was deemed important, for example, to ensure fences were maintained (Ansell et al . 2016).…”

Section: Experiences Of Nrm In the Mid‐murray Valleymentioning

confidence: 99%

Biodiversity on private land: Lessons from theMid‐MurrayValley in South‐eastern Australia

Ward¹,

Bond²,

Burge³

et al. 2022

Eco Management Restoration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we use an autoethnographic approach to explore relationships between landholders and government agencies and natural resource management projects. We use this exploration to argue for a holistic, collaborative approach to decision making around the implementation of biodiversity conservation on private and public land. This approach aligns with principles underpinning reconciliation ecology, which emphasises the inclusion of grass-roots communities for promoting biodiversity conservation in humandominated landscapes where approaches to the management of natural resources may be contested. We present three projects (Environmental Champions; Fencing Incentive programmes; Plains-wanderer programme) and other research from the Mid-Murray Valley region of southern New South Wales to highlight the positive and negative aspects of relationships between landholders and others in natural resource management. We argue that for a more collaborative approach; we need to build relationships based on understanding, trust, respect, ownership and partnerships between rural communities, landholders, education and research institutions and government agencies as recognised in reconciliation ecology.

show abstract

“…The relative lack of cost-effectiveness of agri-environmental payment programs has received attention in government policy documents [e.g., see European Communities Court of Auditors (2015)] as well as in academic literature (e.g., see Zellei 2001;Messer 2006;Matzdorf and Lorenz 2010;Pattanayak et al 2010;Hanley et al 2012;Duke et al 2013;Ansell et al 2016). Whitten et al (2003) argue that for market-based instruments to realise their potential efficiency gains, it is important for the conservation agency to carefully design a policy instrument that addresses the design issues, as well as the performance aspects of the instrument.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing contract allocation for risky conservation tenders

Olita

Iftekhar

Schilizzi

2022

Environ Econ Policy Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the face of a shrinking budget for environmental activities, conservation agencies must design and implement agri-environmental policies that cost-effectively meet the environmental objectives. However, designing such programs is often challenging due to different uncertainties. For example, landholders may be exposed to risks when carrying out conservation projects. To minimise the negative impact of unexpected losses, landholders may require additional financial incentives as compensation for undertaking “risky” conservation projects. In such situations, the conservation agency risks over-spending public funds because of prohibitively high opportunity costs from landholders or failing to meet the environmental target. We used analytical and simulation approaches to explore optimal budget allocation in a target-constrained conservation tender. We also compared the performance of the tender with and without own-cost uncertainty. Results showed that as landholders’ own-cost uncertainty rises, the conservation agency is forced to allocate more funding to secure the same level of the environmental target. We found that the optimal funding level is sensitive to landholders’ competition uncertainty and the magnitude of expected losses.

show abstract

Learning from agri-environment schemes in Australia. Investing in biodiversity and other ecosystem services on farms

Cited by 9 publications

References 63 publications

Drivers of adoption and spread of wildlife management initiatives in Mexico

Drivers of adoption and spread of wildlife management initiatives in Mexico

Biodiversity on private land: Lessons from theMid‐MurrayValley in South‐eastern Australia

Optimizing contract allocation for risky conservation tenders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About