The Reform of Support Mechanisms for Upland Farming: Paying for Public Goods in the Severely Disadvantaged Areas of England

Abstract

The incomes of hill-farmers in 'Less Favoured Areas' of the UK have traditionally been supported by payments related to their production levels. Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and changes in policy objectives within the UK imply a need to change this basis of support. We investigate the option of paying for public goods produced, focusing on landscape features and habitats. A choice experiment study is used to estimate willingness to pay for different landscape features in four Severely Disadvantaged Areas of England. We find significant differences in the value of landscape features, both within and across regions, and parallel differences in the aggregate value of different policy options for upland areas. We discuss briefly how this information could be included in a spatially differentiated payments scheme. Copyright 2007 The Agricultural Economics Society.

Stated preference methods and landscape ecology indicators: An example of transdisciplinarity in landscape economic valuation

“…Indeed, spatial analytical tools like GIS are mostly used for presenting study areas and for mapping results (Campbell, 2007;Hanley et al, 2007;Scarpa et al, 2007), but have been rarely used in the spatial definition of environmental components (Johnson et al, 2002;Englund, 2005).…”

“…In environmental economics, the conventional approach for conducting stated preferences (SP) studies for valuing landscape has been to design a survey, select a set of attributes, describe their changes, mostly through qualitative levels (for example, 'low, medium, high' or 'no action, some action, a lot of action'), often using percentage changes, and simplified graphical representations of the landscape, and elicit respondents' preferences for these attributes (Campbell, 2007;Colombo et al, 2015;Domínguez-Torreiro and Soliño, 2011;Giergiczny et al, 2015;Hanley et al, 2007;Newell and Swallow, 2013;Rambonilaza and Dachary-Bernard, 2007).…”

Heterogeneity of preferences for the benefits of Environmental Stewardship: A latent-class approach

“…Willis et al, 1995;Pruckner, 1995;Gonzalez and Leon, 2003;Campbell, 2007;Hanley et al, 2007;Hynes et al, 2011). This study does not estimate a value for the environmental benefits provided by ES, but instead uses a choice experiment approach to test the hypothesis that the benefits that the general public gain from ES do not vary across the different landscapes over which it is applied.…”

The effect of decoupling on marginal agricultural systems: Implications for farm incomes, land use and upland ecology

“…However, the recent decoupling of subsidies from production decisions means that the future of farming in these areas is uncertain. European uplands are nationally and internationally important for biodiversity as well as being of significant landscape, archaeological, recreational and heritage value (Hanley et al, 2007). The UK uplands play a key role in supporting habitats and species of conservation concern (Ratcliffe & Thompson, 1988;Rodwell, 1991).…”