Technical insights from Effect

This study explores whether a ‘smart market’ cap-and-trade scheme between non-point sources can offer meaningful, robust and policy amenable, advantages over alternative approaches for nitrogen management in a realistic setting: 6504 individual farms in Limfjorden catchment, Denmark.

This article is a systematic review of 55 papers investigantig the performance Agro- Environmental Schemes (AES) and identifying the underlying factors affecting their performance. The theoretical and empirical evidence suggests that these incentives could potentially promote participation, spatial coordination, and environmental effectiveness. However, the results remain a subject of debate in experimental studies. Insights gained from the review provide important implications for the emerging field of conservation science and ongoing efforts to improve the design of AES for better landscape-scale management.

Since 2016, only joint applications through agrarian/nature collectives have been eligible for subsidies for agri-environmental management in the Netherlands. The agrarian collective submits a ‘territorial application’ that specifies which agri-environmental activities the collective will perform in their territory, and how these will contribute to the realization of the goals of the provincial nature management plan. Collective subsidies are granted only after the territorial application has been approved by the province. In EFFECT, Noardlike Fryske Wâlden (NFW) is the agrarian collective that on behalf of its members submits a territorial application for agri-environmental subsidies and makes agreements with farmer-members on agri-environmental management practices and remuneration. The report on EFFECT Case Study #1 includes stakeholders' interviews to explore, the pros, cons, opportunities and priorities in this area.

Case study #3 deals with a results-based grassland conservation scheme targeting plant species conservation in the German federal state of Bavaria. It rewards biodiversity conservation efforts of participating farmers by offering them a payment if pre-defined plant species can ex post be found on land enrolled in the scheme. How to reach the goal of having plant species diversity on fields under the scheme is left up to the farmers, i.e. no management prescriptions are made by the authorities managing the programme. The current report on EFFECT Case Study #3 includes stakeholders' interviews with specific open questions regarding agri-environment schemes in Bavaria and the context of the innovation case in a 1:1 situation.

This article departs from the assumption that the chal-lenge of putting the Farm to Fork Strategy (F2F) intoaction stems from the broader challenge of attainingcross-sectoral policy integration. Policy integration hasbeen part of the EU's policy approach for a long timeand has predominantly been achieved in the form ofenvironmental policy integration (EPI). However, thescope of the F2F extends beyond EPI, as it includes theintegration of climate-related concerns into sectoralpolicies, for instance. Consequently, we contend thatattaining policy integration in the case of the F2F isparticularly challenging and calls for an innovativeapproach to policymaking

Report on the economic performance of existing schemes considering potential trade-offs and synergies when it comes to ecosystem services output.

Ecological indicators of agri-environmental contracts and how they can be used in the assessment of environmental effectiveness.

What can farmers and nature get out of it? Insights from 15 countries. Eco-schemes are a new instrument under the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP), initially foreseen to be implemented from 2021 onwards, now postponed to 2023. The legal basis is the Strategic Plan Regulation1, which is shaping the new green architecture of the CAP for the programming period 2023-2027. After its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union on 6th December 2021 the new CAP became official EU law. Participation in the schemes for the climate and the environment, called eco-schemes, is voluntary for farmers. Only farmers that are eligible for the basic payment under the 1st pillar, now called Basic Income Support for Sustainability (BISS) can get funding for undertaking eco-scheme measures.

The UK is in the process of establishing new policies and rules for biodiversity, environment, and agriculture as part of the 25-year Environment Plan and Agriculture Act. Three new agri-environment schemes (AES) will reward farmers and other land managers for delivering environmental management following the “public money for public goods approach”. This paper has been prepared as part of EFFECT UK Case Study #5 Biodiversity Offsetting to explore farmers, land managers and environmental advisors’ perspectives on various aspects of the Environment Bill and associated 25 Year Environment Plan. The report on EFFECT Case Study #5 includes results from an online survey to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the current AES, the new AES proposed under the Environment Plan, perspectives on biodiversity net gain and the design and implementation of biodiversity offset markets