4.6 Article

How Local Intermediaries Improve the Effectiveness of Public Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: The Role of Networks and Agri-Environmental Assistance

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 7, Issue 10, Pages 13856-13886

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su71013856

Keywords

agri-environment measures; land use conflict and governance; social capital; local embeddedness; payments for environmental services

Funding

  1. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the Social-Ecological Research Program (SOF) [01UU0911]
  2. Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research ZALF e.V.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Large governmental payments for ecosystem services programs (PES) have frequently been criticized for their limited environmental effectiveness. The use of local intermediaries has been considered as one possibility for improving the environmental effectiveness of such programs. German Landcare Associations (LCAs) have been identified as one intermediary that holds the potential to positively influence the implementation of agri-environmental measures (AEMs). This paper empirically assesses the involvement of LCAs in the context of AEM implementation in Germany. An online questionnaire was distributed to all LCAs in Germany. In a first step, we examine if LCAs (1) provide social networks between stakeholders and (2) provide agri-environmental information and assistance to farmers. In a second step, the LCAs assess (3) their perception of how strongly their work influences farmers' participation in PES schemes and (4) if they pursue the spatial targeting of AEMs. In a third step, we relate the relative level of social networks and the provision of agri-environmental information and assistance to their stated influence on farmers' participation in and spatial targeting of AEMs. Finally we derive overall conclusions on how intermediaries can enhance the effectiveness of PES programs in general.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available