From Firenze University Press Journal: Bio-based and Applied Business Economics (BAE)
Riccardo D’Alberto, Dept. of Economics, College of Verona
Meri Raggi, Dept. of Statistical Sciences “P. Fortunati”, University Studiorum University of Bologna
Davide Viaggi, Dept. of Agricultural and Food Sciences (DISTAL), University Studiorum University of Bologna
An agroecological change is being advertised worldwide with the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Advancement (United Nations, 2015 and particularly in the European Union (EU) with its Usual Agricultural Plan (CAP) and the Europe-an Eco-friendly Deal (Baldock and Buckwell, 2021; European Commission,2019 Amongst the CAP approaches and policy devices, one of the most popular tool is the eco-conditionality ingrained in the indirect subsidies (Mamine et al., 2020 that makes the settlement conditional on the uptake of a set of actions taken into consideration appropriate for minimizing nega-tive externalities or boosting favorable ones (Hanley et al., 2012; White and Hanley,2016 Complementary to that, the agri-environmental schemes (AESs) moneyed by the CAP are based upon settlements to farmers for the uptake of environment-friendly practices and the provi-sion of ecosystem solutions that exceed conditionality. AESs are a mandatory aspect of the EU Participant States rural development strategies (RDP) layout however are vol-untary for farmers. Their importance hinges on the necessary share of funds assigned to co-financing: 30 % of CAP Column II (supposed to grow in the future). A big body of literary works thinks about AESs, assess-ing their agri-environmental-climate results (see Hasler et al., 2022 and the recommendations therein), examining their cost-effectiveness and performance (Ansell et al., 2016; Bar-tolini et al., 2021; Blazy et al., 2021; Drechsler et al., 2017; Pacini et al., 2015, approximating the results on the agricul-tural holdings structure and productive selections (Arata and Sckokai, 2016; Bertoni et al., 2020; Chabé-Ferret and Subervie, 2013; D’Alberto et al., 2018; Mennig and Sau-er, 2020, and spotting the variables that influence farm-ers’ uptake choice and actions (Brownish et al., 2021; Drechsler, 2021; Gailhard et al., 2015; Raina et al., 2021; Vergamini et al.,2020 In spite of this bountiful literature and the understanding on AESs, there is frustration regarding their effective-ness and effectiveness in supplying agri-environmental-cli-mate public goods (AECPGs 2 and in regards to achieve-ments durability (Biffi et al., 2021; Bullock et al.,2021 Nowadays, AESs are greatly controlled by action-based strategies addressing private farmers, while their renovation is envisaged via a flexible mix of brand-new tools (Herzon et al., 2018; Olivieri et al., 2021, such as agreement solutions cultivating result-based repayment plans or cumulative application, and solutions entailing value chains and/or executing brand-new kinds of land tenure systems paired to environmental conditionality. These novel strategies are expected to provide AECPGs in a more effective and effective means, being certified with what is imagined by the Farm to Fork method and the EU Biodiversity Approach for 2030 The former goes to the heart of the European Environment-friendly Bargain that targets at making Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050 It prepares to minimize the ecological and climate impact of the EU food system by address-ing detailed challenges in terms of sustainability in the direction of a transition that makes sure that the entire food chain has a neutral or positive ecological effect (European Commission, 2020 a). The last highly sup-ports such a change by acknowledging that it can not be successfully achieved without recovering the endan-gered communities, “bringing nature back to agricultural land” (European Payment, 2020 b). Both initiatives highly support and incentivize the shift to fully lasting practices.To the best of our knowledge, some of these new motivation strategies have been mainly explored individually, like the result-based payments– one of the most studied instrument so far– (Birge et al., 2017; Russi et al., 2016; Sidemo-Holm et al., 2018; Šumrada et al., 2022, 2021; Zabel, 2019 and the collective approaches (El Mokaddem et al., 2016; Narloch et al., 2017; Westerink et al., 2017, while land tenure agreements with environmental clauses and the initiatives along the worth chain were rarely dealt with by the literary works.
DOI: https://doi.org/ 10 36253/ bae- 14016
Read Full Text: https://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/bae/article/view/ 14016