Periodic Reporting for period 2 - CONSOLE (CONtract SOLutions for Effective and lasting delivery of agri-environmental-climate public goods by EU agriculture and forestry)
Période du rapport: 2020-11-01 au 2022-10-31
The European Green Deal and follow up initiatives launched by the European Commission (e.g. Farm to Fork strategy, 2030 Biodiversity strategy) put a strong focus on issues related to climate change, biodiversity and environmental protection in general. Since decades, the agricultural policy in the EU has been partially re-oriented towards the provision of public goods in rural areas acknowledging societal demands. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2023-2027 further strengthen the green architecture of the CAP.
Climate services, biodiversity conservation and environmental protection have typically the nature of public goods, whereby the non-excludability and non-rivalry characteristics prevent the market from working for these goods, generating the well-known problem of free-riding. In addition, the difficulty in the provision of public goods is related to challenges such as trade-offs between environmental performance and farm profitability, the time lag between changes in practices and impact, and the potential mismatch between the scales of actions and effects. As a result, several Agri-Environmental-Climatic Public Goods (AECPGs) are characterised by under-provision.
The general objective of CONSOLE is to boost innovation in the lasting delivery of AECPGs by EU agriculture and forestry. Contract types addressed are environmental-related land tenure-based contracts; contracts with collective implementation/cooperation; result-based/result-oriented contracts and value chain-based contracts.
Climate services, biodiversity conservation and environmental protection have typically the nature of public goods, whereby the non-excludability and non-rivalry characteristics prevent the market from working for these goods, generating the well-known problem of free-riding. In addition, the difficulty in the provision of public goods is related to challenges such as trade-offs between environmental performance and farm profitability, the time lag between changes in practices and impact, and the potential mismatch between the scales of actions and effects. As a result, several Agri-Environmental-Climatic Public Goods (AECPGs) are characterised by under-provision.
The general objective of CONSOLE is to boost innovation in the lasting delivery of AECPGs by EU agriculture and forestry. Contract types addressed are environmental-related land tenure-based contracts; contracts with collective implementation/cooperation; result-based/result-oriented contracts and value chain-based contracts.
Several results were achieved during the project.
First, an operational framework was developed, able to support the design of contractual solutions for the voluntary provision of AECPGs. The framework holds four dimensions: context variables; contractual features; contract’s performance variables; processes description. Contractual features include: tenure-related prescriptions; reference parameter for payment; role of cooperation among farmers/actors; connection with private goods; object of contract; actors involved; other payment characteristics; length of contract; information to land managers; monitoring; sanctions and enforcement; adaptability; conditions for participation. The framework was implemented into a web application (www.console-hub.eu) taking the form of a knowledge hub including examples from real-life implementation and information about different contract types in a searchable format.
The second result is the outcome of the analysis of ca. 120 case studies of a wide spectrum of contract solutions from within and outside the EU. The analyses of case studies showed that many real-life cases of implementation combine different contract types. It became obvious that collective implementation can be a precondition for environmental effectiveness, particularly for AECPGs. Result-based contracts mainly target specific AECPGs and can increase engagement of land-managers due to flexible management choices. Recommendations for contract design and implementation derived from the case studies are: 1.) Targeting contracts to specific regions allows to better address regional criticalities and enhances the farmers’ and foresters’ interest and understanding of measures. 2.) Involving land-managers in target-setting and the development of agri-environmental measures leads to higher compatibility with their businesses and can create win-win situations. 3.) Involving control authorities in the design of indicators in result-based schemes can guarantee integrability into Rural Development Programs. 4.) Fostering bottom-up approaches and involving regional key actors as coordinating units enhances commitment and motivation in collective approaches. 5.) Guaranteeing good levels of equity and fairness enhances acceptance particularly in value-chain based solutions.
Third we provide an analysis of preference and acceptance of the new contract solutions. The acceptance of the new contract solutions for increasing the provision of agri-environmental-climate public goods (AECPG) were studied from the land managers’, and the other stakeholders’ point of view. The survey data consisted of 2,721 responses for land managers and 486 respondents for stakeholders, covering 12 European countries.
The results showed that land managers prefer the result-based and, secondly, the value chain contract solutions. These contract solutions were perceived as both easier to understand and apply on their holdings, as well as more economically beneficial. In contrast, land tenure and collective contract solutions were considered less easy to understand, and less economically beneficial for the holdings.
Considering the specific contract features, annual compensation, technical assistance or training offered to the land managers by the authority as well as the flexibility in determining the measures to adopt within the contract, and the idea that better results bring higher payment, were among the most appreciated characteristic. Instead, the payment to be shared within a group and its periodical nature are considered as less desirable.
Fourth, CONSOLE evaluates performance of the contracts across Europe. Key scientific findings include assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness under different scenarios, comparison across types and with input-based schemes as well as quantification of the value of information.
Finally, CONSOLE provides straight policy messages, also concerning the new CAP and established a lively Community of Practice for future promotion of AECPG contract solutions.
First, an operational framework was developed, able to support the design of contractual solutions for the voluntary provision of AECPGs. The framework holds four dimensions: context variables; contractual features; contract’s performance variables; processes description. Contractual features include: tenure-related prescriptions; reference parameter for payment; role of cooperation among farmers/actors; connection with private goods; object of contract; actors involved; other payment characteristics; length of contract; information to land managers; monitoring; sanctions and enforcement; adaptability; conditions for participation. The framework was implemented into a web application (www.console-hub.eu) taking the form of a knowledge hub including examples from real-life implementation and information about different contract types in a searchable format.
The second result is the outcome of the analysis of ca. 120 case studies of a wide spectrum of contract solutions from within and outside the EU. The analyses of case studies showed that many real-life cases of implementation combine different contract types. It became obvious that collective implementation can be a precondition for environmental effectiveness, particularly for AECPGs. Result-based contracts mainly target specific AECPGs and can increase engagement of land-managers due to flexible management choices. Recommendations for contract design and implementation derived from the case studies are: 1.) Targeting contracts to specific regions allows to better address regional criticalities and enhances the farmers’ and foresters’ interest and understanding of measures. 2.) Involving land-managers in target-setting and the development of agri-environmental measures leads to higher compatibility with their businesses and can create win-win situations. 3.) Involving control authorities in the design of indicators in result-based schemes can guarantee integrability into Rural Development Programs. 4.) Fostering bottom-up approaches and involving regional key actors as coordinating units enhances commitment and motivation in collective approaches. 5.) Guaranteeing good levels of equity and fairness enhances acceptance particularly in value-chain based solutions.
Third we provide an analysis of preference and acceptance of the new contract solutions. The acceptance of the new contract solutions for increasing the provision of agri-environmental-climate public goods (AECPG) were studied from the land managers’, and the other stakeholders’ point of view. The survey data consisted of 2,721 responses for land managers and 486 respondents for stakeholders, covering 12 European countries.
The results showed that land managers prefer the result-based and, secondly, the value chain contract solutions. These contract solutions were perceived as both easier to understand and apply on their holdings, as well as more economically beneficial. In contrast, land tenure and collective contract solutions were considered less easy to understand, and less economically beneficial for the holdings.
Considering the specific contract features, annual compensation, technical assistance or training offered to the land managers by the authority as well as the flexibility in determining the measures to adopt within the contract, and the idea that better results bring higher payment, were among the most appreciated characteristic. Instead, the payment to be shared within a group and its periodical nature are considered as less desirable.
Fourth, CONSOLE evaluates performance of the contracts across Europe. Key scientific findings include assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness under different scenarios, comparison across types and with input-based schemes as well as quantification of the value of information.
Finally, CONSOLE provides straight policy messages, also concerning the new CAP and established a lively Community of Practice for future promotion of AECPG contract solutions.
CONSOLE went beyond the state of the art in three main areas: a) framing the problem of Innovative contract solutions for AECPG provision in a unique consistent framework; b) provide empirical insights on preferences on and performances of these contracts; c) establishing a community of practices with capacity to use new contract solutions and innovate further in the field.
CONSOLE achieved impacts in five main areas.
•Showcasing cooperation models enabling the delivery of agri-environment-climate public goods and guaranteeing their longevity over time: collection of 120 case studies from the EU and beyond.
•Development of innovative agri-environment-climate contractual models based on the review of existing initiatives and the design of new ones.
•Improving economic viability of agri-environment-climate initiatives through a renovated and coherent agri-environment-climate contractual framework, incorporated into guidelines for contract design (co-designed and tested with the community of practice) feasibility of perspective solutions.
•Providing support to policy makers and stakeholders by sharing the good practices at national and regional level: a total of 37 CoP events organized, involving more than 740 participants, supported by 21 training activities, 12 roadshows and 24 multiplier events for a total of more than 1200 participants; while already fed in policy making in the 13 countries involved, it is expected that most of the policy design implications will be relevant for the next programming period.
•Strengthen transdisciplinary research and integrated scientific support for consistent approaches between agricultural and environment-climate priorities, through participatory agenda-setting activities and a two-way exchange with stakeholders, building the basis for collaborations far beyond the project lifetime.
CONSOLE achieved impacts in five main areas.
•Showcasing cooperation models enabling the delivery of agri-environment-climate public goods and guaranteeing their longevity over time: collection of 120 case studies from the EU and beyond.
•Development of innovative agri-environment-climate contractual models based on the review of existing initiatives and the design of new ones.
•Improving economic viability of agri-environment-climate initiatives through a renovated and coherent agri-environment-climate contractual framework, incorporated into guidelines for contract design (co-designed and tested with the community of practice) feasibility of perspective solutions.
•Providing support to policy makers and stakeholders by sharing the good practices at national and regional level: a total of 37 CoP events organized, involving more than 740 participants, supported by 21 training activities, 12 roadshows and 24 multiplier events for a total of more than 1200 participants; while already fed in policy making in the 13 countries involved, it is expected that most of the policy design implications will be relevant for the next programming period.
•Strengthen transdisciplinary research and integrated scientific support for consistent approaches between agricultural and environment-climate priorities, through participatory agenda-setting activities and a two-way exchange with stakeholders, building the basis for collaborations far beyond the project lifetime.