Willing or complying? The delicate interplay between voluntary and mandatory interventions to promote farmers' environmental behavior

IF 6.8 1区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Food Policy Pub Date : 2023-07-06 DOI:10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102481
Jesus Barreiro-Hurle , Francois J. Dessart , Jens Rommel , Mikołaj Czajkowski , Maria Espinosa-Goded , Macario Rodriguez-Entrena , Fabian Thomas , Katarzyna Zagorska
{"title":"Willing or complying? The delicate interplay between voluntary and mandatory interventions to promote farmers' environmental behavior","authors":"Jesus Barreiro-Hurle ,&nbsp;Francois J. Dessart ,&nbsp;Jens Rommel ,&nbsp;Mikołaj Czajkowski ,&nbsp;Maria Espinosa-Goded ,&nbsp;Macario Rodriguez-Entrena ,&nbsp;Fabian Thomas ,&nbsp;Katarzyna Zagorska","doi":"10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Agri-environmental policies generally build around two complementary approaches: mandatory requirements and (compensated) voluntary measures. One of the challenges of the future EU Common Agricultural Policy is precisely to find the right balance between these two types of interventions. We conducted an experiment with farmers in three EU Member States to assess the impact of (1) increasing mandatory contributions to the environment, and of (2) decreasing unconditional income support. We also assess the effect of two key behavioural factors: environmental concern and trait reactance. Results show that both interventions reduce voluntary contributions to the environment, but the reduction is higher when mandatory contributions increase than when income decreases.. However, when mandatory contribution increases substantially, this more than offsets the reduction of voluntary contributions, leading to higher total contributions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":321,"journal":{"name":"Food Policy","volume":"120 ","pages":"Article 102481"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Policy","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919223000799","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Agri-environmental policies generally build around two complementary approaches: mandatory requirements and (compensated) voluntary measures. One of the challenges of the future EU Common Agricultural Policy is precisely to find the right balance between these two types of interventions. We conducted an experiment with farmers in three EU Member States to assess the impact of (1) increasing mandatory contributions to the environment, and of (2) decreasing unconditional income support. We also assess the effect of two key behavioural factors: environmental concern and trait reactance. Results show that both interventions reduce voluntary contributions to the environment, but the reduction is higher when mandatory contributions increase than when income decreases.. However, when mandatory contribution increases substantially, this more than offsets the reduction of voluntary contributions, leading to higher total contributions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
愿意还是顺从?促进农民环境行为的自愿和强制性干预之间微妙的相互作用
农业环境政策通常围绕两种互补的方法建立:强制性要求和(补偿的)自愿措施。未来欧盟共同农业政策的挑战之一恰恰是在这两种干预之间找到适当的平衡。我们对三个欧盟成员国的农民进行了一项实验,以评估(1)增加对环境的强制性贡献和(2)减少无条件收入支持的影响。我们还评估了两个关键行为因素的影响:环境关注和特质抵抗。结果表明,两种干预措施都减少了对环境的自愿贡献,但强制性贡献增加时的减少幅度大于收入减少时的减少幅度。但是,当强制性捐款大量增加时,这就足以抵消自愿捐款的减少,从而导致捐款总额增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Food Policy
Food Policy 管理科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.60%
发文量
128
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: Food Policy is a multidisciplinary journal publishing original research and novel evidence on issues in the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of policies for the food sector in developing, transition, and advanced economies. Our main focus is on the economic and social aspect of food policy, and we prioritize empirical studies informing international food policy debates. Provided that articles make a clear and explicit contribution to food policy debates of international interest, we consider papers from any of the social sciences. Papers from other disciplines (e.g., law) will be considered only if they provide a key policy contribution, and are written in a style which is accessible to a social science readership.
期刊最新文献
Viewpoint: Toward a sustainable Green Revolution in sub-Saharan Africa: The case of maize and rice Expanding the phytosanitary exclusion zone for Mexican avocados: Market impacts and unintended consequences Small wins in practice: Learnings from 16 European initiatives working towards the transformation of urban food systems Information interventions and willingness to pay for PICS bags: Evidence from Sierra Leone Do moral constraints and government interventions promote the willingness and behaviors of food saving among urban residents in China? An empirical study based on structural equation model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1