Suchergebnisse

Agricultural environmental schemes (AES) have been implemented in twenty-eight countries in Europe. In 2013 the agricultural area under agri-environmental schemes was 26.3 % of the utilised agricultural area in the twenty-eight countries (Eurostat, 2017). There is however still mixed evidence about their effectiveness and efficiency (Kleijn, Berendse, Smit, & Gilissen, 2001; Kleijn, Rundlöf, Scheper, Smith, & Tscharntke, 2011; Kleijn & Sutherland, 2003; RLI, 2013). Over the past ten years different directions of enhancing a more effective and efficient AES have been conducted. One of these directions is the collaboration between farmers, government and other organizations. The new EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the period 2015-2020 made it possible for collectives of farmers and other land users to be applicant and final beneficiary of subsidies. The Dutch Government decided on the renewal of the agri-environment scheme (AES). In this new system new farmer collectives have the role of final beneficiary for the AES. This should lead to higher effectiveness of nature management and lower implementation costs. One of the ambitions in the new system of AES is working with ''professional'' farmer collectives (Kamerbrief 390202a3 Nieuwe Stelsel Agrarisch Natuurbeheer, 2013). In 2013 the government and the agriculture associations started an extensive process of development, design and implementation of the new system. In 2015 a countrywide network of 40 new farmer collectives was established. (Snoo et al. 2016). Depending on the results of this period of Common Agriculture Policy (CAP), the next period of CAP 2021-2026 the farmer collectives will have again the role of final beneficiary for the AES. There has not been research about the current professionalization of the farmer collectives. As part of my PhD thesis to gain insight in the professionalization process of the farmer collectives in the new system of AES and the contribution to a more effective and efficient AES. The research question of this paper is: How to conceptualize professionalization of farmer collectives with an assignment for a government task? What are the essential key-elements in the professionalization? Professionalisation is a process by which individuals, organizations and systems in close collaboration become a professional association (Dowling et al., 2014). The first results of this research is a theoretical framework for professionalization checked by farmer collectives. In my presentation I will discuss this framework with examples of the farmer collectives. ; peerReviewed

The aim of this article is to explain and compare the changes in climate policy paradigms (CPPs) of Bangladesh and Nepal. Climate policies are shaped by the underlying CPPs that refer to a dominant set of prevailing and institutionalized ideas and strategies to reduce the impacts of climate change. We focus the analysis on the timeframe between 1997 and 2016, using policy documents (n = 46) and semi-structured interviews (n = 43) with key policy actors. We find that in both countries several CPPs have emerged: disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, mainstreaming, and localized action for adaptation. In Bangladesh, specific policy goals and instruments for each CPP have emerged, whereas in Nepal the government has been struggling to develop specific policy instruments to implement the paradigms. We conclude that competing CPPs currently exist which creates diversified policy responses to climate change impacts in both countries. This 'layering' of different CPPs can be attributed to drivers such as unstable political situation, lack of financial support, influence of national and international non-governmental organizations and global policy frameworks. The findings in our study are relevant to further discussions on how to design future climate policy responses to adapt to climate change.

In our current society, governments face complex societal issues that cannot be tackled through traditional governance arrangements. Therefore, governments increasingly come up with smart hybrid arrangements that transcend the boundaries of policy domains and jurisdictions, combine governance mechanisms (state, market, networks and self-governance), and foster new forms of collaboration. This book provides an overview of what smart hybridity entails and of its potentials and challenges. It includes empirical analyses of hybrid arrangements in five policy domains, and reflections upon these studies by internationally renowned governance scholars. They show that the smartness of the new hybrid arrangements does not lie in realizing quick fixes, but in participants' capacities to learn, adapt and arrive at sustainable and legitimate solutions that balance various public values

AbstractThis paper addresses the role performance information plays in the accountability regimes of international climate change financing institutions and how this can be improved. It has been argued that the quality of the performance information of projects financed by public and private sources, as well as how that information is used, influences decisions made by the various actors in the accountability regimes, including the ability to hold actors to account. A theory‐based framework is developed to analyze and enable the improvement of the information produced and used in climate finance accountability regimes. The framework is tested by applying it to the Green Climate Fund via document analysis and key informant interviews. With the help of the framework, gaps are identified, and improvements are suggested so that account holders and account givers can better fulfill their respective roles in the given accountability regime.

AbstractAlthough policy entrepreneurs are assigned an important role in crossing policy boundaries and addressing complex problems, our understanding of the process is limited. This article systematically reviews 51 studies on conditions, strategies and implications of crossboundary entrepreneurship. Findings show that (1) the literature predominantly mentions issue promotion and coalition-building as crossboundary strategies; (2) vertical boundary-crossing is discussed more frequently than horizontal boundary-crossing; (3) the most reported boundary-crossing function is to expand issue arenas; (4) conditions that enable crossboundary strategies include institutional overlap, issue interpretation, power vacuum, overruling policies and lacking resources; and (5) implications of entrepreneurship include raised opposition, increased competition over leadership, augmented complexity hindering collective action, raised costs and resources, and issues regarding trust, legitimacy and authority. Policy entrepreneurship allows for micro-level insights in the emergence of crossboundary processes. We suggest future research to focus on causal processes between conditions, strategies and implications to better understand their interplay.

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the European Union is essential to enhance the resilience of Europe's farming systems along three capacities: robustness, adaptability and transformability. The SURE-Farm project conducted the first systematic assessment how the CAP performs in this regard. The findings show that hitherto the CAP has been overly focused on supporting the robustness of an increasingly fragile status quo, with uneven effects, while neglecting adaptability and even constraining transformability. The future CAP needs to allow for a better balance with policy mixes that are tailored to regional needs, based on a shared long-term vision. This implies replacing direct payments with measures that specifically address resilience needs, e.g. points-based eco-schemes, agro-environmental programs, coordinated adaptation to shifting markets, ample support for cross-sectoral cooperation, innovation and advice to integrate production and provision of public goods, and participatory and integrative foresight to develop transformation pathways. ; EU; en; contact: miranda.meuwissen@wur.nl