The role of agri-environmental contracts in saving biodiversity in the post-socialist Czech Republic

International Journal of the Commons

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 1-25

  Prazan, Jaroslav ^a   Theesfeld, Insa ^b  

^a Ustav zemedelske Potravinarske a Environmentalni techniky   (Czech Republic)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN TRANSITION ECONOMIES IAMO   (Germany)

Author keywords

Agri environmental measure; Biodiversity; Coordination problem; Governance structure; Policy implementation; Trust

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897801143     PISSN: 18750281     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.18352/ijc.400     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Abrahámová, M., I. Boskova, I. Foltýn, M. Hruška, J. Pražan, and T. Ratinger. 2012. The Future of Grasslands and Beef Production in the Czech Republic. Paper Presented at the 126. EAAE Seminar, Capri, (27-29. June 2012), http:// ageconsearch.umn.edu/handle/126220.
2. Allen, D. W. and D. Lueck. 2005. Agricultural Contracts. In Handbook of New Institutional Economics, eds. C. Ménard and M. M. Shirley, 465-490. Dordrecht: Springer 2010.
3. Czech Statistical Office. 2013. The Czech Republic in Numbers from 1989. Available at: http://www.czso.cz/csu/redakce.nsf/i/cr_od_roku_1989#02; accessed on 24 May 2013.
4. European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Rural Development Commitee. 2007. Agri-Environment Commitments and Their Verifiability. Working Document RD10/07/2006-final. Brussels.
5. Heinmiller, B. T. 2009. Path Dependency and Collective Action in Common Pool Governance. International Journal of the Commons 3(1):131-147.
6. thBiennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons on Governing Shared Resources: Connecting Local Experience to Global Challenges, University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham, England, July 14-18, 2008.
7. IEEP (Institute of European Environmental Policy). 2011. Study on Addressing Biodiversity and Habitat Protection Through Measures Applied Through Common Agricultural Policy: The Case Study Report for the Czech Republic. Project Report to Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development No. AGRI-2010-EVAL-05. London.
8. Miko, L. and M. Hosek, eds. 2009. Příroda a krajina České republiky. Zpráva o stavu. 1. vydání. Praha. Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny ČR, 2009. 102 s. ISBN 978-80-87051-70-2.
9. Ministry of Agriculture. 2005. Annual Report on the Implementation of Horizontal Rural Development Plan-Year 2004. Available at: http://eagri.cz/public/web/ mze/dotace/dobihajici-a-ukoncene-dotace/horizontalni-plan-rozvoje-venkovahrdp/ hodnoceni-a-monitoring/; accessed on 24 May 2013.
10. Ministry of Agriculture. 2007. Czech Rural development plan. Available at: http:// eagri.cz/public/web/mze/dotace/program-rozvoje-venkova-na-obdobi-2007/ programove-dokumenty/; accessed on 24 May 2013.
11. Ministry of Agriculture. 2012a. The State of Agriculture in 2011 "The Green Report". Prague, The Czech Republic.
12. Ministry of Agriculture. 2012b. Annual Report on the Implementation of the Czech Rural Development Plan-Year 2011. Available at: http://eagri.cz/ public/web/mze/dotace/program-rozvoje-venkova-na-obdobi-2007/hodnocenia-monitoring/; accessed on 24 May 2013.
13. Offe, C. 1999. Trust and Knowledge, Rules and Decisions: Exploring a Difficult Conceptual Terrain. In Democracy and Trust, ed. M. Warren. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Ostrom, E. 2005. Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. Polman, N. and L. Slangen. 2008. Institutional Design of Agri-Environmental Contracts in the European Union: the Role of Trust and Social Capital. Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 56:413-430.
17. Prazan, J. 2011. Assessment of Selected Policy Measures. Research Project: Design and Assessment of Agricultural Policies for Environment. Project Report. UZEI, Prague.
18. Prazan, J. and M. Dumbrovsky. 2011. Soil Conservation Policies: Conditions for Their Effectiveness in the Czech Republic. Land Degradation and Development 22:124-133.
19. Prazan, J., T. Ratinger, and V. Krumalova. 2005. The Evolution of Nature Conservation Policy in the Czech Republic-Challenge of Europeanisation in the White Carpathians Protected Landscape Area. Land Use Policy 22:235-243.
20. Queen's University of Belfast. 2000. Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Northern Ireland: Re-Monitoring of Mournes and Slieve Croob, The Antrim Coast Glens and Rathlin, The Sperrings and Slieve Gullion, Biological Evaluation of ESA Scheme Between 1994-2000. Report to the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
21. Queen's University of Belfast. 2004. Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Northern Ireland: Monitoring and Evaluation of the ESA Scheme Between 1993-2003. Report to the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
22. thFramework Program Project CEESA, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany.
23. Rees, R. 1985. The Theory of Principal and Agent Part 1. Bulletin of Economic Research 37(1):3-26.
24. Sell, J. and Y. Son. 1997. Comparing Public Goods and Common Pools Resources: Three Experiments. Social Psychology Quarterly 60(2):118-137.
25. Slangen, L. H. G., L. Loucks, and A. Slangen. 2008. Institutional Economics and Economic Organisation Theory. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publisher.
26. Theesfeld, I. 2005. A Common Pool Resource in Transition. Determinants of Institutional Change for Bulgaria's Postsocialist Irrigation Sector. Aachen: Shaker.
27. Theesfeld, I. 2009. The Downgrading Effect of Abuse of Power on Trust and Collective Action in Bulgaria's Irrigation Sector. In Institutions and Sustainability: Political Economy of Agriculture and the Environment-Essays in Honour of Konrad Hagedorn, eds. Volker Beckmann and Martina Padmanabhan, 223-242. Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer.
28. Uslaner, E. and G. Badescu. 2002. Honesty, Trust, and Legal Norms in the Transition to Democracy: Why Bo Rothstein Is Better Able to Explain Sweden than Romania. Paper Prepared for Presentation at the Collegium Budapest Project on Honesty and Trust Conference, Workshop on Formal and Informal Cooperation. Budapest, November 22-23, 2002.
29. Vatn, A. 2010. An Institutional Analysis of Payments for Environmental Services. Ecological Economics 69(6):1245-1252.
30. Williamson, O. 2000. The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead. Journal of Economic Literature XXXVIII:595-613.
31. Wilson, G. 1997. Factors Influencing Farmer Participation in the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Scheme. Journal of Environmental Management 50:67-93.
32. Wilson, G. A. and K. Hart. 2001. Farmer Participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes: Towards Conservation-Oriented Thinking? Sociologia Ruralis 41(2):254-274.
33. Wrbka, T., S. Schindler, M. Pollheimer, I. Schmitzberger, and J. Peterseil. 2008. Impact of the Austrian Agri-Environmental Scheme on Diversity of Landscapes, Plants and Birds. Community Ecology 9(2):217-227.
34. Yin, R. K. 2003. Case Study Research, Design and Methods (Applied Social Research Methods Series; Volume 5), Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.