Suchergebnisse

The provision of renewable energy by agriculture – so called agroenergy – is a key element of the Europe 2020 Strategy and has sparked the public and research debates on the bio-based economy. Hot topics involve direct and indirect land use change, as well as the ability of agroenergy to foster or hinder food and energy security. Worldwide research has dealt with those and other issues associated with the sustainability of the diffusion of agroenergy generation systems, but the subject is still open. The agricultural sectors' contribution to the provision of energy is central issue in Horizon 2020 strategies and has shaped the public and research debates on the future of bio economy. The common agricultural policy (CAP) has been one of the main drivers of farmers' behaviour changes and represents the main agricultural policy instrument to address viability of rural areas and maintaining the profitability of the agricultural sector. In addition, the European Commission backs the agricultural knowledge and innovation system (AKIS), being the key to successful implementation of a bioeconomy in the EU. AKIS-specific measures are also included in the rural development policy of the CAP 2014-2020. Then, studying the AKIS is important for policy planning in the EU. Chapter 2 analyses the AKIS behind the adoption of farm biogas in an area of central Italy, thereby describing adopters' and business typologies. The methodology relies on social network analysis of primary data, collected via questionnaire to plant adopters, and focuses on the estimation of three network attributes: cohesion, knowledge co-creation, and brokerage. We highlight three business models: i.e. multifunctional farm, entrepreneurial farm, and Energy Service Company. The latter is the most widespread. Self-education, upstream industry, agronomists, farmer/biogas unions, university, public-funded projects, and public research centres are AKIS' stakeholders, which provide information and know-how. Upstream industry is the most influential node, the one that can help knowledge diffusion across adopters, regardless of their background. Self-accessible resources are the main providers of information at the adoption-decision stage. The networks are centralized on self-education tools, while upstream industry and the Research Centre on Animal Productions is the broker. Policy intervention aimed at improving AKIS in the biogas sector should involve the upstream industry in decision making, while considering the duality self-accessible information vs. physical advisors. To contribute to the ongoing policy debate towards CAP reform, Chapter 3 provides an empirical model to simulate the impact of alternative CAP mechanism on the provision of renewable energy. By applying a dynamic mathematical programming model the paper tests the impact new policy measures design on provision of second-generation of bio fuel crops that represent a relevant option for the Tuscany farmers. Results show that CAP reform positive impacts on the supply of energy crops mainly due to the introduction of greening payments, which allows an enlarging of crops diversification. Model results stress also the income stabilisation effects of energy production introduction at farm level, due to reduction of farm exposure to the market prices fluctuations. Chapter 4 contributes to the ongoing debate on the sustainability of agroenergy. We propose an empirical model to simulate the diffusion of farm biogas installations and estimate a set of indicators covering the economic, environmental, and social dimensions of sustainability at the regional level. Model results show that agroenergy production can help farmers stabilise their income and keep viable rural areas, despite some trade-offs among socio-economic and environmental indicators. Major drawbacks are environmental risks associated with farming intensification.

The overarching objective of Task 5.4 is to analyse market and policy incentives, with governance mechanisms, supporting Agro-ecological Farming Systems (AEFS), by delivering a multi-criteria assessment (MCA) of co-constructed innovative market and policy incentives (MPIs). To achieve that objective a mixed methods approach is used, where MCA and qualitative analysis complement each other by gathering information about different aspects of the MPIs and their implications for the governance and future policies. The research design is structured towards three more specific objectives, each being associated with a methodological step, as follows: Step 1. To investigate the MPIs that need to be improved to ensure proper functioning. This objective is achieved via a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) of selected MPIs, based on performance and relevance criteria (Effectiveness, Undesired effects, Targeting, Efficiency, Feasibility, Urgency and priority) selected via EU stakeholder consultation; Step 2. To identify changes in the design of the MPIs, owing to 8 categories (Income and market support, Agri-environment payments, Payments for investments, Knowledge promotion, Certification schemes, Food policies, Networking/cooperation, Other measures), to increase their performances. This objective is achieved via a qualitative analysis; Step 3. To explore how future policies can facilitate governance adjustments and opportunities for the correct implementation of the mix of MPIs. This objective is achieved via a qualitative analysis. Data for all methodological steps are collected at the case study (CS)-level via workshops and/or interviews from the same set of stakeholders, using guidelines prepared by CREA. Result interpretation creates a link with Deliverable 3.4 (Schwarz et al., 2021) by referring to the different transition stages observed in the case studies (Initiating and Enhancing) and to the barriers that the MPIs aim at removing. Performance and relevance rankings share the top three MPIs, i.e. Knowledge promotion, ...

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901

The European energy strategy towards 2020 involves increasing the production of renewable energy by agriculture (agroenergy) for moving towards a bio-based economy. The climate deal reached at the COP 21 conference in Paris (2015) supports the position of the EU concerning the sustainable promotion of agroenergy, as it allows save greenhouse gas emissions compared to fossil-based energy. However, the diffusion of agroenery in the Mediterranean area is modest and uneven, compared to northern European countries, may be due to the low endowment of productive factors. Besides policy, the debate around the diffusion of agroenergy is particularly lively within the academy. To date, agricultural economists have mainly approached the process of agroenergy adoption on farm through econometric or mathematical programming models. The former aim at explaining the underlying determinants of farmers' investment choices (revealed or stated). The latter simulate the choices of profit-maximising farmers under different policy or market conditions. Beside rational behaviour, both methodologies assume that farmers can access perfect information, thus missing to investigate knowledge transfer and the role of research and extension services in technology adoption and diffusion. Against this background, this paper deals with knowledge transfer in the agroenergy sector and focuses on the role of networks in that transfer. We also consider the impact of those networks on the transaction costs associated with agroenergy adoption. The aim of this study is understanding the process of biogas diffusion in a region of the Mediterranean area. The paper would add to the literature on innovation in agriculture by depicting the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System behind the diffusion of agroenergy and by identifying the structural components of that system. With this objective in mind, we consider the diffusion of biogas in Tuscany, a NUTS3 region in Italy. We selected Tuscany because prospective biogas adopters should radically change the structure of their farms and because geography and farming systems of Tuscany allow use that region as a proxy for northern areas of the Mediterranean basin. The methodology involves social network analysis, which allows pinpoint the role of the different interest groups in knowledge transfer and the extent to which knowledge management has shaped the biogas sector in Tuscany. Preliminary results highlight the central position of few major knowledge producers from the research sector, which, however, poorly interact among them and with intermediary organisations. In turn, knowledge transfer downstream seems a weakness of the network. Apparently, adopters are self-sufficient in terms of knowledge gathering during the innovation-decision phase. Missing significant intermediaries, adopters may become reliant on technical support and face high transaction costs. Given the irreversibility of biogas adoption, disconnection could significantly affect the costs for daily management. When evenly distributed, small biogas-to-electricity plants may help the distributed generation, while allowing comply with EU's Renewables Directive. However, the lack of coordination among the components of the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System may hinder the sustainable diffusion of biogas, with the rise of intensive entrepreneurial agro energy farming.

Fino alla presente riforma della Pac, il perseguimento di finalità ambientali passava principalmente attraverso i finanziamenti dei Psr, mentre, ell'ambito del primo pilastro (pagamenti diretti, PD), la condizionalità assicurava il rispetto di regole ambientali minime. Con il Regolamento (UE) 1307/2013, la Pac 2014-2020 ha esteso gli obblighi di natura ambientale a tutte le aziende che ricevono PD. Infatti, il nuovo PD aziendale è costituito da varie componenti, tra cui "pagamento base" (58%) e "greening" (o inverdimento) (30%) sono maggioritarie. Il pagamento base è calcolato su base "regionalizzata" tenendo conto dei pagamenti storici, secondo un meccanismo di convergenza parziale verso il valore medio nazionale dei titoli (circa 179 euro all'ettaro (Frascarelli, 2014)). Il greening prevede il contemporaneo rispetto di tre pratiche benefiche per il clima e l'ambiente sulla superficie a seminativo, ossia diversificare le colture, mantenere i prati permanenti esistenti ed avere aree di interesse ecologico. La diversificazione colturale si applica ad aziende con più di dieci ettari a seminativo; in particolare, fino a 30 ettari sono richieste due colture diverse, tre oltre quella soglia. Per quanto riguarda la seconda condizione, in base al Regolamento, gli Stati membri assicurano che il rapporto tra gli ettari investiti a prato permanente nel 2012 (più quelli dichiarati dagli agricoltori investiti dall'obbligo del greening nel 2015 e non dichiarati nel 2012) e quelli dichiarati come superficie agricola totale nel 2015 non diminuisca più del 5%. Infine, le aree di interesse ecologico sono obbligatorie per aziende con oltre 15 ettari a seminativo; in particolare, tali aree devono occupare almeno il 5% della superficie a seminativo. Le superfici agricole investite a colture permanenti o certificate biologiche sono esentate dall'obbligo di inverdimento. Inoltre, il Regolamento prevede un'ampia lista di pratiche equivalenti alla diversificazione colturale ed alle aree di interesse ecologico, le più rilevanti delle quali consistono nel lasciare a riposo almeno il 75% della superficie a seminativo ammissibile oppure dedicarlo a colture sommerse, prato permanente, erba o altre colture erbacee da foraggio. Il 25% residuo non deve eccedere i 30 ettari. Il mancato rispetto del greening comporterà la perdita della componente d'inverdimento (2016) e graduali decurtazioni del PD, fino ad un massimo del 25% (dal 2018) (Regolamento (UE) 1306/2013). Data la variabilità agricola inter- ed intra-nazionale (ad esempio tra le province italiane), l'applicazione delle nuove regole a livello comunitario comporterà costi differenziati ed avrà diversa efficacia negli stati membri. Infatti, alcuni Autori sottolineano l'importanza di mettere a punto norme ad hoc e non generiche per l'UE. D'altro canto, la crescente domanda di trasparenza della spesa pubblica e le pressioni per la riduzione delle risorse da destinare all'agricoltura richiedono maggiore efficienza nel disegno delle politiche comunitarie. In fase di approvazione del disegno definitivo della nuova Pac, sono state pubblicate molte valutazioni sul probabile impatto della riforma. Ad esempio, Hart and Little (2012), Matthews (2013, 2014) e Hauck et al. (2014) hanno analizzato l'adeguatezza di strumenti di politica alternativi a quelli proposti, mentre Schulz et al. (2014) si sono concentrati sulle preferenze degli agricoltori tedeschi in merito a diversi progetti di greening. Più recentemente, Lizin et al. (2015) hanno valutato i costi subiti dagli agricoltori per le restrizioni sulla scelta dell'uso del suolo introdotte dalla nuova Pac, determinando la loro disponibilità a pagare per l'acquisto di terreni agricoli affetti od esenti da tali obblighi di legge. Tuttavia, nessuno studio confronta meccanismi alternativi di greening con la possibilità, per gli agricoltori, di rinunciare alla componente d'inverdimento del PD. Quest'ultima opzione consente di valutare la sola convenienza per le aziende agricole ad adottare le pratiche previste dal greening, considerando contemporaneamente la diversa incidenza del relativo pagamento dovuta al meccanismo di convergenza parziale. Difatti, aziende appartenenti alla stessa classe di ampiezza possono ricevere pagamenti significativamente diversi pur dovendo attenersi alle stesse prescrizioni. In questo quadro, il presente lavoro è stato realizzato con l'obiettivo di compiere un'analisi costi efficacia del greening e di diverse combinazioni di pagamento di base, al fine di isolare il contributo addizionale della sola misura alle creazione di aree ad alto valore naturalistico.

This document represents the Deliverable D5.2 within Workpackage WP5 "Governance and policy assessment" of the EU Horizon 2020 project UNISECO (Understanding and improving the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems in the EU). The overall objective of this Deliverable (D5.2) is to identify and analyse the governance structures which characterise the different transition "patterns" in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. The specific objectives of D5.2 can be synthesized as: To identify and analyse the most relevant actors for addressing key agro-ecological dilemmas in each Case Study (across the seven main types of actors: farmers; authorities and administrations; agri-food value chain actors; science, innovation, advisory and capacity building actors; NGOs, civic society organisations, local community representatives; consumers; media); To identify and analyse the governance networks with relevance for the challenge. The focus is on power relations, conflicts, collaborations, collective action dynamics, the flows of knowledge and tangible goods. The purpose is to understand the decision-making process and how the network and its elements (actors and actor-actor links) can influence pathways of agro-ecological transitions. Social Network analysis (SNA) is the method that has been used to analyse the governance structures involved in the transition towards agro-ecological farming system (AEFS). The analysis went well-beyond the farm level, by looking at how different stakeholder groups are engaged in the transition processes towards sustainable agriculture and food systems. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 includes an introduction to the topic with particular attention to governance networks enabling the transition towards AEFS. Section 3 reports on the research method (Social Network Analysis) used for the data collection in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. Section 4 presents an overview of all case studies, while Section 5 provides a comparative analysis of the ...

In 15 case studies representing different European farming systems and stages along the agro-ecological transition, related barriers have been analysed and strategies co-constructed with the Multi-Actor Platforms over the course of the UNISECO project. The strategies are the result of different assessments (such as sustainability assessment or social network analysis), interviews and workshops with local stakeholders. Narratives that derive the main lessons learnt on governance changes and sustainability implications of agro-ecological transitions have been developed in a set of web pages (story maps) to make the research outcomes accessible in an easy to understand language to practitioners, policy stakeholders and the wider public. While there are unique lessons learnt in each case study, there are three common domains of lessons learnt, namely (1) knowledge and social capital, (2) market access, processing and value added and (3) innovative policy support. Based on existing policies such as support for organic farming, the latter needs specially to focus on fostering cooperation, supporting of the knowledge system, result-based payments and green public procurement. UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901. This publication reflects only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901