Evaluating European policy instruments for rural development and agri-environment
Submitting Institution
University of GloucestershireUnit of Assessment
Architecture, Built Environment and PlanningSummary Impact Type
EnvironmentalResearch Subject Area(s)
Economics: Applied Economics
Studies In Human Society: Policy and Administration
Summary of the impact
The Countryside and Community Research Institute (CCRI) has undertaken
research providing a
sustained contribution to understanding beneficiary-focused EU and UK
rural development (RD)
policies. This used novel, context-sensitive and mixed-method evaluation
techniques to capture
complex, systemic impacts and diagnose causal linkages between design and
delivery, and policy
performance. In so doing it has generated direct impacts in improved RD
policy making and
evaluation. The research has influenced restructuring in EU policy
frameworks for RD and
changed England's upland policy. By increasing policymakers' understanding
of farm-level
behaviours and responses to agri-environmental policy goals, CCRI's
research has stimulated
better-communicated and integrated advisory approaches.
Underpinning research
The underpinning CCRI research has evidenced the benefits of a more
beneficiary-centred
approach to designing and delivering rural development policies, and was
notable in applying a mix
of quantitative and in-depth qualitative research methods in a systemic
way.
EU RD policy development: CCRI research on EU policy for rural
development (RD) is marked
by a paper co-authored by Dwyer [1] presenting findings from a
`process evaluation' of the EU RD
Regulation 2000-06. This paper highlighted how contextual and qualitative
factors including
institutional conservatism in design and delivery were hindering the
ability of RD programmes to
deliver EU strategic goals, and recommending ways of overcoming this.
Experience and profile
gained through [1] helped CCRI to win a `Review of RD Instruments'
study for the European
Commission, in 2007-8 (leading a 6-partner team). This research made
detailed analyses of RD
policy expenditure, design and delivery; assessing the cost-effectiveness
of instruments; applying
methods emphasising contextualised analysis; using case studies and
undertaking process
evaluation.
Building on this, a consortium led by the same core partners developed an
EU Framework study
RuDI: Rural Development Impacts (2008-10) (collaborators
from 10 Member States) which
analysed and evaluated European RD policy design, delivery and
performance. Policy briefs and
workshops promoted RuDI's findings to national and EU policy makers,
suggesting improvements
to RD policy, strengthening strategic elements in the EU framework whilst
increasing the simplicity
and flexibility of funding instruments (`measures'), and in turn enabling
closer tailoring to local
beneficiary contexts.
UK upland policy development: The CCRI RuDI case study (Dwyer)
evaluated CAP RD
impacts in the English Uplands, showing how the spatial interplay of
policy instruments was
leading to perverse agri-environmental outcomes, due to poor appreciation
of farmer behaviour in
response to these wider trends among those responsible for
agri-environment policy design and
delivery. This stimulated a CCRI study for Exmoor National Park Authority
(ENPA) and Natural
England exploring participatory policy development in the uplands by Dwyer
and Short [2], which
worked with farmers to develop an alternative, `Ecosystem Services'
approach, now being taken
forward by ENPA. Insights from these studies supported those of a further
study for Defra
"Economic and environmental impacts of changes in support measures for
the English Uplands:
An in-depth forward look from the farmer`s perspective" (2010) (Gaskell,
Dwyer, Ingram, Kirwan,
Mills) which identified how upland farmers' opinions and development
paths meant that previous
and proposed future decline in support payments would most likely lead to
a less economically-productive
and culturally-differentiated landscape, with reduced biodiversity.
Evidence from all three CCRI studies contributed to Defra's uplands policy,
helping to stimulate a
review of the agri-environment approach and providing evidence to support a
restructuring of CAP
Single Farm Payments. Benefits in methodological understanding were also
evident: commenting
on the third study, one Defra official stated that "
The quality of the
research was... invaluable at
giving Defra the confidence to use qualitative research" [b]
Farmer engagement: Research impact also derives from a
Defra-funded CCRI study,
Understanding and influencing positive behaviour change in farmers and
land managers (2006-2007)
[Dwyer, Mills, Ingram]. The research used similar triangulated
methods to those discussed
above, including in-depth qualitative case studies of four contrasting
initiatives and a comparative
evaluation of design and delivery, generating two peer-reviewed papers,
one co-authored by
Ingram [3]; the other by Mills and Ingram [4]. Findings
showed how farmers differ in their
engagement with initiatives and that this is influenced by how advice is
given; who gives advice
and how the message and messenger are evaluated; and how the farmer's
capacity and
willingness to change is affected. The research team developed a Good
Practice Guide for policy
makers to assist them in developing future policy. A further, related CCRI
study for the Welsh
Government [5] made 30 recommendations on appropriate mechanisms to be
used in designing
and delivering collaborative agri-environment schemes, developing
co-operative working through
farmer engagement and group capacity building.
References to the research
1] Dwyer, J., Ward, N., Lowe, P. and Baldock, D. (2007) European Rural
Development Under The
Common Agricultural Policy's 'Second Pillar': Institutional conservatism
and innovation. Regional
Studies, Vol. 41.7, pp. 115.
2] Short, C and Dwyer, J (2012) Reconciling pastoral agriculture and
nature conservation: trialling
a co-management approach in the English uplands, Pastoralism:
Research, Policy and Practice,
2:13.
3] Blackstock, K.L., Ingram, J., Burton, R., Brown, K.M. and Slee, B.
(2010). Understanding and
influencing behaviour change by farmers to improve water quality. Science
of the Total
Environment.48 (23), 5631-5638.
4] Sutherland, L., Mills, J., Ingram, J., Burton, R.J.F., Dwyer, J. and
Blackstock, K. (2013)
Considering the source: Commercialisation and trust in agri-environmental
information and
advisory services in England. Journal of Environmental Management
118 (2013) 96-105.
5] Mills, J., Ingram, J., Reed, M., Short, C and Dwyer, J.(2012)
Organising Collective Action for
Effective Environmental Management and Social Learning in Wales. Journal
of Agricultural
Education and Extension, 17, 1, 69-83. 10.1080/1389224X.2011.536356
Details of the impact
The breadth and depth of CCRI research and the expertise developed by
CCRI teams in
understanding how aspects of RD and agri-environmental policies' design
and delivery can
critically affect their outcomes represents a unique position of applied
research influence.
Research impacts have been both direct and indirect, and cumulative over
time. While they draw
from this whole body of work, it is possible to pinpoint instances where
research findings have fed
directly into policy change at both UK and EU levels. In addition, the
impact trajectory has been
iterative: including direct dissemination to, and feedback from, policy
makers as well as successful
research dissemination stimulating further commissioned studies, and
expert input by CCRI
researchers to policy boards, thematic working groups and committees.
Three examples of specific
impacts of CCRI research are evidenced for the 2008-2013 period.
EU RD policy development: The findings of the RD instruments
review and RuDI studies had
direct impacts on the content of the EU Rural Development Regulation
finally agreed in September
2013. The RD instruments review generated detailed recommendations for the
policy after 2013,
most of which are incorporated into the new RD regulation, including a
shift to strengthen the
strategic goals of RD, the removal of `axes', and the redefinition and
merging of individual
measures to provide increased simplicity and flexibility in how funding
can be used [a].
UK upland policy development: Research findings from the study: "Economic
and
environmental impacts of changes in support measures for the English
Uplands" contributed to the
development of UK policy for the Uplands and was used in formal evidence
to the House of
Commons Committee on Farming in the Uplands (2011) as part of Defa's
policy statement on this
topic [c]. As stated by one Defra official [b] "Critically, the
research supported our approach to CAP
reform negotiation and is undoubtedly the most influential piece of
qualitative research I have
commissioned". Also the uplands work on Exmoor exploring more
integrated and flexible land
management policies has helped to influence the policy debate "The NFU
are regularly using
these research findings in discussion with policy-makers to develop more
integrated and flexible
policies and schemes on the uplands"[d], stimulating an internal
review of Natural England's
approach to agri-environment schemes and shaping Defra's proposed response
to the 2013 CAP
reform (This is currently under consultation — it suggests closing the gap
in support rates between
upland and lowland farms, effectively increasing upland support).
Farmer advice and engagement: CCRI's collaborative research
findings on influencing farmers'
environmental behaviour have been taken up widely by the policy community
and agri-sector
practitioners in England and Wales. As one Defra office stated "There
is, over the last five years,
no academic research institution that has either had more impact or has
influenced to a greater
extent, our approach to farmer behaviours, advice and land management
environmental issues"
[b].
The research informed recommendations by the independent Farming
Regulation Task Force
(May, 2011) on the need for clear communication of advice and the
importance of working with
farmers [b]. The study's good practice principles were used directly in
Defra's key principles for the
provision of advice, as stated in Annex 3 of Defra's Review of Advice,
Incentives and Partnership
Approaches, published as a Business Plan Commitment in March 2013 [e].
This review also
evidenced CCRI's evaluations in identifying the drivers leading farmers to
seek advice. As an
indicator of the wider influence of CCRIs research in this area, Annex 1
of the report makes
reference to seven reports that the institute was directly involved in
producing [e].
CCRI research also influenced the Welsh Government's approach to farmer
engagement. The
research on co-operative working demonstrated that successful
agri-environmental co-operatives
can be encouraged, through facilitation, to work collectively for
environmental gain. A direct impact
of this work was the employment of 18 Commons Development Officers (in
situ) operating across
Wales whose task is to develop the confidence and capacity of Commoners to
apply for collective
agri-environment schemes. Approximately 90% of Commons in Wales reportedly
subscribe to and
work with these Officers [f].
The CCRI research was also used at practitioner level by the Agricultural
Industries Confederation
(AIC Value of Advice report, April 2013) to develop an understanding of
farmers' different sources
of advice and to highlight the importance of farm management advice from
one trusted source. As
a result Defra, Natural England and the Environment Agency are now working
more closely with
the agricultural industry to deliver environmental advice through
integrated advisory packages. "In
the past Defra operated a top-down approach to the way environmental
advice, in particular, was
delivered. However, now as a result of some of the CCRI research on
understanding and
influencing farmer behaviours Defra are working more with the industry
in delivering their advice"
[g].
Sources to corroborate the impact
[a] Report http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/rurdev/index_en.htm
and table
comparing outputs of the RD Instruments report with the EAFRD draft
regulation.
[b] Email and testimonial letter from Defra officer stating the
importance of the research in
influencing upland policy and farmer's environmental behaviour.
[c] The CCRI uplands study was used as evidence in the EFRA committee on
Farming in the
Uplands http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmenvfru/556/556.pdf
(pg
68) and in the Government's response to the Efra Committee's Report
`Farming in the Uplands'
(February 2011)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmenvfru/953/953.pdf
(page 7)
[d] National Farmers Union Uplands Committee Chairman testimonial on
impact of CCRI research
on upland policy and schemes.
[e] Influence of CCRI on Defra advice illustrated by Annex 1 and 3 of
Defra report "Evaluation of
selective advice and incentives schemes"
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/221050/annexes-evaluation-advice-incentive-schemes.pdf
[f] A testimonial from a WAG officer stating how CCRI research led
directly to the employment of
18 Commons Development Officers.
[g] Testimonial from AIC on the impact of CCRI advice in developing
integrated environmental
advice packages with the Government using commercial advisors.