Although many species have a larger range than the average sized farm, most agri-environment schemes (AES) involve contracts with individual land managers. However, in the Netherlands ‘collective contracts’ allow neighbouring land managers to co-ordinate environmental management at the landscape rather than the farm-scale. Findings from a study of Dutch Environmental Co-operatives (ECs) are used to discuss how collective contracts for environmental goods affect the following contractual issues associated with AES: transaction costs, asymmetry of information, the ‘hold-up’, ‘end-of-contract’ and ‘assurance’ problems and incomplete contracts. As a prerequisite for effective collective contracts requires land managers holding communal aims and interests, the techniques used by ECs to form like-minded groups are also reviewed. Government support for collective contracts can be justified because they: (1) reduce transaction costs; (2) improve ecological effectiveness; and (3) increase the policy options available. Government support for ECs can be justified (1) as compensation to members for the additional costs they incur co-ordinating group actions; (2) to assist collectives buy-in expert advice; and (3) because they increase participation rates by (a) helping counter the ‘hold-up’, ‘assurance’ and ‘incomplete contract’ problems, and (b) by framing decisions in ways that shift attitudes, values and aspirations among members.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeremy Franks (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: