Aligning strategic and participatory approaches to agri‐environment scheme design and implementation to enhance nature recovery outcomes

Bibliographic Data

ID19583305
AuthorsDavid J Baker (0000-0002-0466-8222, University of Exeter, corresponding author), Caroline Nye (0000-0003-0579-3575, University of Exeter), Rebecca Wheeler (0000-0001-5649-3690, University of Exeter), Charles Masquelier (0000-0003-1850-6731, University of Exeter), Amy Binner (0000-0003-3235-0585, University of Exeter), Kevin J Gaston (0000-0002-7235-7928, University of Exeter), Matthew S Heard (0000-0002-0805-8165, National Trust), Matt Lobley (0000-0003-4774-8422, University of Exeter), D Smith (0000-0002-0650-6606), David K Smith (0000-0001-6508-6368, University of Exeter), Ilya M D Maclean (0000-0001-8030-9136, University of Exeter)
Year2025
Volume7
Issue2
Pages329-345
Publication date2025-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePeople and Nature (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2575-8314 • E-ISSN: 2575-8314
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/pan3.10785
OpenAlexW4406597973
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited78

Nature recovery requires the provisioning of resources in the right place and in sufficient quantities to support wildlife populations and improve ecological processes. Agri‐environment schemes (AES) have been a major mechanism for delivering environmental management across EU‐farmed landscapes, but measured benefits to nature are often negligible in large part due to a lack of strategic spatial targeting of management actions. As an example, AES in England are often delivered using a participatory strategy, typically at individual farm scale, with types of management agreements and uptake reflecting the business model and interests of each farm. However, this implementation model can result in poorly distributed conservation resources and, consequently, a failure to recover nature across larger scales, even if individual agreements are delivered well. Achieving effective, large‐scale nature recovery through AES requires aligning its implementation with spatially targeted approaches that prioritise specific conservation goals. We discuss the rationale for, and major barriers to, aligning AES design and implementation to these approaches. We then highlight how, through the framework of systematic conservation planning , both the strategic and participatory components of AES could be aligned better to enhance nature recovery outcomes. To ensure AES help achieve nature recovery goals, clear and measurable targets must be set with the type and spatial configuration of actions designed to enable meeting targets. Strategic spatial targeting must also be carried out with the implementation phase in mind, accounting for socio‐economic opportunities and barriers to engagement and acknowledging that uncertainties around farm‐scale implementation mean plans must be adaptable. Participatory approaches for AES design and implementation that support the delivery of spatially targeted management actions are required, most notably by facilitating collaboration or cooperation across farm holdings. For AES to contribute effectively to nature recovery goals, aligning strategic and participatory approaches in its design and implementation is crucial. This requires uniting knowledge across disciplines and cultures and ensuring that information is shared to support progressive refinement of scheme design and guidance towards achieving overall nature recovery goals. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog

Business · Citizen journalism · Knowledge management · Management science · Operations management · Participatory design · Process management · World Wide Web · Agricultural Innovations and Practices · Computer Science · Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management · Engineering · Rural development and sustainability

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access