Abstract

To improve the provision of agri-environmental-climate public goods (AECPGs) from agriculture and forestry, new solutions, such as result-based payments or collective implementation, and new strategies along the value chain might help. The analysis of ca. 120 case studies in and outside EU showed that many real-life cases of implementation combine different contract types. Collective implementation can be a precondition for environmental effectiveness, particularly if AECPGs are addressed that can be hardly improved by measures on single plots, (e.g. water quality). Result-based contracts can target specific AECPGs and increase engagement of land-managers due to flexible management choices. Some recommendations for contract design and implementation are distilled: 1.) Targeting contracts to specific regions addresses regional criticalities and enhances the farmers’ and foresters’ interest and understanding of measures. 2.) Involving land-managers in target-setting and measure development leads to higher compatibility with their businesses and can create win-win situations. 3.) Involving control authorities in the design of indicators in result-based schemes can guarantee integrability into RDPs. 4.) Fostering bottom-up approaches and involving regional key actors as coordinating units enhances commitment and motivation in collective approaches. 5.) Guaranteeing good levels of equity and fairness enhances acceptance particularly in value-chain based solutions. It becomes clear that result-based and collective solutions don’t fit in each context situation, as they often demand high levels of knowledge and collaborative skills. Value chain approaches are often only suited if consumers’ awareness is high.