Abstract：
Continued innovation in contract design may enhance the delivery of agri-environmental climate public goods (AECPG), but barriers to adoption arise in terms of how farmers perceive the economic benefits. Therefore, this paper examines survey data from Ireland and the Netherlands to analyse whether land managers agree that results-based, collective action, value chain and land tenure contracts for the delivery of AECPG are understandable, applicable to their farm and economically beneficial. Using Probit models, we also identify groups of land managers who perceive the different contract types as being economically beneficial, and these findings can inform policymakers of farmer groups who need adequate consideration during the design of agri-environmental contracts. For example, greater incentives could encourage older farmers to enrol in results-based contracts in Ireland and value chain contracts in the Netherlands. We also find a link between contract duration and the perceived economic benefits of collective action contracts in both countries, with land managers in Ireland desiring a longer duration. We highlight that policymakers and land managers in Ireland could apply lessons from the design of agri-environmental contracts in the Netherlands, where they are more common and varied. Greater knowledge exchange between users and non-users of such contracts would also help bridge the gap between theory and practice in both countries.
摘要：
合同设计的持续创新可能会增强农业环境气候公共产品（AECPG）的交付，但是，在农民如何看待经济利益方面，就会出现采用障碍。因此,本文研究了爱尔兰和荷兰的调查数据，以分析土地管理者是否同意基于结果的集体行动,交付AECPG的价值链和土地使用权合同是可以理解的，适用于他们的农场和经济效益。使用Probit模型，我们还确定了土地管理者群体，他们认为不同的合同类型在经济上是有益的，这些发现可以为农民群体的决策者提供信息，他们在设计农业环境合同时需要充分考虑。例如,更大的激励措施可以鼓励年长的农民在爱尔兰注册基于结果的合同，在荷兰注册价值链合同。我们还发现合同期限与两国集体行动合同的感知经济利益之间存在联系，爱尔兰的土地管理者渴望更长的期限。我们强调，爱尔兰的政策制定者和土地管理者可以借鉴荷兰农业环境合同设计的经验教训，它们更常见和多样化。此类合同的用户和非用户之间更大的知识交流也将有助于弥合两国理论与实践之间的差距。
