Post on 23-Jul-2020
http://www.provide-project.eu/
DAVIDE VIAGGIUniversity of Bologna
davide.viaggi@unibo.it
DG AGRI Lunch seminar8th February 2018, Bruxelles.
PROVIDE project Presentation
PROV
Idin
g sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icultu
re a
nd fo
rest
ry
PROVIding smart DElivery of public goods by EU agriculture and forestry
1
Duration: 1/9/2015 - 31/8/2018
Contact (project coordinator): Davide Viaggi(davide.viaggi@unibo.it)
http://www.provide-project.eu/Twitter: @PROVIDE_EU
LinkedIn: PROVIDE Project euFacebbok: Provide Horizon2020 project
Partners
2
Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna (UNIBO) (coord)
Leibniz Zentrum fuer Agrarlandschaftforschung (ZALF)
Universitaet fuer Bodenkultur Wien (BOKU)
Stichting VU-VUmc (VU/VUmc)
University of Cordoba (UCO)
The James Hutton Institute (JHI)
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)
Finnish Forest Research Institute (Metla)
Tallinn University (TLU)
Istituto Delta Ecologia Applicata srl (DELTA)
Universitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza (UAIC)
Institute of Agricultural Economics (IAE)
Warsaw University (UNIWARSAW)
Technology Centre of the Academy of Sciences of
the Czech Republic (TC AS CR)
Italy
Germany
Austria
The Netherlands
Spain
UK
France
Finland
Estonia
Italy
Romania
Bulgaria
Poland
Czech Republic
PRO
VIdi
ng sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icul
ture
and
fore
stry
Objectives of the project
5
•To provide a (consistent) conceptual basis, evidence, tools and improved incentive and policy options to support the “smart” provision of public goods
•By the EU agriculture and forestry ecosystems•In the light of trade-offs and conflicts brought about by prospective intensification scenarios
•Using a transdisciplinary approach
PROV
Idin
g sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icultu
re a
nd fo
rest
ry
Case study regions (CSR)
+EUlevel
Workflow
6
WP2 - Un-packing and co-construction of PG notion (and
project activities) with stakeholders
WP3 - Mapping of connection between conditions-practices
and PG production (and identification of hotspots)
WP4 - Improved (methods for) valuation of PG
WP5 - Formulation and evaluation of mechanisms (incl.
policy instruments) for production of PG
WP6 - Development of a framework and toolbox
PRO
VIdi
ng sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icul
ture
and
fore
stry
Stakeholder and expert network (SEN)
10
•Role•Feeding knowledge and identify priorities•Participatory research•Mediator for dissemination
•Structure & activities:•150+ people involved•in 13 countries + EU•70 events both EU level and locally
PRO
VIdi
ng sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icul
ture
and
fore
stry
THANK YOU VERY MUCHdavide.viaggi@unibo.it
http://www.provide-project.eu/
Mapping PGs at European level
• Agro-biodiversity
• Climate regulation
• Erosion prevention
• Farmland birds
• Flood regulation
• Cultural heritage
• Mega-fauna habitat
• Pollination
• Tourism
• Wild-food provisioning
10
PROV
Idin
g sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icultu
re a
nd fo
rest
ry
Mapping at theCSR level
• Exploring availability of information on PGs
provision within each CSR
• Analysis of demand and supply/demand
gaps with stakeholders interviews
• ->direct support to the identification of
hotspots for further analyses
• ->identification of candidate policy tools
matching gaps between demand and supply
11
PR
OV
Idin
g s
ma
rt
DE
live
ry o
f p
ub
lic g
oo
ds b
y E
U a
gri
cu
ltu
re a
nd
fo
restr
y
Mapping (selected insights)
1
•High potential as a supporting tool
•Importance of “functional” mapping of PG supply and demand (beyond
mere technical info)
•Causes of under provision are very “local”
•And…..
• Data availability issues
• Incomplete
• Locally-differentiated
• Interpretation issues:
• Drivers-practices-provision relationship
• Demand-supply relationship
• Mapping-policy relatinships
• High complementarity with stakeholders contribution
PR
OV
Idin
g sm
art
DEl
iver
y o
f p
ub
lic g
oo
ds
by
EU a
gric
ult
ure
an
d f
ore
stry
Valuation (activities)
1
•Common survey on CAP expenditure and priorities for PGs provision•Demand side (WTP from DCE, AHP+CV, others): Surveys in 11 CSAs, 2400 interviewees•Supply side: (WTA from DCE, CV, cost calculations): Surveys in 7 CSAs, ca.2000 interviewees
PROV
Idin
g sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icultu
re a
nd fo
rest
ry
Valuation (selected insights)
1
• Around 60% of the respondents agreed with the current CAP expenditure
devoted to promote the provision of PGs by AFS (23% think it’s too low)-
>average WTP=86 euro/household/year
• PGs more highly ranked: water availability and quality
• Demand side
• Mostly positive and relevant WTP
• Dependence on actual conditions and design
• Importance of heterogeneity for financing
• Supply side
• More than accounting costs (individual attitudes etc.)
• Context-specific
• Importance of heterogeneity for design of measures
• Matching demand and supply: potential and challenges
• Need of good practices with valuation and value transfer
Valuation resultsDemand-side: HS-related common exercise– Partners: AT, UK, ES, IT, BG, and RO.– While different PGBs and context: high intensity of preferences
(e.g. UK: €12-25m for biodiversity and €27-59m for water quality).– More accurate assessments at regional and local level… and
more specific as well. Examples of comparisons:o Water quality: AT: €60/household·year for potable groundwater
without treatment; UK: 47-104/person·year for good status.o Rural landscape: AT: €1.3/household·year for 100ha of additional
hedges and flower strips; RO: €0.5/person·year for 100ha of additional forest areas.
o Biodiversity: UK: €24,9/person·year for maintaining current level of farmland bird species; ES: €3.5-4.9 for improvements of approx. +50% and +100% in the level of level of farmland bird species.
o Intra-case comparison: ES: Moderate and significant improvements for biodiversity (€3.5 and €4.9) and soil functionality (€0 and €4.4).
THANK YOU VERY MUCHdavide.viaggi@unibo.it
http://www.provide-project.eu/
Some challenges
4
•Changing agenda: productivity, resource
efficiency and sustainable intensification•From theory to reality, from reality to theory•Communicating public goods•Intermediate (public) goods (& bads)•Valuation issues•From policies to mechanisms (incl. markets)
PRO
VIdi
ng sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icul
ture
and
fore
stry
Untill now…WP2 stakeholders• 3 rounds of stakeholder workshops (CSR+EU, total 42 workshops)
WP3 mapping• EU-level Mapping CSR Mapping + Quantitative importance of different
public goods + Connection with drivers and mechanism
WP4 valuation• Demand and supply valuation; research on determinants and
transferability ongoing
•WP5 mechanism• Selection of mechanisms, tools, indicators; finalisation of modelling
ongoing
•WP6 toolbox• State of play, framework and preliminary identification of needs and
options
Expected results
7
•An operational framework to support the smart provision
of public goods
•A toolbox putting together an inventory/mapping of
options, operational means for valuation and evaluation,
and a selection of evaluated policy/sector mechanisms
•A renewed (“un-packed”) conceptualization of the notion
of public goods
•A consolidated and long-lasting community of knowledge
and practice
PRO
VIdi
ng sm
art D
Eliv
ery
of p
ublic
goo
ds b
y EU
agr
icul
ture
and
fore
stry