Beyond carbon sequestration: Swedish farmers' preferences and trade-offs between co-benefits of climate change mitigation measures
炭素隔離を超えて：気候変動緩和策の共便益に対するスウェーデンの農家の選好とトレードオフ (AI 翻訳)
Harold Opdenbosch, Emilia Mattsson, Oyakhilomen Oyinbo, Jens Rommel, Helena Hansson, Gordana Manevska‐Tasevska
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
スウェーデンの農家179人を対象に、カバークロップ生態スキームにおける炭素隔離、生物多様性、土壌健康などの共便益に対する選好を調査。潜在クラス分析により、非金銭的属性に敏感な「対応的農家」と現状維持を好む「従来型農家」の2クラスを特定。土壌健康が最も好まれ、農家の態度と年齢が選好の不均一性の主因。
English
Surveying 179 Swedish farmers, this study examines preferences for co-benefits (carbon sequestration, biodiversity, soil health) of cover cropping eco-schemes. Latent class analysis reveals two farmer types: 'responsive' farmers valuing non-monetary attributes and 'conventional' farmers preferring status quo. Soil health is most preferred due to tangible private returns. Attitudes and age drive preference heterogeneity.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本の農業政策では、みどりの食料システム戦略やカーボン・クレジット制度が進む中、農家の行動インセンティブ理解は重要。本研究成果は、日本での環境直接支払いや炭素貯留施策の設計に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
This study contributes to global understanding of farmer behavior in agri-environmental schemes, relevant for designing effective climate mitigation policies under CAP and similar frameworks. It highlights the importance of co-benefits like soil health for farmer participation, informing policy design worldwide.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides empirical evidence on farmer preferences for co-benefits, useful for behavioral modeling in agri-environmental policy.
🏢実務担当者:Agri-food companies and cooperatives can use insights to design incentive schemes that align with farmer motivations.
🏛政策担当者:Informs design of agricultural climate policies by highlighting the role of co-benefits and farmer heterogeneity.
📄 Abstract（原文）
The mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions is a central policy concern in agriculture, reflected through voluntary contractual measures in the Common Agricultural Policy. The literature suggests that farmers' motivation for participating in mitigation measures does not necessarily originate in climate consciousness nor a sense of responsibility for mitigation, but rather in the co-benefits that they can bring. This paper investigates farmers' preferences for climate-related and non-climate co-benefits of mitigation measures, specifically carbon sequestration, biodiversity and soil health, using the cover cropping eco-scheme as a case study. We elicit trade-offs between monetary and non-monetary utility values associated with the co-benefits, alongside farmers' attitudes and identities, using a survey among Swedish farmers ( n = 179). Results reveal two distinct classes: class 1 reflects “responsive farmers” due to their greater sensitivity to the non-monetary attributes in the utility function and their positive and significant attitudes towards cover cropping, while class 2 refers to “conventional farmers”, with a stronger preference for the status quo and monetary utility values. Responsive farmers are prepared to incur costs, such as accepting reductions in subsidy payments, to support agri-environmental and climate outcomes. Soil health emerges as the most preferred co-benefit, likely due to its more immediate and tangible private returns, including improved yields, compared with the broader public goods associated with biodiversity and carbon sequestration. Farmers' underlying attitudes towards the cover cropping eco-scheme, alongside farmers' age, are the main source of unobserved heterogeneity in preferences and trade-offs.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2026.109066first seen 2026-05-15 18:26:29 · last seen 2026-06-05 04:49:26
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。