Zasnove kmetijsko-okoljskih ukrepov in njihove značilnosti

Tanja ŠUMRADA, Emil ERJAVEC

Povzetek


Kmetijsko-okoljska plačila (KOP) so instrument kmetijske politike za spodbujanje kmetijskih praks in aktivnosti, ki presegajo z zakonodajo določene osnovne okoljske standarde. Načrtovanje KOP je kompleksen vsebinski, organizacijski in participativni proces. Odločevalci so soočeni z zahtevno nalogo izbora ustreznih zasnov ukrepov, pri čemer razpoložljive možnosti in njihove prednosti in slabosti večinoma niso zbrane in predstavljene na sistematičen način. Namen prispevka je opredeliti tipologijo ukrepov z vidika podlage za plačilo, koordinacije ukrepanja in načina izbora upravičencev. Nadalje prispevek podaja pregled uporabnosti in izvajanja posameznih zasnov ukrepov v praksi, ki temelji na pregledu literature in analizi primerov ukrepov v državah članicah EU in EFTA. V Evropski uniji sodijo KOP med najpomembnejše instrumente na področju varstva okolja in narave, vendar raziskave kažejo, da imajo kljub velikemu vložku proračunskih sredstev razmeroma majhne okoljske učinke. V zadnjih dveh desetletjih zato v evropskih in drugih državah preizkušajo različne nove zasnove KOP, s katerimi skušajo izboljšati njihovo uspešnost pri doseganju okoljskih ciljev in stroškovno učinkovitost. Ukrepi, ki so doslej večinoma temeljili na izpolnjevanju predpisanih praks, dopolnjujejo in v nekaterih državah že nadomeščajo rezultatsko naravnani in podrobneje prostorsko opredeljeni ukrepi. Nekatere evropske države preizkušajo tudi načine, kako kmetijske prakse, ki omogočajo doseganje ciljev s področja varovanja okolja in narave, uveljaviti s skupnim delovanjem kmetovalcev in drugih deležnikov.


Ključne besede


kmetijsko-okoljski ukrepi; rezultatske sheme; skupno delovanje; prostorsko ciljanje; okoljske dražbe; biodiverziteta v kmetijskih ekosistemih; vplivi kmetijstva na okolje; Skupna kmetijska politika

Celotno besedilo:

PDF

Literatura


Armsworth, P. R., Acs, S., Dallimer, M., Gaston, K. J., Hanley, N., & Wilson, P. (2012). The cost of policy simplification in conservation incentive programs. Ecology Letters, 15(5), 406–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01747.x

Batáry, P., Báldi, A., Kleijn, D., & Tscharntke, T. (2011). Landscape-moderated biodiversity effects of agri-environmental management: A meta-analysis. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 278(1713), 1894–1902. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.1923

Batáry, P., Dicks, L. V., Kleijn, D., & Sutherland, W. J. (2015). The role of agri-environment schemes in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 29(4), 1006–1016. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12536

Birge, T., & Herzon, I. (2019). Exploring cultural acceptability of a hypothetical results-based agri-environment payment for grassland biodiversity. Journal of Rural Studies, 67, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.02.006

Birge, T., Toivonen, M., Kaljonen, M., & Herzon, I. (2017). Probing the grounds: Developing a payment-by-results agri-environment scheme in Finland. Land Use Policy, 61, 302–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.11.028

Boulton, A., Lockett, R., & Seymour, T. (2013). A review and evaluation of collaborative landscape-scale management initiatives. Commissioned Report no. 598. Scottish Natural Heritage. Pridobljeno s www.nls.uk/e-monographs/2013/598.pdf

Buller, H., Wilson, G. A., & Höll, A. (Ur.). (2000). Agri-environmental Policy in the European Union. Ashgate Publishing.

Burton, R. J. F., & Schwarz, G. (2013). Result-oriented agri-environmental schemes in Europe and their potential for promoting behavioural change. Land Use Policy, 30(1), 628–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.05.002

Chobotová, V. (2013). The role of market-based instruments for biodiversity conservation in Central and Eastern Europe. Ecological Economics, 95, 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.08.007

Colombo, S., & Rocamora-Montiel, B. (2018). Result-oriented Agri-Environmental Climate Schemes as a means of promoting climate change mitigation in olive growing. Outlook on Agriculture, 47(2), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0030727018770931

ECA. (2011). Is agri-environment support well designed and managed?. Special report no. 7/2011. European Court of Auditors. Pridobljeno s https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR11_07/SR11_07_EN.PDF

ECA. (2020). Biodiversity on farmland: CAP contribution has not halted the decline. Special report no. 13/2020. European Court of Auditors. Pridobljeno s https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=53892

Egdell, J. (2000). Consultation on the countryside premium scheme: Creating a `market’ for information. Journal of Rural Studies, 16(3), 357–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00039-X

ENRD. (2018). Background briefing: Collective approaches. Working Document of the Thematic Group (TG) on sustainable management of water and soils. European Network for Rural Development (ENRD). Pridobljeno s https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/sites/enrd/files/tg2_water-soil_briefing_collective-approaches.pdf

ENRD. (2019). RDP analysis: Support to environment & climate change. M10.1 Agri-environment-climate commitments. European Network for Rural Development (ENRD). Pridobljeno s https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/rdp-measures-analysis_en

Erjavec, E., Šumrada, T., Juvančič, L., Rac, I., Cunder, T., Bedrač, M., & Lovec, M. (2018). Vrednotenje slovenske kmetijske politike v obdobju 2015-2020: Raziskovalna podpora za strateško načrtovanje po letu 2020. Kmetijski inštitut Slovenije. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329718206_Vrednotenje_slovenske_kmetijske_politike_v_obdobju_2015-2020_Raziskovalna_podpora_za_stratesko_nacrtovanje_po_letu_2020_-_Ljubljana_Kmetijski_institut_Slovenije

Evropska komisija. (2014). Technical elements of agri-environment-climate measure in the programming period 2014-2020.

Evropska komisija. (2018, januar 6). Natural resources and environment—Legal texts and factsheets. Pridobljeno s https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/natural-resources-and-environment_en

FAO. (2011). Payments for Ecosystem Services and Food Security. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Pridobljeno s http://www.fao.org/3/i2100e/i2100e00.htm

Franks, J. R., & Emery, S. B. (2013). Incentivising collaborative conservation: Lessons from existing environmental Stewardship Scheme options. Land Use Policy, 30(1), 847–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.06.005

Gamero, A., Brotons, L., Brunner, A., Foppen, R., Fornasari, L., Gregory, R. D., … Voříšek, P. (2017). Tracking Progress Toward EU Biodiversity Strategy Targets: EU Policy Effects in Preserving its Common Farmland Birds. Conservation Letters, 10(4), 395–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12292

Gerowitt, B., Isselstein, J., & Marggraf, R. (2003). Rewards for ecological goods—Requirements and perspectives for agricultural land use. Biotic Indicators for Biodiversity and Sustainable Agriculture, 98(1), 541–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00112-9

Gorton, M., Hubbard, C., & Hubbard, L. (2009). The Folly of European Union Policy Transfer: Why the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Does Not Fit Central and Eastern Europe. Regional Studies, 43(10), 1305–1317. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400802508802

Grammatikopoulou, I., Iho, A., & Pouta, E. (2012). Willingness of farmers to participate in agri-environmental auctions in Finland. Food Economics, 9(4), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/2164828X.2013.845557

Herzon, I., Birge, T., Allen, B., Povellato, A., Vanni, F., Hart, K., … Pražan, J. (2018). Time to look for evidence: Results-based approach to biodiversity conservation on farmland in Europe. Land Use Policy, 71, 347–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.12.011

Iho, A., Lankoski, J., Ollikainen, M., Puustinen, M., & Lehtimäki, J. (2014). Agri-environmental auctions for phosphorus load reduction: Experiences from a Finnish pilot. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 58(2), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.12049

Juvančič, L., Bojkovski, D., Pohar, J., Kuhar, A., & Vrisk, M. (2018). Določitev stroškovno učinkovitih javnih podpor za ohranjanje avtohtonih pasem domačih živali V4-1433. Končno poročilo o rezultatih opravljenega raziskovalnega dela na projektu v okviru ciljnega raziskovalnega programa (CRP) »Zagotovimo.si hrano za jutri«. Univerza v Ljubljani, Biotehniška fakulteta. Pridobljeno s http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:DOC-WHEX7470

Kaiser, T., Reutter, M., & Matzdorf, B. (2019). How to improve the conservation of species-rich grasslands with result-oriented payment schemes? Journal for Nature Conservation, 52, 125752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2019.125752

Kaligarič, M., Čuš, J., Škornik, S., & Ivajnšič, D. (2019). The failure of agri-environment measures to promote and conserve grassland biodiversity in Slovenia. Land Use Policy, 80, 127–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.013

Kleijn, D., & Sutherland, W. J. (2003). How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? Journal of Applied Ecology, 40(6), 947–969. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2003.00868.x

Krämer, J. E., & Wätzold, F. (2018). The agglomeration bonus in practice—An exploratory assessment of the Swiss network bonus. Journal for Nature Conservation, 43, 126–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2018.03.002

Lastra-Bravo, X. B., Hubbard, C., Garrod, G., & Tolón-Becerra, A. (2015). What drives farmers’ participation in EU agri-environmental schemes?: Results from a qualitative meta-analysis. Environmental Science & Policy, 54, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.06.002

Latacz-Lohmann, U., & Schilizzi, S. (2005). Auctions for Conservation Contracts: A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature (Project No: UKL/001/05). University of Kiel; University of Western Australia. Pridobljeno s https://www2.gov.scot/Publications/2006/02/21152441/0

Leventon, J., Schaal, T., Velten, S., Dänhardt, J., Fischer, J., Abson, D. J., & Newig, J. (2017). Collaboration or fragmentation? Biodiversity management through the common agricultural policy. Land Use Policy, 64, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.02.009

Lundberg, L., Persson, U. M., Alpizar, F., & Lindgren, K. (2018). Context Matters: Exploring the Cost-effectiveness of Fixed Payments and Procurement Auctions for PES. Ecological Economics, 146, 347–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.021

McCarthy, J., Bonnin, C., & Meredith, D. (2018). Disciplining the State: The role of alliances in contesting multi-level agri-environmental governance. Land Use Policy, 76, 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.049

McKenzie, A. J., Emery, S. B., Franks, J. R., & Whittingham, M. J. (2013). Landscape-scale conservation: Collaborative agri-environment schemes could benefit both biodiversity and ecosystem services, but will farmers be willing to participate? Journal of Applied Ecology, 50(5), 1274–1280. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12122

Meyer, C., Reutter, M., Matzdorf, B., Sattler, C., & Schomers, S. (2015). Design rules for successful governmental payments for ecosystem services: Taking agri-environmental measures in Germany as an example. Journal of Environmental Management, 157, 146–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.03.053

Mills, J., Gibbon, D., Ingram, J., Reed, M., Short, C., & Dwyer, J. (2011). Organising Collective Action for Effective Environmental Management and Social Learning in Wales. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 17(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2011.536356

Ministry of Economic Affairs. (2016). The cooperative approach under the new Dutch agri-environment-climate scheme: Background, procedures and legal and institutional implications. Ministry of Economic Affairs. Pridobljeno s https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/sites/enrd/files/w12_collective-approach_nl.pdf

MKGP. (2017). Program razvoja podeželja RS za obdobje 2014-2020 (CCI 2014SI06RDNP001). Različica 5.1. Evropska komisija. Pridobljeno s https://www.program-podezelja.si/images/SPLETNA_STRAN_PRP_NOVA/1_PRP_2014-2020/1_1_Kaj_je_program_razvoja_pode%C5%BEelja/3._sprememba_PRP/Tretja_sprememba_PRP_Programme_2014SI06RDNP001_5_1_sl.pdf

Newton, I. (2017). Farming and Birds. HarperCollins.

OECD. (2010). Guidelines for Cost-effective Agri-environmental Policy Measures. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264086845-en

OECD. (2013). Providing Agri-environmental Public Goods through Collective Action. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264197213-en

OECD. (2015). Public Goods and Externalities: Agri-environmental Policy Measures in Selected OECD Countries. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239821-en

OECD. (2017). Evaluation of Agricultural Policy Reforms in the European Union: The Common Agricultural Policy 2014-20. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264278783-en

O’Rourke, E., & Finn, J. A. (Ur.). (2020). Farming for Nature: The role of results-based payments. Teagasc; National Parks and Wildlife Service. Pridobljeno s https://www.teagasc.ie/environment/biodiversity--countryside/farming-for-nature/

Palm-Forster, L. H., Swinton, S. M., Lupi, F., & Shupp, R. S. (2016). Too Burdensome to Bid: Transaction Costs and Pay-for-Performance Conservation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 98(5), 1314–1333. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aaw071

Parkhurst, G. M., & Shogren, J. F. (2007). Spatial incentives to coordinate contiguous habitat. Special Section - Ecosystem Services and Agriculture, 64(2), 344–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.009

Plieninger, T., Schleyer, C., Schaich, H., Ohnesorge, B., Gerdes, H., Hernández‐Morcillo, M., & Bieling, C. (2012). Mainstreaming ecosystem services through reformed European agricultural policies. Conservation Letters, 5(4), 281–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00240.x

Poláková, J., Tucker, G., Hart, K., Dwyer, J., & Rayment, M. (2011). Addressing biodiversity and habitat preservation through Measures applied under the Common Agricultural Policy. Report Prepared for DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Contract No. 30-CE-0388497/00-44 (str. 357). Institute for European Environmental Policy. Pridobljeno s https://ieep.eu/publications/addressing-the-eu-s-biodiversity-goals-through-the-cap

Polman, N., Slangen, L., & Huylenbroeck, G. (2010). Collective approaches to agri-environmental management. V EU Policy for Agriculture, Food and Rural Areas (str. 363–368). Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Prager, K. (2015). Agri-environmental collaboratives for landscape management in Europe. Sustainability governance and transformation, 12, 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2014.10.009

Rac, I., Juvančič, L., & Erjavec, E. (2020). Stimulating collective action to preserve High Nature Value farming in post-transitional settings. A comparative analysis of three Slovenian social-ecological systems. Nature Conservation, 39, 87–111. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.39.51216

Reed, M. S., Moxey, A., Prager, K., Hanley, N., Skates, J., Bonn, A., … Thomson, K. (2014). Improving the link between payments and the provision of ecosystem services in agri-environment schemes. Ecosystem Services, 9, 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.06.008

Riley, M., Sangster, H., Smith, H., Chiverrell, R., & Boyle, J. (2018). Will farmers work together for conservation? The potential limits of farmers’ cooperation in agri-environment measures. Land Use Policy, 70, 635–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.049

Rolfe, J., Whitten, S., & Windle, J. (2017). The Australian experience in using tenders for conservation. Land Use Policy, 63, 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.037

Saba, A. (2017). Results-Based Agri-Environmental Schemes for Delivering Ecosystem Services in the EU: Established Issues and Emerging Trends. V M. Alabrese, M. Brunori, S. Rolandi, & A. Saba (Ur.), Agricultural Law (str. 83–122). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64756-2_5

Sabatier, R., Doyen, L., & Tichit, M. (2012). Action versus Result-Oriented Schemes in a Grassland Agroecosystem: A Dynamic Modelling Approach. PLoS ONE, 7(4), e33257. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033257

Schilizzi, S. (2017). An overview of laboratory research on conservation auctions. Land Use Policy, 63, 572–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.06.035

Schomers, S., Matzdorf, B., Meyer, C., & Sattler, C. (2015). How Local Intermediaries Improve the Effectiveness of Public Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: The Role of Networks and Agri-Environmental Assistance. Sustainability, 7(10), 13856–13886. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71013856

Sidemo-Holm, W., Smith, H. G., & Brady, M. V. (2018). Improving agricultural pollution abatement through result-based payment schemes. Land Use Policy, 77, 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.05.017

Slabe-Erker, R., Bartolj, T., Ogorevc, M., Kavaš, D., & Koman, K. (2017). The impacts of agricultural payments on groundwater quality: Spatial analysis on the case of Slovenia. Ecological Indicators, 73, 338–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.09.048

Slovenc, M. (2019). Can a “Good Farmer” and a “Bad Farmer” Cooperate?: An Examination of Conventional and Organic Farmers’ Perceptions of Production and Environmental Protection. V A. A. Lukšič & T. Tkalec (Ur.), Intertwining of diverse minds in(to) political ecology: Scientific texts of doctoral students participating in the Summer school of political ecology (str. 111–129). Inštitut Časopis za kritiko znanosti. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340681391_Can_a_Good_Farmer_and_a_Bad_Farmer_Cooperate_An_Examination_of_Conventional_and_Organic_Farmers'_Perceptions_of_Production_and_Environmental_Protection

Sutcliffe, L. M. E., Batáry, P., Kormann, U., Báldi, A., Dicks, L. V., Herzon, I., … Tscharntke, T. (2015). Harnessing the biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland. Diversity and Distributions, 21(6), 722–730. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12288

Šumrada, T., Kmecl, P., & Erjavec, E. (2020a). Učinki kmetijske rabe in ukrepov javnih politik na pestrost ptic kmetijske krajine. V J. Prišenk (Ur.), Razvojni vidiki prenosa znanja v skupni kmetijski politiki po letu 2020 (str. 41–53). Društvo agrarnih ekonomistov Slovenije (DAES). Pridobljeno s http://www.daes.si/Splet/8.%20konferenca%20DAES%20-%20Zbornik.pdf

Šumrada, T., Lovec, M., Juvančič, L., Rac, I., & Erjavec, E. (2020b). Fit for the task? Integration of biodiversity policy into the post-2020 Common Agricultural Policy: Illustration on the case of Slovenia. Journal for Nature Conservation, 54, 125804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2020.125804

Šumrada, T., Novak, A., Udovč, A., Rac, I., Šilc, U., Čelik, T., … Erjavec, E. (2020c). Potenciali novih zasnov in sodelovanje kmetov v kmetijsko-okoljskih ukrepih. Poročilo v okviru CRP V4-1814 Analitične podpore za večjo učinkovitost in ciljnost kmetijske politike do okolja in narave v Sloveniji. Univerza v Ljubljani, Biotehniška fakulteta.

Uthes, S., & Matzdorf, B. (2013). Studies on Agri-environmental Measures: A Survey of the Literature. Environmental Management, 51(1), 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-012-9959-6

Uthes, S., Matzdorf, B., Müller, K., & Kaechele, H. (2010). Spatial Targeting of Agri-Environmental Measures: Cost-Effectiveness and Distributional Consequences. Environmental Management, 46(3), 494–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9518-y

Vainio, A., Tienhaara, A., Haltia, E., Hyvönen, T., Pyysiäinen, J., & Pouta, E. (2019). The legitimacy of result-oriented and action-oriented agri-environmental schemes: A comparison of farmers’ and citizens’ perceptions. Land Use Policy, 104358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104358

Vesterager, J. P., Frederiksen, P., Kristensen, S. B. P., Vadineanu, A., Gaube, V., Geamana, N. A., … Busck, A. G. (2016). Dynamics in national agri-environmental policy implementation under changing EU policy priorities: Does one size fit all? Land Use Policy, 57, 764–776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.05.014

Vojtech, V. (2010). Policy Measures Addressing Agri-environmental Issues (OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers no. 24). OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/5kmjrzg08vvb-en

Wätzold, F., & Drechsler, M. (2005). Spatially Uniform versus Spatially Heterogeneous Compensation Payments for Biodiversity-Enhancing Land-Use Measures. Environmental & Resource Economics, 31(1), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-004-6979-6

Wätzold, F., & Drechsler, M. (2014). Agglomeration payment, agglomeration bonus or homogeneous payment? Resource and Energy Economics, 37, 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2013.11.011

Westerink, J., Jongeneel, R., Polman, N., Prager, K., Franks, J. R., Dupraz, P., & Mettepenningen, E. (2017). Collaborative governance arrangements to deliver spatially coordinated agri-environmental management. Land Use Policy, 69, 176–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.002

Wezel, A., Vincent, A., Nitsch, H., Schmid, O., Dubbert, M., Tasser, E., … Bogner, D. (2018). Farmers’ perceptions, preferences, and propositions for result-oriented measures in mountain farming. Land Use Policy, 70, 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.020

Wezel, A., Zipfer, M., Aubry, C., Barataud, F., & Heißenhuber, A. (2016). Result-oriented approaches to the management of drinking water catchments in agricultural landscapes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 59(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2014.1000453

Zavalloni, M., Raggi, M., & Viaggi, D. (2019). Agri-environmental Policies and Public Goods: An Assessmentof Coalition Incentives and Minimum Participation Rules. Environmental and Resource Economics, 72(4), 1023–1040. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-018-0237-9

Zilans, A., Schwarz, G., Veidemane, K., Osbeck, M., Tonderski, A., & Olsson, O. (2019). Enabling policy innovations promoting multiple ecosystem benefits: Lessons learnt from case studies in the Baltic Sea Region. Water Policy, 21(3), 546–564. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2019.054

Žvikart, M., & Debeljak, N. (2019). Ovrednotenje stroškov priprave in izvajanja rezultatsko usmerjenega kmetijsko-okoljskega ukrepa za ohranjanje suhih travišč. Varstvo narave, 31, 47–60.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14720/aas.2020.116.1.1775

Povratne povezave

  • Trenutno ni nobenih povratnih povezav.


Avtorske pravice (c) 2020

##submission.license.cc.by-nc-nd4.footer##

 

Acta agriculturae Slovenica je odprtodostopna revija, ki objavlja pod pogoji licence Creative Commons Priznanje avtorstva (CC BY).

                     


eISSN 1854-1941