<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=148039"><dc:title>Impact of the European Union`s Common agricultural policy on the provision of ecosystem services</dc:title><dc:creator>Rac,	Ilona	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Erjavec,	Emil	(Mentor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Dwyer,	Janet	(Komentor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>agriculture</dc:subject><dc:subject>environment protection</dc:subject><dc:subject>common agricultural policy</dc:subject><dc:subject>CAP</dc:subject><dc:subject>ecosystem services</dc:subject><dc:description>The focus of this thesis is the impact of governance arrangements on ecosystem services in the field of agriculture. EU farming is considered as a multi-scale Social-ecological system (SES), with a focus on the main institutional framework governing it, the Common agricultural policy (CAP). The governance of resource use in agriculture is analysed from different angles and at different levels. These ‘snapshots’ can elucidate system attributes that affect interactions in each observation. This dictated the use of multiple disciplinary approaches. To analyse which factors stimulate collective action to preserve High Nature Value farming in post-transitional settings, participatory action research was employed. To conceptualise agri-environmental discourses under the CAP, EU- and national-/regional-level policy documents were analysed to assess differences in the understanding of the relationship between the environment and farming. To assess the potential for a paradigm shift and the possible extent of a green shift in the CAP 2021-2027 proposal, the content of the proposed reform for the period 2021-2027 was analysed, along with the responses of key actors. In a study collating the knowledge of 300 experts, authors sought to create recommendations for the implementation phase of the new CAP with regard to measures for biodiversity conservation. The key conclusion that emerges from all the ‘snapshots’ is that in governance arrangements aiming to stimulate more environmentally sustainable management, local conditions must be given more consideration. Local knowledge should be tempered with science-based analyses and greater freedom in the selection of priorities and design of policy interventions should be accompanied by appropriate accountability mechanisms. Measures should therefore be carefully co-designed with users on the ground. At the same time, dialogue and communication must be stimulated, as results of the discourse analysis show that there are very different mental models present in the understanding of the interactions between agriculture and the environment.</dc:description><dc:date>2023</dc:date><dc:date>2023-07-26 12:44:58</dc:date><dc:type>Doktorsko delo/naloga</dc:type><dc:identifier>148039</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
