<?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=173350"><dc:title>Failure or success?</dc:title><dc:creator>Pečurlić,	Lucija	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Erjavec,	Emil	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Sudarić,	Tihana	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Šumrada,	Tanja	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>biodiversity policy integration</dc:subject><dc:subject>common agricultural policy</dc:subject><dc:subject>agri-environmental schemes</dc:subject><dc:subject>Croatia</dc:subject><dc:subject>EU enlargement</dc:subject><dc:description>Despite the adoption of EU nature conservation legislation, Central and Eastern European countries have witnessed accelerated biodiversity declines in recent decades. This paper explores the reasons behind the relatively weak integration of biodiversity policy into the agricultural sector, with Croatia serving as a case study. Conceptually, this study contributes to the understanding of biodiversity policy integration (BPI) by applying an 
adapted analytical framework that reveals how institutional and structural constraints shape the depth of integration in post-socialist contexts, offering insights for future EU enlargements and vertical policy integration. The study involved a comprehensive review of national legislation and an analysis of interviews with stakeholders and experts. Historically, Croatia’s biodiversity conservation efforts were primarily concentrated on protected areas, with limited involvement of farmers. Agri-environmental schemes (AES) for biodiversity were introduced during the 2014–2022 CAP period, but were implemented on less than 2 % of farmland. Factors such as limited institutional capacity, a lack of biodiversity data, and insufficient experience in designing conservation programs resulted in relatively poorly tailored measures. Despite increased flexibility in the post-2023 CAP, few significant policy changes have been made, primarily due to a lack of stakeholder collaboration and inadequate institutional support for new pproaches.</dc:description><dc:date>2025</dc:date><dc:date>2025-09-16 12:51:01</dc:date><dc:type>Članek v reviji</dc:type><dc:identifier>173350</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
