Online from publisher. 3 pages., In 2019 cover crop report, SHP dives into cover crop adoption practices. Summary of findings from a survey among 80 farmers in 11 states in the Soil Health Partnership network.
Ben-Othmen, Marie Asma (author) and Ostapchuk, Mariia (author)
Format:
Paper
Publication Date:
2019-05
Published:
France
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 32 Document Number: D10583
Notes:
16 pages., Paper presented at the 172nd European Association of Agricultural Economists Seminar,"Agricultural policy for the environment or environmental policy for agriculture?" Brussels, Belgium, May 28-29, 2019., via database., Results of this study indicate that environmental consideration is not the key factor behind farmers' preference involving land restoration programs. The financial component remains the main incentive.
USA: International Food Information Council, Washington, D.C.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 202 Document Number: D12082
Notes:
Online from the IFIC organization. 5 pages., "2021 food trends: from our eating and purchasing habits for food safety, COVID-19 still looms large on food decisions and health goals." Summary of findings from the 2020 Food and Health Survey conducted by IFIC.
10 pages., Via online journal., Forest ownership is changing in Europe. Reasons include recent institutional changes in Eastern Europe, changing lifestyles of non-agricultural owners and afforestation. At present, there is little comparative analysis across Europe, and the implications that these changes have for forest management and for the fulfilment and redefinition of policy objectives have not been addressed systematically. This paper has been developed in the framework of a European research network on forest ownership change, based on conceptual work, literature reviews and empirical evidence from 28 European countries. It aims to provide an overview of the state of knowledge, to discuss relevant issues and provide conceptual and practical foundations for future research, forest management approaches, and policy making. In particular, it discusses possible approaches for classifying forest ownership types and understandings of “new” forest ownership. One important insight is that the division into public and private forests is not as clear as often assumed and that an additional category of semi-public (or semi-private) forms of forest ownership would be desirable. Another recommendation is that the concepts of “new forest owners” vs. “new forest owner types” should be differentiated more consciously. We observe that, in research and policy practice, the mutual relations between forest ownership structure and policies are often neglected, for instance, how policies may directly and indirectly influence ownership development, and what different ownership categories mean for the fulfilment of policy goals. Finally, we propose that better support should be provided for the development of new, adapted forest management approaches for emerging forest owner types. Forest ownership deserves greater attention in studies dealing with forest policy or forest management.
