Nature markets and English farmer groups: ready to go or reluctant to engage?

Kerry Waylen, Laure Kuhfuss (), Chloe Thompson, Carol Kyle, Niamh Mary Mchugh, Lucy Capstick, Helen Kendall and Stephen Jones
Additional contact information
Kerry Waylen: The James Hutton Institute
Laure Kuhfuss: SMART - Structures et Marché Agricoles, Ressources et Territoires - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Rennes Angers - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement, James Hutton Inst, Dundee DD2 5DA, Scotland - Partenaires INRAE
Chloe Thompson: The James Hutton Institute
Carol Kyle: The James Hutton Institute
Niamh Mary Mchugh: The Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust
Lucy Capstick: The Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust
Helen Kendall: Newcastle University [Newcastle]
Stephen Jones: Imaging Institute [Cleveland] - Cleveland Clinic

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Farmers and other land-managers are increasingly expected to engage in ‘nature markets', whereby private sector actors pay for new environment-related goals from land management, such as payments for carbon sequestration or biodiversity credits. The UK is pioneering nature markets, but one of the perceived challenges for scaling these markets is the need for collaboration by multiple land-managers. In this study we explore if and how pre-existing farmer groups in England can engage in nature markets, and what might better enable this. This is based on a survey of contacts for twenty-eight farmer groups, and semi-structured interviews with nine of these groups. We found farmer groups have strengths that may allow them to engage in nature markets, especially their capacity to ‘aggregate' supply, share knowledge, and coordinate efforts. These strengths often depend on the capacities of facilitators. Groups vary in size and remit, affecting strengths such as the ability to offer investments tied to place-identity. However, not all facilitators and group members are enthusiastic about nature markets; and even where there is interest, more information or other support may be required. These findings are consistent with thinking on farmers' social capital and the importance of facilitators for farmer coordination. If farmer groups are to engage more with nature markets, support for groups and their facilitators is needed, tailored to differently-sized groups, and tracking the consequences for farmers and nature. Regardless of the popularity and priorities of market-based approaches, encouraging land-manager collaboration will likely be a worthwhile investment for joined-up landscape management.

Keywords: Land-managers; Ecosystem markets; Social networks; Payments for ecosystem services; Green finance; Natural capital (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026-05
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Journal of Rural Studies, 2026, 124, pp.104108. ⟨10.1016/j.jrurstud.2026.104108⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05603836

DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2026.104108

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().