Farmers' preferences toward practice‐ and results‐based agri‐environmental schemes (AES) are analysed using a labelled choice experiment. The analysis focuses on schemes involving an innovative satellite‐based monitoring system, with different environmental objectives. Olive groves in southern Spain are used as a case study. Results show no statistically significant differences in farmers' willingness to accept (WTA) payment for participating in practice‐ versus results‐based AES when the scheme targets carbon sequestration. By contrast, farmers require a significantly higher WTA payment for results‐based AES when targeting biodiversity (using bird species as an indicator), mostly due to the uncertainties related to its provision and monitoring. WTA significantly increases with provision level and remote sensing monitoring, regardless of the type of scheme. Significant preference heterogeneity is observed, partly explained by farmers' attitudes toward risk and their beliefs about environmental service provision and monitoring capacity. The results suggest useful policy implications, including the potential of making use of joint provision of environmental services in the design of results‐based AES and accompanying them with uncertainty mitigating measures.

中文翻译：

---

比较遥感控制的基于实践和基于结果的农业环境计划：在西班牙橄榄园的应用

使用标记选择实验分析农民对基于实践和结果的农业环境计划（AES）的偏好。分析的重点是涉及具有不同环境目标的创新型卫星监测系统的方案。西班牙南部的橄榄园被用作案例研究。结果显示，当计划以碳封存为目标时，农民接受基于实践的 AES 与基于结果的 AES 的支付意愿（WTA）没有统计学上的显着差异。相比之下，当以生物多样性为目标（使用鸟类物种作为指标）时，农民要求为基于结果的 AES 支付更高的 WTA 费用，这主要是由于与其提供和监测相关的不确定性。无论计划类型如何，WTA 都会随着供应水平和遥感监测的增加而显着增加。观察到显着的偏好异质性，部分原因是农民对风险的态度以及他们对环境服务提供和监测能力的信念。结果表明了有用的政策含义，包括在基于结果的 AES 设计中利用联合提供环境服务的潜力，并辅以不确定性缓解措施。