Biology and Environment, volume 112, issue 1, pages 1-24

A review of evidence on the environmental impact of Ireland's Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS)

Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2012-01-01
scimago Q4
SJR
CiteScore
Impact factor
ISSN07917945
General Agricultural and Biological Sciences
General Environmental Science
Abstract
Received 19 October 2009. Accepted 28 February 2011. Published 29 March 2012. Since its inception in 1994, there has been strong demand for evidence of the environmental effectiveness of the Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS), which has paid farmers in the Republic of Ireland over €3 billion up to 2010. A variety of research projects have been undertaken that investigate the environmental effects of REPS through an examination of either specific environmental measures or specific geographical areas. A review of available publications has confirmed the absence of a comprehensive, national-scale study of the environmental impacts of REPS. For this reason, there is insufficient evidence with which to judge the environmental effectiveness of the national-scale implementation of the whole scheme. For some specific meas ures, however, sufficient evidence is available to inform an objective assessment in some cases, and to help learn how to improve environmental effectiveness in most cases. The majority of the REPS payments are now dedicated to biodiversity objectives. Thus, biodiversity measures and options should be a priority for any national-scale environmental assessment of the scheme. Such a study would help identify the environmental benefits of REPS, the specific elements of REPS that are performing adequately, and those elements that are in need of improvement. Given the considerable overlap between REPS measures and options and those included in the 2010 Agri Environment Options Scheme (AEOS), the assessment of REPS measures could also be used to inform the likely environmental performance of the AEOS.

Top-30

Journals

1
2
1
2

Publishers

1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
  • We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
  • Statistics recalculated only for publications connected to researchers, organizations and labs registered on the platform.
  • Statistics recalculated weekly.

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Share
Cite this
GOST | RIS | BibTex | MLA
Found error?