Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40287575›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2025

Market-Based Instruments for Biodiversity in Agricultural Landscapes: An Evaluation of Quality Criteria in a German case study.

Lea Streit, Arndt Feuerbacher, Markus Röhl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lea StreitNürtingen-Geislingen University of Applied Science, Institute for Landscape and Environment, Hechinger Str. 12, 72622, Nürtingen, Germany. lea.streit@hfwu.de.ORCID 0009-0000-7949-8152
Arndt FeuerbacherUniversity of Hohenheim, Ecological-Economic Policy Modelling Research Group, Institute for Agricultural Policy and Markets, Schwerzstr. 46, 70599, Stuttgart, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3414-5120
Markus RöhlNürtingen-Geislingen University of Applied Science, Institute for Landscape and Environment, Hechinger Str. 12, 72622, Nürtingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5989-4537

Funding

Baden-Württemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Arts BW6_09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Market-based instruments (MBIs) for the protection and promotion of biodiversity have gained significant importance in recent years. The success of MBIs depends largely on the transparent presentation of their actual effects, which rely on the quality of implementation. Quality criteria can be used to evaluate this. To date, few studies have examined whether and how these criteria are applied. This study seeks to address this gap, by using MBIs in the German agricultural landscape as a case study. Quality criteria were defined on the basis of a literature review; then applied to MBIs identified through an internet search and finally analyzed. Quality criteria related to methodological approaches (implementation, maintenance, used seed mixtures) and quality control (monitoring, localization) are presented less frequently than information on rights and obligations or the use of financial funds. Among the 151 MBIs analyzed, 70% lack control mechanisms and monitoring systems, indicating unverified effectiveness. Additionally, MBIs financed through program approaches are more likely to have control mechanisms and include perennial measures than MBIs funded by direct payments of sponsors or consumers purchasing a product. The development of MBI offerings suggests that there is persistent and growing demand, as some programs have been running for several decades. However, without ecological monitoring, it is not possible to ascertain whether these measures benefit biodiversity. To establish standardized methods for comparing MBIs for biodiversity, policymakers must consider official guidelines and, where appropriate, implement regulatory frameworks.

Indexed as

AgricultureBiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesEnvironmental MonitoringGermany(Agro-)EcologyBiodiversity OffsetEcosystem servicesLand-use managementNon-governmental schemesPayment for Ecosystem Services

Identifiers

PMID40287575
PMCPMC12084266

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.