Diversity of agri-environmental governance and potential impacts on environmental performance – a systematic review

The governance of Agri-Environmental Schemes (AES) in the European Union plays a crucial role in shaping their environmental performance. However, existing research remains fragmented across different governance models and geographical contexts. This paper provides a systematic literature review of 28 studies to consolidate evidence on AES governance. It examines how governance models - through AES design, implementation, and actor interactions - are shaped and how related factors affect AES environmental performance. Our findings highlight the diversity of AES governance models, ranging from centralized national approaches to highly decentralized regional systems. The degree of decentralization, multi-level decision-making processes, and the engagement of different actors emerge as key determinants of AES governance models. The review further underscores a fundamental tension between centralization and decentralization, where increased subsidiarity enhances local relevance but may lead to policy fragmentation and objective dilution. Additionally, we identify three primary governance-related factors influencing AES environmental performance: design-related (e.g., contract features and spatial targeting), actor-related (e.g., power dynamics and stakeholder participation), and implementation-related (e.g., monitoring challenges and transaction costs). Furthermore, the results underline the role of path dependency, as past relationships among key practitioners continue to shape policy dynamics and define the mandates of the various actors involved. This study concludes that while governance does not directly determine AES environmental performance, it shapes the context for success or failure by influencing actor dynamics, policy design, and implementation strategies. Effective governance requires balancing subsidiarity with policy coherence, shaping decision-making processes, and addressing actors’ inclusion that may allow higher environmental performance. • Governance models vary across EU Member States balancing subsidiarity and coherence. • Decentralization enhances relevance but risks policy fragmentation. • Governance arrangements structure actor interactions, shaping AES decision-making. • Actor, design, and implementation factors influence AES environmental performance. • Path dependency shapes AES governance, reinforcing existing institutional dynamics.