Dataset on involved actors and their roles in the governance of innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes

In the presented dataset we have analyzed 19 innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes from six European countries. The selected contracts represent examples of four different contract types: result-based, collective, land tenure, and value chain contracts. For the analysis we used a three step approach: Step 1: We employed a method mix combining literature review, web search, and expert consultation to identify potential case examples for the innovative contracts, resulting in a final sample of four to five contracts per contract types including contracts from Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Step 2: We designed a survey structured in accordance with Elinor Ostrom’s institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework to collect detailed information on overall 34 variables for each contract, yielding a data matrix with 646 data points. Step 3: We conducted an in-depth analysis for each contract on the involved actors and their roles in contract governance roles, generating a detailed inventory of 179 identified actors where each actor was assigned one or several out of 16 possible governance roles, creating a data matrix of 2,864 data points. The dataset generated through these three steps contains 84 data files, including tables, figures, maps, and one text file. The dataset can be re-used by all interested in the institutional and governance analysis of innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes. The dataset is linked to Work package 2 (WP2), Task 2.2 (T2.2), and Deliverable 2.2 (D2.2) of the research and innovation action ‘Contracts2.0’ (https://www.project-contracts20.eu/) funded under grant agreement no. 818190 through the European Union’s Horizon 2020 program. This dataset contains the information required to reproduce the results presented in the following research paper: Sattler, C., Barghusen, R., Bredemeier, B., Dutilly, C., Prager, K. (2023). Institutional analysis of