User choice in care for older people has assumed that care is like any other commodity; which is in contrast with the concept of care defined by the feminist and ethics of care literature, which includes a relational component beyond care tasks – caring relationships. This study aims to understand how caring relationships impact the decisions of older users of care and their perceived satisfaction. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 Direct Payments (DPs) older users, including proxies, in three Local Authorities in the Greater London area. Users fell into three groups according to their use of DPs: those purchasing care from agencies, those employing acquaintances as Personal Assistants (PAs) and those employing strangers as PAs. Decisions on and perceived satisfaction with care were both influenced by caring relationships. All users recognised that caring relationships can have instrumental value in improving care delivery or allowing greater leeway in negotiating tasks. Many users placed intrinsic value on continuity of care and the development of close caring relationships and clearly favoured employing PAs. The latter involved higher levels of uncertainty, emotional investment and reciprocal gift exchanges. Agencies were often chosen due to users’ preference for more detached caring relationships. The findings confirm that caring relationships involving reciprocal emotional investment are an important outcome of care, with salient implications for user behaviour.

Research using the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) and other data shows that direct government payments to farmers increase rents and the price of land. However, some ARMS data is imputed and does not account for relationships between payments and other variables. We investigate various imputation methods and benefits gained from a method with a wide scope rather than a parsimonious range of variables. Using our method, we estimate that an additional dollar of direct payment increases land value about $2.69 more per acre than ARMS imputation methods and that our imputations (using an exhaustive iterative sequential regression) outperform other methods and/or smaller models.

Direct payments – cash for people eligible for adult social care and spent by them on care and support – are claimed to enable care to better reflect user preferences and goals which improve outcomes. This paper compares outcomes of older direct payment users and those receiving care via a managed personal budget (where the budget is spent on the recipients behalf by a third party). The study adopted a retrospective, comparative design using a postal questionnaire in three English councils with adult social care responsibilities in 2012–13. Included in the study were 1,341 budget users aged 75+, living in ordinary community settings. The overall response rate was 27.1 per cent (339 respondents). Three validated scales measured outcomes: EQ-5D-3L (health status), the Sheldon–Cohen Perceived Stress Scale and the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (social care-related quality of life). The study found that direct payment users appreciated the control conferred by budget ownership, but in practice, for many it did not ‘translate’ into improved living arrangements. It also found no statistically significant difference in outcomes between direct payment and managed personal budget users. The paper argues that despite policy and other guidance and research evidence about effective implementation of direct payments for older people, the absence of evidence for better outcomes may at least in part be attributable to values underpinning policies relating to personalisation and personal budgets.

Financial incentives have become a core component of private lands conservation programmes because of their ability to motivate stewardship behaviour. Concern exists about the durability of stewardship behaviours after payments end. Payments for performance may impact farmers' current and future engagement with an incentive programme to protect an at-risk ground-nesting grassland bird. Farmer motivations for participating in the programme, as well as their intention to continue the programme if the financial incentive no longer existed, were quantified. Although farmers did not report a high level of current involvement in the programme, most reported they would continue at a similar or higher level of engagement if the payments ended. These outcomes were related to their perception that their participation was driven by their internal motivation to help rather than the desire to obtain the financial reward. The perception that their behaviour was self-directed was positively influenced by the flexibility surrounding landowners’ engagement with the programme, a feeling of competence and achievement, and a feeling of connectedness to the organization implementing the programme. The success of conservation incentive programmes over the long term can be enhanced by explicitly accounting for the needs of landowners in programme design and administration.

Personalisation of social care for adults is a key policy objective in the United Kingdom (UK), as in many other welfare states, having gained wide acceptance as essential for the empowerment of service users and as a means of managing increasing population demand. The system of personal budgets being established in the UK pursues twin objectives: aiming to ‘empower’ individuals to achieve ‘more for less’. However, there is mixed evidence that either objective is being achieved in practice. This is especially so in respect of older people who are less likely to accept a personal budget and more likely to be dissatisfied with their experience of using one. A qualitative study of eight cases in two local authority areas in England explored older people's experience of using a personal budget taken in the form of a direct payment. Data were elicited through a series of three in-depth interviews with each participant. The study was concerned with understanding the relationship between participants' experience of ‘Self’ and personalised services. Participants experienced personalisation when paid carers perceived and accommodated their ‘special requirements of Self’. In most cases this was achieved despite the consumerist aspects of personalisation rather than because of them, and often gave rise to risk and dilemma. The findings emphasise the importance of holistic assessment, and commissioning for quality over maximising choice.

Conservation practitioners are increasingly faced with the need to compensate resource users because of restrictions imposed on access and use of natural resources. The idea that direct payments may facilitate compensation more effectively than a programme based upon income substitution is questioned through examining two direct payments initiatives in an Indonesian marine national park. Elite capture of the direct payments process was facilitated in a context characterized by malleable state institutions and powerful private business interests, thereby disadvantaging key resource-dependent groups. The ecological benefits of direct payments initiatives and of protected areas were compromised through the emphasis on business priorities rather than environmental criteria. These difficulties were mitigated through taking account of existing practices regarding resource access, ensuring equal distribution of benefits and introducing new systems gradually over a period of time through trusted individuals, thereby facilitating the acceptance of direct payments initiatives amongst key user groups.

A key question in the literature on payments for ecosystem services (PES) is how payments incentivize conservation action and, in particular, how they interact with other motivations, including motivations for environmental stewardship. Related to this question are concerns about the temporal sustainability of PES: what happens when payments cease and whether a ‘no pay, no care’ environmental ethic is fostered. I present empirical research from a case study in western Uganda, where forest-adjacent communities are paid in exchange for planting trees on private lands, for carbon sequestration. The study demonstrates the range of values people have for trees in the landscape and the range of motivations for participating in PES schemes. However, the analysis shows that payments are clearly the main motivation for involvement, except in one area where people are more motivated by aesthetic and existence values for trees. Given the widespread importance of money in motivating involvement, I investigate the profitability of participation over time. This profitability analysis, in combination with qualitative data on perceptions of, and plans for, the future, contributes to understanding the temporal sustainability of PES. I draw on various strands of evidence to argue that the way participants prioritize payments may constitute a threat to the long-term maintenance of PES activities, particularly in situations such as in this case study, in which there is a mismatch between payments and contract length.

The idea of direct payments for biodiversity conservation in developing countries has generated much debate. Despite substantial experience with related economic instruments in high-income countries such approaches are rare in tropical developing countries, where conservation action is most urgently needed. We explore current experience with the application of direct payments in developing countries through an extensive review and subsequent analysis of the efforts of Conservation International. Our review identifies a broad spectrum of possible direct payment contracts. However, we focus on those involving international conservation interests. Firstly, we develop a framework for the design of direct payment applications, addressing four major aspects: contractual arrangements, definition of conservation services, performance payments, and monitoring and enforcement systems. Secondly, we discuss implementation issues, highlighting the need to consider social factors such as participatory processes, property rights, local institutions and contract legitimacy. Finally, we discuss important considerations for future payment schemes. These include the need for social responsibility, as well as rigorous assessments of effectiveness. We conclude that direct payments show potential as an innovative tool for engaging local communities or resource users in conservation and as a mechanism for channelling global investments in biodiversity conservation services to site-based initiatives.

This paper uses qualitative data from a cross-national study of ‘cash for care’ schemes in five European countries (Austria, France, Italy, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom) to consider the concepts of empowerment and independence in relation to both care-users and care-givers. The paper locates the schemes along two axes, one of regulation/non-regulation, the other whether relatives can be paid or not. Each of the schemes has a different impact both on the care relationship and on the labour market for care. In The Netherlands where relatives can be paid, for example, a fully commodified form of informal care emerges; but in Austria and Italy with low regulation, a mix of informal and formal care-givers/workers has emerged with many international migrant workers. In the UK, direct payments allow care-users to employ local care-workers who deliver care for various lengths of time; while in France a credentialised system means that care-work is delivered by qualified workers but for very short intervals. The main conclusion is that none of these schemes have a simple outcome or advantage, and that the contexts in which they occur and the nature of their regulation has to be understood before drawing conclusions about their impact on empowerment and independence on both sides of the care relationship.