In this study we evaluate the consequences of regional and collective implementation of ecological focus areas according to Articles 46:5 and 46:6 of the EU Direct Payments regulation. Through broader analyses, we also consider other forms of collaboration and additional management requirements. Promoting networks of areas with an ecological focus is part of the EU’s investment in green infrastructure. Sweden does not currently allow for any collaboration among farmers. The study results are based on ecological-economic modelling, a workshop with farmers and interviews with administrators. Our analyses focus on the effects on pollination and biological pest control, both of which are ecosystem services benefiting agriculture, and on transaction costs for farmers and administrators.Farmers are positive about collaboration, officials fear higher costsGenerally, the participating farmers are positive about collaboration. However, clearer and more concrete links between approved focus areas, management requirements and environmental benefits are needed to create acceptance among farmers. Administrators with experience of collaborative systems are generally positive to collective implementation, while those without experience are hesitant. There is a fear of increased transaction costs among Swedish administrators, despite the fact that well-functioning examples of collaboration in Europe exist. We recommend seeking inspiration and knowledge from these successful examples.Small environmental effects from current focus areasThe introduction of collective implementation of ecological focus areas with the current Swedish regulations would provide small environmental effects. The environmental effects remain weak because of the possibility of still being able to choose focus areas with weak environmental effects, and because generous weighting factors reduce the actual surface allocated to focus areas providing higher environmental benefits. In addition, there are incentives to place focus areas on low productive land, where the need for focus areas supporting ecosystem services is least. Further, focus areas that are part of normal cultivation are also approved today, creating deadweight. Our models show that the possibility of collaboration does not solve these problems.Better environmental effects with the right focus areas and quality requirementsIn order to achieve substantial environmental effects, it is necessary to design rules that favour the most environmentally effective focus areas. First and foremost, the focus area menu should contain environmentally effective measures. In addition, the weighting system should be re-evaluated so that the most effective focus area is used as a benchmark. Finally, the allocation of ecological focus areas should be done from a landscape perspective to ensure their contribution to green infrastructure. At the farm level, the choice and allocation of focus areas should be guided by information and advice about where the potential for environmental benefits is the greatest, for example near crops favoured by pollination and biological pest control. When aiming at benefiting these ecosystem services, an effective way would be to limit the menu of selectable focus areas to fallows and uncultivated field edges with a requirement to sow these with flowering plants.