Sustainable development of agriculture is at the core of agricultural policy debates in Europe. There is a consensus that diversification of cropping would support sustainable development. However, a reduction in legume cultivation has been observed in the EU during the last decades. This decline has induced, in turn, a deficit of proteins and a reduction of ecosystem services provided by legumes. Therefore, we analysed the mechanisms that shape agricultural systems to identify leverage points for reviving European legume production. Specifically, we reviewed the factors that affect the market and non-market value of legumes and the relevant agricultural policies. We characterized the decline in legume cropping as an outcome of the dominance of economic forces that favour specialization of production systems over diversification. We found that the value of market outputs of legumes per unit area is relatively low and volatile, with a 25-78 % variation in pea gross margins, which reduces market competitiveness. We observed that the value of systeminternal outputs of legumes such as the nitrogen fixed, of 130 to 153 kg N ha; crop protection services that reduce agrochemical costs, by 20-25 % in cereals; and yield enhancements of subsequent crops, of 0.2 to 1.6 t ha −1 in cereals, are often underestimated. In addition, markets fail to translate external effects of legumes such as biodiversity enhancement, reduction in emissions, of up to 50 % in N 2 O, and soil improvements into economic benefits. Current policies support legumes through selected mechanisms such as ecological focus areas, agri-environmental programmes and sparse coupled support measures. Domestic cultivation of legumes could be supported through trade policies such as import restrictions on genetically modified soybean or new mechanisms to appreciate non-market outputs including payments for ecosystem services and carbon markets. In addition, development of new value chains, niche markets, scaling-up of plant breeding efforts and dissemination of information is required.

No abstract

Agri-environmental measures (AEM) are incentive-based instruments in the European Union (EU) that provide payments to farmers for voluntary environmental commitments related to preserving and enhancing the environment and maintaining the cultural landscape. We review the AEM literature and provide an overview of important research topics, major research results and future challenges as discussed in the available literature concerning these measures. This review contributes to the existing literature by attempting to equally consider ecological and economic perspectives. The reviewed articles are analyzed regarding their regional focus, topics and methods. The analytical section of the article seeks to discuss commonly asked questions about AEM on the basis of results from reviewed studies. The vast amount of available literature provides valuable insights into specific cases and reveals a complex picture with few general conclusions. The existing research is usually either biased toward ecological or economic perspectives and fails to provide a holistic picture of the problems and challenges within agri-environmental programming (e.g., multiple measures, multiple target areas, legal aspects, financial constraints, transaction costs). Most empirical studies provide detailed insights into selected individual measures but are incapable of providing results at a level relevant to decision-making, as they neglect the role of farmers and the available AEM budget. Predominantly economic approaches often only consider rough assumptions of ecological and economic processes and are also not suitable for decision-making. Decision-support tools that build on these disciplinary results and simultaneously consider scheme factors and environmental conditions at high spatial resolution for application by the responsible authorities are rare and require further research.

Policy reform of the CAP and society's expectations of agriculture have resulted in a growing need for improved information on the effectiveness of policy in achieving high-level objectives for more sustainable practice in agriculture. This is a high priority given its importance for consumers, public policy and private industry. Data collection programmes will need to adapt their scope if their information is to adequately address new information needs about high-level objectives. Assessment of sustainability at the farm level is hindered by the lack of data with which to derive appropriate, meaningful, and relevant indicators. This is particularly problematic for assessment of agricultural sustainability across the European Union (EU). Various databases exist at the EU scale regarding agricultural data sources and we identify one of these, the EU Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN), as having considerable potential to assess farm-level sustainability at EU level. We critique several examples of published work that has attempted to assess agricultural sustainability using: FADN data alone; FADN data in combination with data from supplementary surveys, and; FADN data in combination with data from other EU databases. We conclude that the FADN would need to broaden its scope of data collection if it is to address the new information needs of policy, and we discuss the challenges in expanding FADN with a view towards wider farm-level assessment of sustainability. These include careful selection of indicators based on various criteria, the representativeness of the FADN, and the need to include new themes to address environmental, social, and animal welfare effects of policy.

No abstract

The goal of China's sloping land conversion programme (SLCP) is to combat soil erosion and to reduce rural poverty. An ex‐ante assessment of possible SLCP impacts was conducted with a focus on rural sustainability, taking the drought‐prone region of Guyuan in Western China as an example. The Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment (FoPIA) was used to conduct two complementary impact assessments, one assessing SLCP impacts at regional level and a second one assessing alternative forest management options, to explore possible trade‐offs among the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability. Regional stakeholders assessed the SLCP to be capable of reducing soil erosion but felt it negatively affected rural employment, and a further continuation of the Programme was advocated. Assessment of three forest management scenarios by scientists showed that an orientation towards energy forests is potentially beneficial to all three sustainability dimensions. Ecological forests had disproportionate positive impacts on environmental functions and adverse impact on the other two sustainability dimensions. Economic forests were assessed to serve primarily the economic and social sustainability dimensions, while environmental impacts were still tolerable. The FoPIA results were evaluated against the available literature on the SLCP. Overall, the assessment results appeared to be reasonable, but the results of the regional stakeholders appeared to be too optimistic compared with the more critical assessment of the scientists. The SLCP seems to have the potential to tackle soil erosion but requires integrated forest management to minimize the risk of water stress while contributing to economic and social benefits in Guyuan. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

No abstract

This paper presents the results of a sustainability impact assessment (SIA) of policy induced land use changes in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The regional problems include rapid expansions of urban areas, due to high population pressure, and the conversion of paddy fields and forests into settlements. The objective of this study was to assess the impacts of two land use policies on social, economic, and environmental Land Use Functions (LUFs) in Yogyakarta. The following scenarios were developed for the SIA: a forest protection scenario (S1), a paddy field conservation scenario (S2), and a counterfactual (no policy) scenario of ‘Business As Usual’ (BAU). The Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment (FoPIA) was applied to conduct an expert-based impact assessment. For the specification of the regional sustainability context, a set of nine key LUFs and associated indicators were developed, including three social, three economic, and three environmental sustainability criteria. The resulting scenario impacts of the assessment differed considerably, with positive impacts of the S1 and S2 scenarios on seven of nine LUFs, and negative impacts of the BAU scenario on six LUFs. The perception of the FoPIA method by the regional stakeholders was positive. We conclude that this method contributes toward an enhanced regional understanding of policy effects and sustainability, particularly in data-poor environments