Buffer Strips on the Low‐Lying Plain of Veneto Region (Italy): Environmental Benefits and Efficient Use of Wood as an Energy Resource

Abstract

Vegetated buffer strips (VBS) are recognized as a cost-effective way to reduce agricultural nonpoint-source pollution. In agroecosystems with high field fragmentation, only narrow VBS that partially compromise farmers' revenue are accepted. This study aimed to identify some ecosystem services as provided by VBS in terms of soil and water quality, and VBS performance in terms of wood for energy purposes. Buffer strip design (3 vs. 6 m wide) and composition were considered to define best practices for wood use at the farm level and for the local firewood market. Results showed that yearly wood pole production was 0.5 t 100 m −1 , on average, ranging between a minimum of 0.22 t 100 m −1 and a maximum of 0.72 t 100 m −1 per row. Wood production had negligible effects on farmers' revenue. By contrast, water quality was enhanced, especially with 6-m-wide VBS. Specific subsidies for the maintenance of VBS increased total income despite a reduction in crop production (−17.5% in 6-m VBS with two rows). Subsidies might be better quantified at a site-specific level by taking into account all ecosystem services that are provided by VBS. Promising solutions to increase farmers' income are related to the wood seasoning process for firewood production; reducing the moisture content to <25% before the start of the winter season increases its market value.Abbreviations: 3G, 3-m-wide buffer formed by grass only; 3G1R, 3-m-wide buffer with grass cover and a row of shrubs and trees; 6G1R, 6-m-wide buffer with grass and a row of shrubs and trees; 6G2R, 6-m-wide buffer with grass and two rows of shrubs and trees; RDP, Rural Development Programme; SOC, soil organic carbon; TSS, total suspended solids; VBS, vegetated buffer strip(s).

Current Insights into the Effectiveness of Riparian Management, Attainment of Multiple Benefits, and Potential Technical Enhancements

“…However, the meta‐analysis found that buffering effectiveness was reduced with buffer zone age and was unrelated to width. In contrast, other studies in the current compilation support NO 3 reduction effectiveness increasing with width (Dal Ferro et al, 2019; Jaynes and Isenhart, 2019). The latter studies examined narrower buffers and possibly identified minimum sizes (e.g., below ∼5 m where N interception became negligible compared with input loads).…”

“…Dal Ferro et al (2019) found that 6‐m buffer strips achieved reductions in total suspended solids (64%), total P (31%), and herbicides (45–98%), whereas 3‐m buffers were less effective and even enhanced some pollutant losses to watercourses relative to controls. Subsidies for these buffers were for management of buffers for trees.…”

“…There is an implicit assumption of the delivery of ecosystem services related to riparian buffer functions, but considerable uncertainty in evidence remains as to how to achieve and assess these (Stutter et al, 2012). Several papers in this collection show that appropriate management of riparian buffers can enhance the delivery of multiple ecosystem services (Brown et al, 2019; Dal Ferro et al, 2019; Hille et al, 2019; Singh et al, 2019; Zak et al, 2019), along with improving the ecological value of the riparian zones and the adjacent aquatic habitat. Zak et al (2019) showed that IBZ designs, encompassing tree and mini‐wetland areas in relatively narrow margins, can act as a habitat for a diverse range of species, including species of conservation concern.…”

“…However, the implications of this management prescription on biodiversity require further research. Harvesting management is also important where buffer zone vegetation comprises trees (Dal Ferro et al, 2019; Zak et al, 2019; Rhoades, 2019) or other biomass (Brown et al, 2019). These issues highlight the important role that clear, robust agricultural and environmental policy can play a part in influencing management and determining the effectiveness of riparian buffer zones.…”

“…Dal Ferro et al (2019) studied a system where trees were grown for firewood in 3‐ and 6‐m buffers adjacent to arable land in an area of traditional farming practice in Italy. There was a motivation to also achieve multiple benefits for wood fuel production, as well as reducing suspended sediment, nutrient runoff, and pesticide spray drift.…”