Governance of Ecosystem Services in Agroecology: When Coordination is Needed but Difficult to Achieve

Salliou, Nicolas; Muradian, Roldán; Barnaud, Cécile

doi:10.3390/su11041158

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study of pest control should benefit enormously from multi-disciplinary teams taking advantage of such opportunities. When ecological information is wellintegrated with social and behavioral understanding, obstacles to incorporating conservation biocontrol approaches can be overcome (Salliou et al, 2019). However, scientists also need to step out of the academy altogether to engage deeply with the end users experiencing the problem and with whom we ultimately want to craft an ecological solution.…”

Section: Operationalization Challenges and A Path Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring What Matters: Actionable Information for Conservation Biocontrol in Multifunctional Landscapes

Chaplin‐Kramer

O’Rourke

Schellhorn

et al. 2019

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite decades of study, conservation biocontrol via manipulation of landscape elements has not become a mainstream strategy for pest control. Meanwhile, conservation groups and governments rarely consider the impacts of land management on pest control, and growers can even fear that conservation biocontrol strategies may exacerbate pest problems. By finding leverage points among these actors, there may be opportunities to align them to promote more widespread adoption of conservation biological control at the landscape-scale. But are ecologists measuring the right things and presenting the right evidence to enable such alignment? We articulate key concerns of growers, conservation groups, and governments with regards to implementing conservation biological control at the landscape scale and argue that if ecologists want to gain more traction, we need to reconsider what we measure, for what goals, and for which audiences. A wider set of landscape objectives that ecologists should consider in our measurements include risk management for growers and co-benefits of multifunctional landscapes for public actors. Ecologists need to shift our paradigm toward longer-term, dynamic measurements, and build cross-disciplinary understanding with socioeconomic and behavioral sciences, to enable better integration of the objectives of these diverse actors that will be necessary for landscape management for conservation biocontrol to achieve its full potential.

show abstract

Section: Operationalization Challenges and A Path Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring What Matters: Actionable Information for Conservation Biocontrol in Multifunctional Landscapes

Chaplin‐Kramer

O’Rourke

Schellhorn

et al. 2019

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…synthetic pesticides, usually with expected lower yields or profits [18], that is, a specific farm level application of agroecological principles and ecological intensification. Critiques: (i) there is no explicit use of biodiversity, which would require landscape-scale management beyond farm level [23] and (ii) certification schemes vary across regions and countries. Sustainable intensification (SI): is closely related to agroecological principles but suggests a multifaceted approach and oversees the entire food system by considering nutrition, food sovereignty, and adaptation to localities defined by socioeconomic as well as environmental conditions.…”

Section: Rethinking the Bpm In Agroeconomic Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This interdependence of biodiversity and agricultural production has led to a variety of concepts that aim to optimize the management of agricultural landscapes, balancing yields, biodiversity, and sustainability [16]. These concepts make use of agroecological principles [17], promote organic farming [18] suggest ecological intensification [19], or sustainable intensification (SI) [20], compare land sharing and land sparing concepts [21][22][23] and take the perspective of managing a coupled socioecological system (SES). While there is much published research on the SES concept, quantitative, empirically-based, and model-based implementations are largely lacking or their improvement through process-based validation is pending [24].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Deciphering the Biodiversity–Production Mutualism in the Global Food Security Debate

Seppelt

Arndt

Beckmann

et al. 2020

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Without changes in consumption, along with sharp reductions in food waste and postharvest losses, agricultural production must grow to meet future food demands. The variety of concepts and policies relating to yield increases fail to integrate an important constituent of production and human nutritionbiodiversity. We develop an analytical framework to unpack this biodiversity-production mutualism (BPM), which bridges the research fields of ecology and agroeconomics and makes the trade-off between food security and protection of biodiversity explicit. By applying the framework, the incorporation of agroecological principles in global food systems are quantifiable, informed assessments of green total factor productivity (TFP) are supported, and possible lock-ins of the global food system through overintensification and associated biodiversity loss can be avoided. Consequences of Increasing Food ProductionThe quest for greater crop output for food and non-food products [1-3] leads to both an increase in agricultural land use and an increase in yields, typically achieved through an intensification of cultivation methods that help to close yield gaps (see Glossary) [4,5,62]. This, in turn, leads to a loss of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes [7] and increases pressure on natural diversity [8], which continues declining despite ongoing efforts for protection [9]. The avoidance of food waste and dietary changes offer two demand-side options to reduce pressure on food production [10], but these have thus far not been achieved at the macro level [11].Biodiversity is a crucial component of ecosystem functions that are essential for agricultural production, such as soil fertility, pollination, and biocontrol (i.e., the control of plant pests by their natural enemies) [12][13][14][15]. This interdependence of biodiversity and agricultural production has led to a variety of concepts that aim to optimize the management of agricultural landscapes, balancing yields, biodiversity, and sustainability [16]. These concepts make use of agroecological principles [17], promote organic farming [18] suggest ecological intensification [19], or sustainable intensification (SI) [20], compare land sharing and land sparing concepts [21][22][23] and take the perspective of managing a coupled socioecological system (SES). While there is much published research on the SES concept, quantitative, empirically-based, and model-based implementations are largely lacking or their improvement through process-based validation is pending [24]. As a result, it is currently not possible to capture and quantify the biodiversity-production mutualism (BPM) in its entirety. However, recent research provides the necessary basis for such a comprehensive, quantitative, process-based understanding of the BPM concept [15,24,25]. A Multidisciplinary Perspective on the Relationship between Agriculture and BiodiversityHow is Biodiversity Affected by Cropland Management? Management of agricultural landscapes serves the provisioning of agricultural goods and has ha...

show abstract

“…In that vein, a major potential mechanism for overcoming diversification barriers that we have not touched upon is the power of consumers to directly influence how crops are grown. There are a range of potential actions within this realm, from certification of biodiversity-friendly agriculture to radical reorganization of supply chains, highlighting the need for greater collaboration between the natural and social sciences (e.g., Robertson and Swinton, 2005;Salliou et al, 2019;Valencia et al, 2019). Lastly, federal policy and research funding should be redirected toward incentivizing cropping system diversification and away from initiatives that support unsustainable cropping systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Confronting Barriers to Cropping System Diversification

Mortensen

Smith

2020

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governance of Ecosystem Services in Agroecology: When Coordination is Needed but Difficult to Achieve

Cited by 16 publications

References 62 publications

Measuring What Matters: Actionable Information for Conservation Biocontrol in Multifunctional Landscapes

Measuring What Matters: Actionable Information for Conservation Biocontrol in Multifunctional Landscapes

Deciphering the Biodiversity–Production Mutualism in the Global Food Security Debate

Confronting Barriers to Cropping System Diversification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About