Integrated assessment of agricultural systems – A component-based framework for the European Union (SEAMLESS)

Ittersum, M.K. van; Ewert, Frank; Heckelei, Thomas; Wéry, Jacques; Olsson, Johanna Alkan; Andersen, Erling B.; Bezlepkina, I.; Brouwer, F.; Donatelli, Marcello; Flichman, Guillermo; Olsson, Lennart; Rizzoli, Andrea Emilio; Wal, T. van der; Wien, Jan Erik; Wolf, J.

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2007.07.009

Cited by 433 publications

(211 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

194

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are, however, communities of practice who apply narrower meanings. For example, the Society for Landscape Ecology has a strong focus on modeling the biophysical elements of landscapes (36), whereas, in much of Europe, landscape approaches are still largely synonymous with spatial planning (37). The de facto use of landscape approaches by most conservation organizations has evolved from the dominant paradigm of the late 20th century of integrated conservation and development projects (5,38).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses

Sayer

Sunderland

Ghazoul³

et al. 2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

1,016

1,035

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Landscape approaches" seek to provide tools and concepts for allocating and managing land to achieve social, economic, and environmental objectives in areas where agriculture, mining, and other productive land uses compete with environmental and biodiversity goals. Here we synthesize the current consensus on landscape approaches. This is based on published literature and a consensus-building process to define good practice and is validated by a survey of practitioners. We find the landscape approach has been refined in response to increasing societal concerns about environment and development tradeoffs. Notably, there has been a shift from conservation-orientated perspectives toward increasing integration of poverty alleviation goals. We provide 10 summary principles to support implementation of a landscape approach as it is currently interpreted. These principles emphasize adaptive management, stakeholder involvement, and multiple objectives. Various constraints are recognized, with institutional and governance concerns identified as the most severe obstacles to implementation. We discuss how these principles differ from more traditional sectoral and project-based approaches. Although no panacea, we see few alternatives that are likely to address landscape challenges more effectively than an approach circumscribed by the principles outlined here.food security | integrated development approaches | social ecological systems | agriculture environment trade offs | Convention on Biological Diversity

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses

Sayer

Sunderland

Ghazoul³

et al. 2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

1,016

1,035

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared to the more traditional pattern-mimicking models (Hilferink and Rietveld 1998;Verburg and Overmars 2009) and bio-economic optimization models (van Ittersum et al 2008), ABMs are better able to represent the diversity of decisionmaking strategies that underpin land-use change (Bousquet and Le Page 2004;Parker et al 2008;Polhill et al 2011). Some ABMs focus on interactions between agents, such as imitation and the spread of knowledge or information (Berger 2001;Macmillan and Huang 2008;Alexander et al 2013), whilst others focus on the diversity amongst agents in terms of alternative motives and strategies (Karali et al 2011;Kelley and Evans 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land-use change arising from rural land exchange: an agent-based simulation model

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Land exchange can be a major factor driving land-use change in regions with high pressure on land, but is generally not incorporated in land-use change models. Here we present an agent-based model to simulate land-use change arising from land exchange between multiple agent types representing farmers, nature organizations, and estate owners. Methods The RULEX model (Rural Land EXchange) was calibrated and applied to a 300 km 2 case study area in the east of the Netherlands. Decision rules about which actor will sell and buy land, as well as which specific land to buy or sell are based on historical observations, interviews, and choice experiments.Results A reconstruction of land-use change for the period 2001-2009 demonstrates that RULEX reproduces most observed land-use trends and patterns. Given that RULEX simulates only one mechanism of land-use change, i.e. land exchange, it is conservative in simulating change. Conclusions With this model, we demonstrate the potential of incorporating land market processes in an agent-based, land-use change model. This supports understanding of land-use change that is brought about by ownership change, which is an important process in areas where pressure on land is high. The soundness of the process representation was corroborated by stakeholders within the study area. Land exchange models can be used to assess the impact of changes in climate, markets, and policy on land use change, and help to increase effectiveness of alternative land purchasing strategies by stakeholders or spatial planning policy.

show abstract

“…However, in order to devise and assess these potential policy options the European Commission requires detailed information and scientific evidence that reflects the diversity of regional and local agriculture (European Commission, 2009a). Agricultural research that considers complex cross-cutting policy problems, such as climate change adaptation, has a history of employing computer modelling (van Ittersum et al, 2008). Such approaches are capable of not only working cross-scales by bridging the micro (farm or local regional) and macro (market or sector) levels but they also link different disciplinary perspectives so that social, environmental and economic impacts can be considered alongside each other (van Ittersum et al 2008).…”

Section: ) Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Agricultural research that considers complex cross-cutting policy problems, such as climate change adaptation, has a history of employing computer modelling (van Ittersum et al, 2008). Such approaches are capable of not only working cross-scales by bridging the micro (farm or local regional) and macro (market or sector) levels but they also link different disciplinary perspectives so that social, environmental and economic impacts can be considered alongside each other (van Ittersum et al 2008). The variety in computer-based models or tools generated to aid decision making in this and other policy fields, however, has led to complaints about their poor up take as well a lively debate about how to better design or develop these tools so that they are of greater use to policy makers (Nilsson et al 2008;Sterk et al 2009a).…”

Section: ) Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contexualising the tool development process through a knowledge brokering approach: The case of climate change adaptation and agriculture

Adelle

2015

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article applies a 'knowledge brokering' approach to contextualise the development of an integrated computer modelling tool into the real world policy context of adaptation of agriculture to climate change at the EU level. In particular, the article tests a number of knowledge brokering strategies described and theorized in the literature, but seldom empirically tested. The article finds that while the policy context can be used to identify a theoretically informed knowledge brokering strategy, in practice a strategy's 'success' is more informed by practical considerations, such as whether the tool development process is knowledge or demand driven. In addition, in practice the knowledge brokering process is found to be dynamic and messy, which is not always apparent in the literature. The article goes on to question the perception that there is always a need (or a desire) to bridge the gap between researchers and policy makers in the tool development process. Rather than a problem of design and communication, the science policy interface may be characterised more by a high level of competition between researchers and research organisations to have their tool legitimised by its use in the policy making process.

show abstract

Integrated assessment of agricultural systems – A component-based framework for the European Union (SEAMLESS)

Cited by 433 publications

References 32 publications

Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses

Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses

Land-use change arising from rural land exchange: an agent-based simulation model

Contexualising the tool development process through a knowledge brokering approach: The case of climate change adaptation and agriculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About