Time will tell: resource continuity bolsters ecosystem services

Schellhorn, Nancy A.; Gagić, Vesna; Bommarco, Riccardo

doi:10.1016/j.tree.2015.06.007

Cited by 246 publications

(220 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

198

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several research strategies based on different (agro-)ecological approaches can provide such actionable knowledge, such as (i) functional ecology approaches (response-and-effect plant traits) to identify species/cultivar growth, either alone or in mixtures (Duru et al 2015a;Faucon et al 2017;Gaba et al 2014a); (ii) landscape ecology approaches, possibly combined with functional ecology (e.g. Fahrig et al 2011;Schellhorn et al 2015), to analyse and estimate relationships between landscape characteristics and ecological processes; (iii) network-based approaches to analyse and manage impacts of human activities on ecological networks (Bohan et al 2016;Hagen et al 2012) and (iv) environmental gradient approaches to analyse and estimate relationships between agricultural practices and species distribution (e.g. for weed management; Gaba et al 2014).…”

Section: Biological Input-based Farming Systems In Globalised Commodimentioning

confidence: 99%

A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review

Thérond

Duru

Roger-Estrade

et al. 2017

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

212

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In most current farming system classifications (e.g. "conventional" versus "organic"), each type of farming system encompasses a wide variety of farming practices and performances. Classifying farming systems using concepts such as "ecological", "sustainable intensification" or "agro-ecology" is not satisfactory because the concepts "overlap in…def-initions, principles and practices, thus creating…confusion in their meanings, interpretations and implications". Existing classifications most often focus either on biotechnical functioning or on socio-economic contexts of farming systems. We reviewed the literature to develop an original analytical framework of the diversity of farming systems and agriculture models that deal with these limits. To describe this framework, we first present the main differences between three biotechnical types of farming systems differing in the role of ecosystem services and external inputs: chemical input-, biological inputand biodiversity-based farming systems. Second, we describe four key socio-economic contexts which determine development and functioning of these farming systems: globalised commodity-based food systems, circular economies, alternative food systems and integrated landscape approaches. Third, we present our original analytical framework of agriculture models, defined as biotechnical types of farming systems associated with one or a combination of socio-economic contexts differing in the role of relationships based on global market prices and "territorial embeddedness". We demonstrate the potential of this framework by describing six key agriculture models and reviewing key scientific issues in agronomy associated with each one. We then analyse the added value of our analytical framework and its generic character. Lastly, we discuss transversal research issues of the agriculture models, concerning the technologies required, their function in the bioeconomy, their multi-criteria and multilevel assessments, their co-existence and the transitions between them.

show abstract

Section: Biological Input-based Farming Systems In Globalised Commodimentioning

confidence: 99%

A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review

Thérond

Duru

Roger-Estrade

et al. 2017

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

212

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the relationship between landscape structure, population dynamics, and ecosystem services varies temporally. Seasonal changes in habitats provide resources for arthropods in agricultural landscapes suggesting that both spatial and temporal heterogeneity of resources is important (Chaplin-Kramer et al 2013;Schellhorn et al 2015). A more thorough understanding of temporal and spatial variability in agricultural landscapes could be used to design agroecosystems with sustainable levels of ecosystem services (Tscharntke et al 2016;Landis 2017).…”

Section: Landscape-scale Impacts: Theory and Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of the agricultural transformation of the Canadian Prairies on grassland arthropods

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prairie grasslands have been transformed to become the primary source of agricultural production in Canada. Soon after its establishment, the Biological Survey of Canada recognised the urgent need to document the arthropods of the prairie grasslands, especially in the few pristine remnants. Although this initiative has yielded considerable progress in documenting the species present in the Prairies Ecozone, comprehensive ecological studies are sparse. Landscape effects on arthropods are well studied elsewhere, but no equivalent studies have been published for the Canadian Prairies. Crop rotation varies landscape composition annually, changes host plant resources in fields, and interacts with other agricultural inputs to disturb pest and beneficial arthropods. Despite only a handful of studies on grazing, there is an emerging pattern: moderate grazing increases arthropod diversity and benefits certain arthropod guilds. Abiotic inputs elicit variable responses from different arthropod taxa; Carabidae (Coleoptera) are best studied, with some information available for ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and aquatic arthropods. Biotic inputs include arthropods released for biocontrol of weed and insect pests; evidence indicates that biocontrol agents of insects have a greater potential for impact on native communities of arthropods. The studies reviewed here reveal important trends and research gaps to be addressed in the future.

show abstract

“…Although such findings open up new possibilities for pest control practices at the landscape level (Cong et al 2014), little is known about the concrete feasibility of such practices (Tscharntke et al 2005, Schellhorn et al 2015. Because agricultural landscapes are the outcome of many individuals' practices, a biological control strategy using complex landscape regulation might require coordination among these individuals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives

Salliou¹,

Barnaud²

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Pesticide reduction is a key current challenge. Scientific findings in landscape ecology suggest that complex landscapes favor insect pest biological control by conservation of natural enemy habitats. A potential agro-ecological innovation is to conserve or engineer such complex landscapes to reduce pesticide use. However, whereas the relevant resources are often well known in most natural resource management situations, potential resources involved in this innovation (natural enemies and the landscape) are not necessarily considered as resources in the eyes of their potential users. From the perspective that resources are socially constructed, our objective was to investigate whether and how these resources are considered by their potential users. To do so, we conducted research in an area specializing in tree-fruit (apple) production in southwestern France. This site was selected for its high pest incidence and high use of insecticides on orchards and, consequently, high stakes involved for any alternative. We conducted 30 comprehensive interviews with stakeholders (farmers and crop advisors) about their pest control strategies to explore their representation of their landscape and natural enemies. Our results show that natural enemies are considered by local stakeholders as public good resources, especially in the context of interventions by public institutions for their conservation, acclimation, and management. Farmers sometimes consider natural enemies as private goods when they can isolate the crop, enclosing it with nets or some other type of boundary. We also show that the landscape was not considered as a resource for biological pest control by conservation, but rather as a source of pests. We advocate for more research on the effects of landscapes on natural enemies, including participatory research based on dialogue among farmers, crop advisors, and scientists.

show abstract

Time will tell: resource continuity bolsters ecosystem services

Cited by 246 publications

References 58 publications

A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review

A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review

Impacts of the agricultural transformation of the Canadian Prairies on grassland arthropods

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Time will tell: resource continuity bolsters ecosystem services

Cited by 246 publications

References 58 publications

A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review

A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review

Impacts of the agricultural transformation of the Canadian Prairies on grassland arthropods

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers&#8217; perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives