Whole system valuation of arable, agroforestry and tree-only systems at three case study sites in Europe

Giannitsopoulos, Michail; Graves, Anil; Burgess, Paul J.; Crous-Duran, Josep; Moreno, Gerardo; Herzog, Félix; Palma, J.H.N.; Kay, Sonja; Jalón, Silvestre García de

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122283

Cited by 18 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The policy scenario demonstrated that at the current payment level, regional biodiversity was considerably degraded as grassland and in particular, orchard meadows were often replaced by crop production. This implies that crop production in Switzerland is highly financially attractive if subsidies are considered (Giannitsopoulos et al, 2020). Farmers receive a guaranteed payment of 1,400 CHF/ha for crop production as well as 120 CHF/ha as price support for supplying cereals (Bundesrat, 2013), while a guaranteed premium for cultivating grassland is 1,000 CHF/ha in the hilly regions (Bundesrat, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, we did not consider their non-market benefits, i.e., externalities such as reduced soil erosion risk, carbon sequestration or regional identity in the calculation of the economic profit. Although capturing the real value of orchard meadows is a core challenge in the economic assessment (Schönhart, et al, 2011a), accounting for such non-market benefits of orchard meadows in the decision process will improve the validity of results and help to determine a more appropriate level of financial support (Bethwell et al, 2021;Giannitsopoulos et al, 2020).…”

Section: Methodological Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, the extra costs to qualify for QII can be assumed to be negligible. Therefore, given an assumed tree's life of 60 years (Giannitsopoulos et al, 2020), we averaged the payments over 60 years per year and calculated the annual payment. In this study, we selected two types of orchard meadows, as explained in the next section.…”

Section: Agricultural Policy Modulementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Stopping the decline of Swiss biodiverse fruit orchards by better targeting subsidies

Nishizawa

Kay

Schuler

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agri-environmental schemes (AES) aimed at promoting farmland biodiversity are a key agricultural policy instrument in Switzerland. While the share of farmland managed under AES has expanded, traditional orchard meadows, regarded as agrobiodiversity hotspots, are declining. It is not clear yet what role AES play in maintaining orchard meadows, considering the effects of different farm management. Thus, the objective of this study was to examine the effects of AES on farmers’ decision-making regarding orchard meadows across a range of farm types. We developed an ecological-economic assessment model by integrating the results of the expert system SALCA-BD (Swiss Agricultural Life Cycle Assessment—Biodiversity) into the optimization-based bio-economic farm model (BEFM). We applied the model to five typical farm types (small dairy, large dairy, suckler, orchard, and small farms) identified in a rural region of northern Switzerland. Modeling results show that the adoption of AES considerably varies among farm types according to the compliance cost of participating in AES. Also, the current AES do not provide farmers with sufficient payments to maintain any type of orchard meadows. Instead, converting orchard meadows into arable land would generate higher incomes for farmers. This study recommends farm type specific payments to different farm types and a regulatory framework that incentivizes farmers to preserve the existing area of orchard meadows.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodological Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Agricultural Policy Modulementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stopping the decline of Swiss biodiverse fruit orchards by better targeting subsidies

Nishizawa

Kay

Schuler

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this respect, a range of provisioning, regulating and cultural ecosystem services are provided by the environment, many of which are non-market benefits. Previous research has shown that tree-based systems can provide important benefits relative to arable systems, for example, in terms of regulating ecosystem services (e.g., soil erosion control, nutrient reduction in water, air quality improvement) [51,52] and cultural ecosystem services (e.g., recreation, aesthetics and sense of place) [53,54]. The value of these benefits for society needs to be incorporated in cost-benefit analysis studies to provide an improved basis for valuing land use systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Impact of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on Economic Profitability of Arable, Forestry, and Silvoarable Systems

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study assesses the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sequestration of a silvoarable system with poplar trees and a crop rotation of wheat, barley, and oilseed rape and compares this with a rotation of the same arable crops and a poplar plantation. The Farm-SAFE model, a financial model of arable, forestry, and silvoarable systems, was modified to account for life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from tree and crop management were determined from life-cycle inventories and carbon storage benefits from the Yield-SAFE model, which predicts crop and tree yields in arable, forestry, and silvoarable systems. An experimental site in Silsoe in southern England served as a case study. The results showed that the arable system was the most financially profitable system, followed by the silvoarable and then the forestry systems, with equivalent annual values of EUR 560, 450 and 140 ha−1, respectively. When the positive and negative externalities of GHG sequestration and emissions were converted into carbon equivalents and given an economic value, the profitability of the arable systems was altered relative to the forestry and silvoarable systems, although in the analysis, the exact impact depended on the value given to GHG emissions. Market values for carbon resulted in the arable system remaining the most profitable system, albeit at a reduced level. Time series values for carbon proposed by the UK government resulted in forestry being the most profitable system. Hence, the relative benefit of the three systems was highly sensitive to the value that carbon was given in the analysis. This in turn is dependent on the perspective that is given to the analysis.

show abstract

“…This limitation is especially apparent for temperate regions while more research has been conducted in the tropics. The number of experiments in temperate regions, however, is growing, with newly designed studies, but it will take several years to decades until the trees planted are mature enough to enable detailed investigations of the long-term system effects [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling Agroforestry’s Contributions to People—A Review of Available Models

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change, increasing environmental pollution, continuous loss of biodiversity, and a growing human population with increasing food demand, threaten the functioning of agro-ecosystems and their contribution to people and society. Agroforestry systems promise a number of benefits to enhance nature’s contributions to people. There are a wide range of agroforestry systems implemented representing different levels of establishment across the globe. This range and the long time periods for the establishment of these systems make empirical assessments of impacts on ecosystem functions difficult. In this study we investigate how simulation models can help to assess and predict the role of agroforestry in nature’s contributions. The review of existing models to simulate agroforestry systems reveals that most models predict mainly biomass production and yield. Regulating ecosystem services are mostly considered as a means for the assessment of yield only. Generic agroecosystem models with agroforestry extensions provide a broader scope, but the interaction between trees and crops is often addressed in a simplistic way. The application of existing models for agroforestry systems is particularly hindered by issues related to code structure, licences or availability. Therefore, we call for a community effort to connect existing agroforestry models with ecosystem effect models towards an open-source, multi-effect agroforestry modelling framework.

show abstract

Whole system valuation of arable, agroforestry and tree-only systems at three case study sites in Europe

Cited by 18 publications

References 62 publications

Stopping the decline of Swiss biodiverse fruit orchards by better targeting subsidies

Stopping the decline of Swiss biodiverse fruit orchards by better targeting subsidies

Assessing the Impact of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on Economic Profitability of Arable, Forestry, and Silvoarable Systems

Modelling Agroforestry’s Contributions to People—A Review of Available Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About