Will farmers work together for conservation? The potential limits of farmers’ cooperation in agri-environment measures

Riley, Mark; Sangster, Heather; Smith, Hugh G.; Chiverrell, Richard; Boyle, John

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.049

Cited by 75 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, results may be highly dependent on the specific environmental conditions that prevail during these short measurement periods (Burt, ; Wilby et al ., ). Establishing longer‐term paired catchment experiments in agricultural landscapes presents a significant challenge for the implementation of treatments and for maintaining a control, given individual variations in farm‐level agricultural practices and decision‐making (Riley et al ., ). This can hinder investigation of management initiatives designed to reduce soil erosion because of difficulties in evaluating the effectiveness of such changes at the catchment‐scale across multiple farms and for a range of hydro‐climatic conditions.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Simulating a century of soil erosion for agricultural catchment management

Smith

Peñuela

Sangster

et al. 2018

Earth Surf Processes Landf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural land management requires strategies to reduce impacts on soil and water resources while maintaining food production. Models that capture the effects of agricultural and conservation practices on soil erosion and sediment delivery can help to address this challenge. Historic records of climatic variability and agricultural change over the last century also offer valuable information for establishing extended baselines against which to evaluate management scenarios. Here, we present an approach that combines centennial-scale reconstructions of climate and agricultural land cover with modelling across four lake catchments in the UK where radiometric dating provides a record of lake sedimentation. We compare simulations using MMF-TWI, a catchment-scale model developed for humid agricultural landscapes that incorporates representation of seasonal variability in vegetation cover, soil water balance, runoff and sediment contributing areas. MMF-TWI produced mean annual sediment exports within 9-20% of sediment core-based records without calibration and using guide parameter values to represent vegetation cover. Simulations of land management scenarios compare upland afforestation and lowland field-scale conservation measures to reconstructed historic baselines. Oak woodland versus conifer afforestation showed similar reductions in mean annual surface runoff (8-16%) compared to current moorland vegetation but a larger reduction in sediment exports (26-46 versus 4-30%). Riparian woodland buffers reduced upland sediment yields by 15-41%, depending on understorey cover levels, but had only minor effect on surface runoff. Planting of winter cover crops in the lowland arable catchment halved historic sediment exports. Permanent grass margins applied to sets of arable fields across 15% or more of the catchment led to further significant reduction in exports. Our findings show the potential for reducing sediment delivery at the catchment scale with land management interventions. We also demonstrate how MMF-TWI can support hydrologically-informed decision making to better target conservation measures in humid agricultural environments.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Simulating a century of soil erosion for agricultural catchment management

Smith

Peñuela

Sangster

et al. 2018

Earth Surf Processes Landf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, norms and values, referring to the dominant views of what makes a 'good farmer' (cf. Riley, Sangster, Smith, Chiverrell, & Boyle, 2018) directly influence some farmers' motivation to engage in agro-ecological farming and indirectly influence other farmers through a lack of community support and trust and even peer pressure (to not adopt agro-ecological farming, because it is considered as inferior).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditions for the adoption of agro-ecological farming practices: a holistic framework illustrated with the case of almond farming in Andalusia

Schoonhoven

Runhaar

2018

International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural landscapes offer unique habitats for many species. Because agriculture is a major land use worldwide, changes in farming practices can have major repercussions for biodiversity. Particularly in Western Europe, ongoing intensification and scale enlargement but also land abandonment and poor agricultural practices leading to land degradation form a major threat to agrobiodiversity. Agro-ecological farming practices are suggested as an alternative way of farming in order to conserve and enhance biodiversity. Yet knowledge about what factors explain farmers' adoption of agro-ecological farming practices is fragmented and incomplete. In this paper, we offer a holistic framework that specifies these factors and how they are interconnected. The framework is illustrated and refined by means of a case study analysis of almond farming in Andalusia. The chosen case represents a specific localized farming practice that currently negatively impacts biodiversity but for which agro-ecology forms an attractive alternative regarding biodiversity. The case study demonstrates that our framework offers a useful tool to systematically identify the different factors that affect agro-ecological farming adoption, interlinkages between factors and particularly the more structural barriers to agroecology.

show abstract

“…Significant improvement in the delivery of "Public Goods" requires spatial coordination of environmental management across multiple farm holdings and collaboration among governmental and other actors, including, possibly, groups of farmers (Westerink et al, 2017), clear objectives for each habitat type and impact assessments which identify the full impact of management options. Policy-makers must think beyond the economic aspects of AES participation (Riley et al, 2018) and invest in structures which embrace the importance of social and cultural capital, promoting peer to peer exchanges and social learning which in turn will raise the professionalism of farmer groups (Westerink et al, 2017). GC is an example of targeted scheme management requiring the formation of collaborative grazing associations to manage common land (Reed et al, 2014).…”

Section: Conclusion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What can management option uptake tell us about ecosystem services delivery through agri-environment schemes?

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agri-environment schemes (AES), currently embedded in EU and UK policies, actively promote 'greening', 'sustainability' and 'ecosystem services' approaches to land management. The funding structures of these policies, however, run counter to this sustainable approach, and create barriers to AES success, primarily through a continued focus on productivity support. In this study, we aim to determine the effectiveness of action-based AES, as a delivery mechanism for ecosystem services, using secondary data analysis techniques to unravel the complexities of AES funding distribution and scheme structure and geographic information systems (GIS) to explore the spatial extent and uptake of AES management options, using Wales, UK as a study area. Our results show 84% of recipients of AES payments receiving <£10k annually, comprising only 35% of the total available funding. 15, out of a total of ~165, management options, accounted for >75% of all advanced level management contracts awarded in both 2015 and 2017. This bias in option uptake, in many cases, positively prevents further deterioration of existing habitat condition through a 'business as usual' approach. However, we argue that the voluntary, over prescriptive nature of the schemes limits management option uptake, negatively impacts on the schemes ability to deliver ecosystem services, and lessens the government's ability to promote long-term behavioural change. If AES are to deliver the '"Public Goods"' that future policy demands, then targeted and adequate levels of funding and a willingness to participate must be combined with greater farmer autonomy and clear outcomes to deliver management options at a landscape scale.

show abstract

Will farmers work together for conservation? The potential limits of farmers’ cooperation in agri-environment measures

Cited by 75 publications

References 51 publications

Simulating a century of soil erosion for agricultural catchment management

Simulating a century of soil erosion for agricultural catchment management

Conditions for the adoption of agro-ecological farming practices: a holistic framework illustrated with the case of almond farming in Andalusia

What can management option uptake tell us about ecosystem services delivery through agri-environment schemes?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About