			Home About us Contact

Agri-environment Schemes (agri-environment + scheme)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Life Sciences	88%
Earth and Environmental Science	7%

Selected Abstracts

Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries

ECOLOGY LETTERS, Issue 3 2006
D. Kleijn
Abstract Agri-environment schemes are an increasingly important tool for the maintenance and restoration of farmland biodiversity in Europe but their ecological effects are poorly known. Scheme design is partly based on non-ecological considerations and poses important restrictions on evaluation studies. We describe a robust approach to evaluate agri-environment schemes and use it to evaluate the biodiversity effects of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. We compared species density of vascular plants, birds, bees, grasshoppers and crickets, and spiders on 202 paired fields, one with an agri-environment scheme, the other conventionally managed. In all countries, agri-environment schemes had marginal to moderately positive effects on biodiversity. However, uncommon species benefited in only two of five countries and species listed in Red Data Books rarely benefited from agri-environment schemes. Scheme objectives may need to differentiate between biodiversity of common species that can be enhanced with relatively simple modifications in farming practices and diversity or abundance of endangered species which require more elaborate conservation measures. [source]

Minimal effects of wind turbines on the distribution of wintering farmland birds

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, Issue 6 2008
Claire L. Devereux
Summary 1Energy production from wind power is increasing rapidly in Europe to help combat the threats from global warming. For example, the European Commission have set a target for 20% of EU energy to come from renewable sources by 2020. In recent decades, biodiversity on European farmland has fallen dramatically due to agricultural intensification. Agri-environment schemes (AES) have been implemented across the EU, in part at least, to combat these declines. Significant numbers of turbines are, and will be, built on farmland. There is, therefore, a potential conflict between wind turbines and AES on farmland. 2Various mechanisms potentially cause wind turbines to alter bird distribution including noise and physical structure. 3We show that turbine location (controlling for other effects such as boundary location and crop type) did not affect the distribution of four functional groups of wintering farmland birds (seed-eaters, corvids, gamebirds and Eurasian skylarks) at differing distances from wind turbines ranging from 0,150 m to 600,750 m. The only species for which distribution was related to the presence of wind turbines was the largest and least manoeuvrable (common pheasant Phasianus colchicus L.). 4In a further analysis of data collected at 0,75 m and 75,150 m from turbines, we found no evidence to suggest that farmland birds in our study avoided areas close to wind turbines. 5Synthesis and applications. This is the first evidence suggesting that the present and future location of large numbers of wind turbines on European farmland is unlikely to have detrimental effects on farmland birds (at least for those species included in our study). This should be welcome news for nature conservationists, wind energy companies and policy-makers. However, our work is only a first step, as there may be potential influences of wind turbines on bird distribution during the breeding season. [source]

Habitat connectivity and matrix restoration: the wider implications of agri-environment schemes

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, Issue 2 2006
PAUL F. DONALD
Summary 1The spread and intensification of agriculture are recognized as two of the most important global threats to wildlife. There are clear links between agricultural change and declines in biodiversity across a wide range of agricultural systems, and convincing evidence that reversing these changes leads to a recovery in wildlife populations. 2Nearly 4 billion euros are now paid annually through agri-environment schemes (AES) to farmers in Europe and North America to make environmental improvements to their land. Where appropriately designed and targeted, these schemes have proved successful in reversing declines in farmland wildlife populations. 3We argue that insights gained from island biogeography and metapopulation theory, and from theoretical and empirical assessments of landscape connectivity suggest that AES may carry substantial wider benefits, which so far have not been considered in the design and deployment of such schemes. ,Softening' agricultural land could offset some of the negative impacts on biodiversity of the loss and fragmentation of non-agricultural habitats; could allow species to adapt to climate change; could slow the spread of alien and invasive species; and could contribute positively to the coherence of key biodiversity and protected area networks. Indeed, AES might represent the only viable way to counter these threats. 4We outline a number of ways in which these wider benefits could be taken account of in the design of AES and suggest a number of characteristics of the species most likely to benefit from them. 5Synthesis and applications. Agri-environment schemes might bring significant environmental benefits to habitats other than farmland by restoring the agricultural matrix that separates them. Theoretical and empirical research suggests that matrix restoration improves a number of ecosystem functions. Where they are available, AES might therefore represent a viable mechanism for addressing a range of pandemic environmental problems such as global climate change. Little consideration has so far been given to these wider conservation applications in the design, deployment and monitoring of AES. [source]

The value of agri-environment schemes for macro-invertebrate feeders: hedgehogs on arable farms in Britain

ANIMAL CONSERVATION, Issue 5 2010
A. R. Hof
Abstract Agri-environment schemes have been introduced in countries throughout the world in an attempt to reverse the negative impacts of agricultural intensification on biodiversity and the environment. There have been some investigations into the effectiveness of such schemes, which show mixed outcomes but little is known with regard to mammals. The hedgehog is a generalist predator and preys on, among others, an array of macro-invertebrates, prey important for many other taxa. For a non-volant species, it is highly mobile in the environment and should thus be less susceptible to negative effects of habitat fragmentation caused by agricultural intensification. However, it has recently been included in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan, as a result of evidence of a significant decline. We studied the importance of agri-environment schemes for hedgehogs using radio-tracking on arable farms. Both agri-environment field margins and hedgerows appear to be very valuable for hedgehogs. Both habitat types were intensively utilized by hedgehogs; higher food availability/accessibility on agri-environment field margins and higher food or nest site availability along edges and/or lower predation risk by badgers in arable areas may explain these preferences. Badger predation of hedgehogs was high in the study site and the main cause of death. Our study emphasizes the importance of natural habitat in an agricultural landscape and shows that agri-environment schemes can be beneficial to this generalist macro-invertebrate feeder. The implementation of agri-environment schemes that include wide field margins and dense, well-established hedgerows on farmland could significantly contribute to the viability of hedgehog populations in intensive arable-farming landscapes, and by implication benefit other macro-invertebrate feeders. [source]

Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries

Alpha and beta diversity of arthropods and plants in organically and conventionally managed wheat fields

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, Issue 4 2007
YANN CLOUGH
Summary 1Most studies in applied ecology use measures of ,-diversity measures, i.e. the mean diversity on a site, to compare biodiversity effects of different management schemes. The total or ,-diversity within a region, however, need not be correlated with the mean ,-diversity within any site of the region. Thus, analyses of ,-diversity alone may misrepresent the contributions of other diversity components (,) to total diversity (,). 2We apply a biodiversity-partitioning approach to species richness from a comparison between paired organic and conventional wheat fields in 21 sites from three regions in Germany, where we recorded plants, bees, carabids, staphylinids and spiders in the centre and edge of the fields. 3Relative values of ,- and ,-diversity depended on taxon. Both between-site and between-region ,-diversity were very high (in total 60,85%). ,-Diversity and between-site ,-diversity was larger on the edge than in the centre of fields for all taxa. 4,-Diversity, between-site ,-diversity of plants and bees and between-region ,-diversity of bees were higher in organic than in conventional fields, providing local as well as larger-scale species richness benefits. ,-Diversity did not differ between management types for the epigaeic arthropods. Lower between-site ,-diversity was found for spiders in organic fields than in conventional fields, resulting in higher total species richness in conventionally managed wheat. 5Similarity in composition of landscapes surrounding the study fields was correlated with similarity in species composition for epigaeic arthropods in conventional fields. For this group of organisms the variability of landscapes in the sample contributed to increasing ,-diversity. 6Synthesis and applications.,-Diversity accounts for the major part of species richness in agro-ecosystems. Implementing an agri-environment scheme such as organic agriculture may result in either an additional increase of total diversity, as could be shown for plants and bees, or in a decrease in total diversity as was the case for the spiders. Therefore, ,-diversity needs to be included in the evaluation of different management schemes for conservation. For plant and bees it is recommended to implement agri-environment schemes in contrasting landscapes and in different regions to maximize total species richness benefits. [source]

Dynamics of species-rich upland hay meadows over 15 years and their relation with agricultural management practices

APPLIED VEGETATION SCIENCE, Issue 3 2007
C.N.R. Critchley
Stace (1997) Abstract Questions: Has the species-rich vegetation of upland hay meadows been maintained under low intensity management imposed by an agri-environment scheme? Is the target plant community re-establishing where it has been modified previously by intensive agricultural practices? What combinations of management practices and soil properties are associated with changes towards or away from the target community? Location: The Pennines, northern England, UK. Methods: A survey of 116 hay meadows in 1987 was repeated in 2002 by recording plant species in permanent quadrats. Changes in community variables (species richness, Ellenberg values, upland hay meadow community coefficients) were analysed in species-rich, modified species-rich and degraded grassland types. Redundancy Analysis and Generalised Linear Models were used to show the relationship between management practices and soil properties and change in species composition and community variables. Results: Few sites contained the species-rich grassland type, and here forb richness declined. In the modified species-rich type, total and grass species richness increased but Ellenberg N-values also increased. Total and grass species richness increased in the degraded type and the community coefficient increased. Management was weakly related to change in species composition but showed clear relationships with the community variables. Re-establishment of the target species-rich community was more likely with late cutting, in the absence of cattle or prolonged spring grazing, and at lower soil nutrient status. Conclusion: The species-rich community was not maintained but some reversion occurred in degraded grassland. Inorganic fertiliser application and intensive spring grazing should be avoided and cutting delayed until late July. [source]

Making agricultural landscapes more sustainable for freshwater biodiversity: a case study from southern England

AQUATIC CONSERVATION: MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS, Issue 4 2009
Bella Davies
Abstract 1.Agriculture is known to have a range of deleterious impacts on freshwater habitats and biota and many countries have introduced measures to attempt to mitigate these impacts through agri-environment initiatives. Despite the protection they provide, water bodies (any discrete body of surface fresh water) in farmland landscapes commonly remain impaired by agriculture. In some areas of the UK there have been calls to halt farming completely, indicating that the measures offered for the widespread protection of aquatic systems, particularly the use of buffer strips, may not be extensive enough to provide sufficient protection for freshwater biota. 2.This study investigated whether existing agri-environment measures for the widespread protection of aquatic habitats could be better deployed to provide a higher level of protection for the aquatic macrophytes and macroinvertebrates of a study area in southern England. 3.Reserve selection procedures were used to reallocate the area of land that could be remunerated under the Environmental Stewardship scheme as buffer strips bordering water bodies, so that a higher level of protection was provided for both the richness and rarity of aquatic species in the study area. 4.Almost 395 ha were available for reallocation in the reserve selection process, which was found to provide a satisfactory level of protection for up to 90% of the surveyed species. 5.The results showed that the agri-environment scheme in England has a great deal of potential to provide more effective protection for the aquatic biodiversity of agricultural landscapes if measures are targeted. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries

Effect of livestock breed and grazing intensity on grazing systems: 5.

GRASS & FORAGE SCIENCE, Issue 4 2007
Management, policy implications
Summary This paper explores the management and policy implications of research findings investigating the use of grazing intensity and traditional breeds to achieve biodiversity outcomes on grasslands in four countries of Europe. An economic analysis, based on these research findings, indicated that financial assistance and/or premium prices are required to achieve sustainable grazing systems with a high biodiversity. The research findings suggested that existing agri-environment scheme prescriptions based only on blanket stocking rates are too crude to increase plant diversity, lacking consideration of initial site conditions. Conversely, some invertebrates seem to rapidly benefit from lenient stocking, highlighting the importance of clear goals for agri-environment schemes. Recommendations for an appropriate support package to deliver grazing systems with high biodiversity are presented. [source]

The recent declines of farmland bird populations in Britain: an appraisal of causal factors and conservation actions

IBIS, Issue 4 2004
Ian Newton
In this paper, the main aspects of agricultural intensification that have led to population declines in farmland birds over the past 50 years are reviewed, together with the current state of knowledge, and the effects of recent conservation actions. For each of 30 declining species, attention is focused on: (1) the external causes of population declines, (2) the demographic mechanisms and (3) experimental tests of proposed external causal factors, together with the outcome of (4) specific conservation measures and (5) agri-environment schemes. Although each species has responded individually to particular aspects of agricultural change, certain groups of species share common causal factors. For example, declines in the population levels of seed-eating birds have been driven primarily by herbicide use and the switch from spring-sown to autumn-sown cereals, both of which have massively reduced the food supplies of these birds. Their population declines have been associated with reduced survival rates and, in some species, also with reduced reproductive rates. In waders of damp grassland, population declines have been driven mainly by land drainage and the associated intensification of grassland management. This has led to reduced reproductive success, as a result of lowered food availability, together with increased disturbance and trampling by farm stock, and in some localities increased nest predation. The external causal factors of population decline are known (with varying degrees of certainty) for all 30 species considered, and the demographic causal factors are known (again with varying degrees of certainty) for 24 such species. In at least 19 species, proposed causal factors have been tested and confirmed by experiment or by local conservation action, and 12 species have been shown to benefit (in terms of locally increased breeding density) from options available in one or more agri-environment schemes. Four aspects of agricultural change have been the main drivers of bird population declines, each affecting a wide range of species, namely: (1) weed-control, mainly through herbicide use; (2) the change from spring-sown to autumn-sown cereal varieties, and the associated earlier ploughing of stubbles and earlier crop growth; (3) land drainage and associated intensification of grassland management; and (4) increased stocking densities, mainly of cattle in the lowlands and sheep in the uplands. These changes have reduced the amounts of habitat and/or food available to many species. Other changes, such as the removal of hedgerows and ,rough patches', have affected smaller numbers of species, as have changes in the timings of cultivations and harvests. Although at least eight species have shown recent increases in their national population levels, many others seem set to continue declining, or to remain at a much reduced level, unless some relevant aspect of agricultural practice is changed. [source]

The Governance of Rural Land in a Liberalised World

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 3 2007
Ian Hodge
Abstract Liberalisation of agricultural policies reduces the influence of policy on land-use decisions, but environmental policy objectives remain. Governance provides an approach that recognises the role of institutions and collective action. The formulation of environmental policy objectives in terms of the provision of public goods raises questions as to the role of economic valuation and as to whether the definition of ,goods' may misdirect policy attention. An alternative approach relates to ecosystem services and sees management issues in terms of ecosystem resilience and the adaptive governance of socio-ecological systems. Governance involves a mix of regulation, markets, government incentives and collective action. Regulation sets the domain within which markets operate and social judgements as to property rights are required as a basis for exchanges. Depending on commodity prices, agri-environment schemes may be required either to reduce agricultural production intensity or to keep land under production. The diffuse nature of the environmental benefits and costs of land uses, the complexity of ecosystems and the need to co-ordinate land management decisions indicate a role for local adaptive co-management of land resources. Governments play a major role in supporting the institutional framework within which this can take place. [source]

Alpha and beta diversity of arthropods and plants in organically and conventionally managed wheat fields

Will agri-environment schemes deliver substantial biodiversity gain, and if not why not?

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, Issue 1 2007
MARK J. WHITTINGHAM
Summary 1One of the main aims of agri-environment schemes (AES) is to increase biodiversity on farmland. Common conservation practice is to identify areas containing valuable resources (e.g. habitats, ecosystems and species) and then to protect them: ,protected area' schemes. AES differ from typical protected area schemes because they are often applied to small patches of land, such as field boundaries, and are sometimes located in areas where the target species does not occur. 2AES require an enormous amount of funding and they have been applied across a large geographical area, i.e. the European Union. However, recent evidence suggests mixed results regarding the effects of AES on biodiversity. 3It is hard to predict the consequences of AES on biodiversity because a number of factors are seldom accounted for explicitly. For example: (i) the occurrence of target species will vary between patches; (ii) there will be variation in habitat preference by species in different geographical areas; (iii) both optimal foraging theory and metapopulation theory predict that the distance from breeding individuals is likely to determine patch use; (iv) if resources are widely spread then the home ranges of some species may need to increase to encompass the multiple resources needed for breeding. The potential for these factors to affect the outcome of AES on biodiversity is discussed. 4Synthesis and applications. AES are likely to increase biodiversity if a lower number of larger resource patches are provided, in contrast to current practice that promotes many small fragmented areas of environmental resource. One way of achieving this may be to run these schemes more like traditional protected area schemes, with farms or groups of farms managed using extensive farming methods. Such an approach negates some of the problems of current AES and may help to address a wider range of concerns held by different countryside stakeholders. [source]

Long-term enhancement of agricultural production by restoration of biodiversity

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, Issue 1 2007
JAMES M. BULLOCK
Summary 1Experimental manipulations have shown positive impacts of increased species richness on ecosystem productivity, but there remain some questions about this relationship. First, most studies last < 4 years, which raises issues about whether diversity,productivity relationships are maintained in mature communities. Secondly, the conservation relevance of many studies is debatable. We addressed both issues using long-term experimental studies of the agriculturally relevant hay yield of recreated species-rich grasslands. 2Grasslands were recreated within replicated experiments in ex-arable fields at two sites in southern England by using either species-poor or species-rich seed mixtures. The species-poor mixture comprised seven grasses as recommended for grassland creation in English agri-environment schemes. The species-rich mixture comprised 11 grasses and 28 forbs and was designed to recreate a typical southern English hay meadow. 3After 8 years the plots sown with species-rich mixtures resembled target diverse community types. The plots sown with species-poor mixtures had been colonized by a number of forbs but had lower numbers of grasses, legumes and other forbs than the species-rich plots. Increased hay yield of the species-rich plots in the first years of the experiments have been described in an earlier paper, and these differences were maintained after 8 years. 4In the eighth year the species-rich plots had an average 43% higher hay yield than the species-poor plots. Regression analysis showed that the variation in hay yield was related to differences in the number of non-leguminous forbs and showed no relation to grass or legume numbers. This suggests increased hay yield is an effect of the greater range of life forms exhibited by forbs rather than a simple fertilizing effect of legumes. 5The nitrogen content and phosphorus content of the hay showed complex treatment effects over time. However, the nutritional value of the hay was above the minimum requirements for livestock. 6Synthesis and applications. The aims of conservationists and farmers can often be in conflict. This study has shown that the recreation of diverse grasslands of conservation value can have a positive impact on hay yield, which benefits the farm business, and this is repeated across differing sites. Because the effect is maintained over time, farm income will be increased in the long term. [source]

Enhancing diversity of species-poor grasslands: an experimental assessment of multiple constraints

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, Issue 1 2007
RICHARD F. PYWELL
Summary 1Many grasslands in north-west Europe are productive but species-poor communities resulting from intensive agriculture. Reducing the intensity of management under agri-environment schemes has often failed to increase botanical diversity. We investigated biotic and abiotic constraints on diversification by manipulating seed and microsite availability, soil fertility, resource competition, herbivory and deficiencies in the soil microbial community. 2The effectiveness of 13 restoration treatments was investigated over 4 years in a randomized block experiment established in two productive grasslands in central-east and south-west England. 3Severe disturbance involving turf removal followed by seed addition was the most effective and reliable means of increasing grassland diversity. Disturbance by multiple harrowing was moderately effective but was enhanced by molluscicide application to reduce seedling herbivory and by sowing the hemiparasite Rhinanthus to reduce competition from grasses. 4Low-level disturbance by grazing or slot-seeding was ineffective in increasing diversity. Inoculation with soil microbial communities from species-rich grasslands had no effect on botanical diversity. Nitrogen and potassium fertilizer addition accelerated off-take of phosphorus in cut herbage but did not cause a reduction in soil phosphorus or increase botanical diversity. 5Different grazing management regimes had little impact on diversity. This may reflect the constraining effect of the July hay cut on species dispersal and colonization. 6Synthesis and applications. Three alternative approaches to grassland diversification, with different outcomes, are recommended. (i) High intervention deturfing, which would create patches with low competitive conditions for rapid and reliable establishment of the target community. For reasons of cost and practicality this can only be done over small areas but will form source populations for subsequent spread. (ii) Moderate intervention (harrowing or slot-seeding) over large areas, which would establish a limited number of desirable, generalist species that perform well in restoration. This method is low cost and rapid but the increases in biodiversity are less predictable. (iii) Phased restoration, which would complement the above approaches. Productivity and competition are reduced over 3,5 years using Rhinanthus or fertilizers to accelerate phosphorus off-take. After this time harrowing and seeding should allow a wide range of more specialist species to establish. However, further research is required to determine the long-term effectiveness of these approaches. [source]

Habitat connectivity and matrix restoration: the wider implications of agri-environment schemes

Wild mammals and the human food chain

MAMMAL REVIEW, Issue 2-3 2008
PIRAN C. L. WHITE
ABSTRACT 1Wild mammals have a long history of association with the human food chain, with some being the source for domesticated animals and others being considered traditionally as game species. Wild mammals are of negligible importance in terms of overall energy flows in agricultural ecosystems in Britain, but some wild mammals can have detrimental effects on the human food chain through predation, competition and disease transmission. 2Understanding these ecological processes at the level of populations and individuals can assist with devising appropriate management strategies to reduce human,wildlife conflict over limited resources. There remains a dearth of reliable information on the economic impacts of wild mammals on human food production, although the available quantified evidence suggests that the impacts are generally minor and localized, and are far outweighed by the wider public benefits associated with wild mammals. 3Greater public awareness of environmental and animal welfare issues, together with changes to rural communities resulting from human population movements, are changing the social landscape of interactions between people and wild mammals in the British countryside, and leading to an increase in more ambivalent attitudes towards wild mammals than has typically been the case in the past. 4Reform of agricultural policy is placing greater emphasis on the management of the land for biodiversity and environmental protection. While the benefits deriving from many previous agri-environment schemes have been mixed, there is increasing evidence that an emphasis on targeted and coordinated management at the landscape scale can enhance success. This type of approach is essential if some of the major threats facing declining wild mammal populations, such as population fragmentation, are to be overcome. 5There is an increasing divergence between regulation of agricultural ecosystems for food production and disease minimization and regulation of the land for biodiversity production via agri-environment schemes. The resolution of these tensions at the policy level will have major implications for future interactions between wild mammals and the human food chain. [source]

Mammals, agri-environment schemes and set-aside , what are the putative benefits?

MAMMAL REVIEW, Issue 4 2007
D. W. MACDONALD
ABSTRACT 1The impacts of agricultural intensification on farmland wildlife have been the subject of increasing concern, particularly over the last two decades. Population declines have occurred for a number of mammalian species, sometimes drastically so, and changes in farming practice are believed to be significant contributory factors. 2The major policy instruments for delivering environmental benefits on farmland are agri-environment schemes. These encourage farmers to adopt more environmentally sensitive farming practices to promote farmland biodiversity. Additionally, compulsory set-aside, which reduces agricultural surplus, could also have positive impacts on wildlife. In this paper we consider some of the putative benefits of agri-environment schemes and set-aside for mammals. 3We review how establishment and management options within agri-environment schemes and set-aside might affect habitat resources for mammals. For example, conservation headlands increase plant and invertebrate resources within the crop edge for mammals such as wood mice. Grassy field margins can support communities of smaller mammals, and hedgerows may act as important commuting and hunting routes. Their potential will depend on factors such as seed mixtures used, timing and severity of cutting, and length of time they have been in place. 4At a farm level, habitat heterogeneity may be increased through organic agriculture, which is supported by some agri-environment schemes. Studies suggest significant benefits to mammals, including wood mice and bats. However, it is increasingly recognized that effective conservation of farmland mammals must seek solutions at the landscape scale, addressing such issues as habitat connectivity between farms. One approach may be the better targeting of scheme agreements. 5We suggest that agri-environment schemes and set-aside can contribute to the conservation of mammals on farmland. Recent policy changes are likely to have further positive impacts on farmland wildlife but appropriate mammal monitoring programmes must be developed rigorously to assess their effects. [source]