World Bank Working Papers are published to communicate the results of the Bank's work to the development community with the least possible delay. The manuscript of this paper therefore has not been prepared in accordance with the procedures appropriate to formally-edited texts. Some sources cited in this paper may be informal documents that are not readily available. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank of the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work

No abstract

World Bank Working Papers are published to communicate the results of the Bank's work to the development community with the least possible delay. The manuscript of this paper therefore has not been prepared in accordance with the procedures appropriate to formally-edited texts. Some sources cited in this paper may be informal documents that are not readily available. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank of the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work

Agricultural management has a great influence on biodiversity and its services in agroecosystems. In Europe, a relevant proportion of biodiversity is dependent on low-input agriculture. To assess the effects of agricultural management on biodiversity, in this study we surveyed the communities of arable plants, diurnal flying insects, and pollinators in three conventional and in two organic fields of a traditional Elephant garlic (Allium ampeloprasum L.) crop of the Valdichiana area, in Tuscany (central Italy). The sampling was carried out twice during the season: in spring, during crop growing, and in summer, after crop harvesting. We assessed the effects of the different agricultural management on the richness and composition (species occurrence and abundance) of the three communities using univariate and multivariate analyses. Concerning our specific case study, only plant species richness was significantly higher in organic fields (15.7 ± 2.7 species per plot), compared to conventional ones (5.4 ± 2.3 species per plot). Regarding community composition, only pollinators showed a marginally significant difference between conventional and organic fields. Conversely, the effect of specific fields significantly explained differences in composition of all the investigated groups (plants, total insects, and pollinators). The results suggest that, in our case study, the emerged differences in diversity of the investigated communities were mainly attributable to environmental and management factors related to single fields, more than to organic or conventional farming. Such evidence could be partly due to the very local scale of the study, to the heterogeneity of the surveyed fields, and to the reduced number of surveyed fields. Further investigation is therefore needed.