Mixed systems of agriculture incorporating combinations of trees and crops have formed key elements of the landscape of Europe throughout historical times, and many such systems continue to function in the present day. In many cases they represent formerly widespread traditional systems in decline and a number have already become extinct or exist only in a threatened state. The causes are both practical and economic. The agricultural subsidy regime within the European Union is presently unfavourable towards silvoarable practices, which has been a major factor in their recent decline. The silvoarable systems of Europe can be split into two classes according to location -northern Europe and the Mediterranean. The latter contains not only a greater area of silvoarable cultivation, but also a greater diversity of systems due to the broader range of commercial tree and crop species grown. In general, the systems of northern Europe are limited by light, whilst those of the Mediterranean are limited by the availability of water. Mixed systems of agriculture present an opportunity for future European rural development and have the potential to contribute towards the increased sustainability of agriculture and enhancement of biodiversity, whilst preserving landscapes that are both culturally important and aesthetically pleasing. A better understanding of the legacy of traditional silvoarable systems, combined with the formulation of a consistent definition and specific European policy towards them will be invaluable in ensuring that the benefits of mixed agriculture are fully exploited in the future.

An accurate and objective estimate on the extent of agroforestry in Europe is critical for the development of supporting policies. For this reason, a more harmonized and uniform Pan-European estimate is needed. The aim of this study was to quantify and map the distribution of agroforestry in the European Union. We classified agroforestry into three main types of agroforestry systems: arable agroforestry, livestock agroforestry and high value tree agroforestry. These three classes are partly overlapping as high value tree agroforestry can be part of either arable or livestock agroforestry. Agroforestry areas were mapped using LUCAS Land Use and Land Cover data . By identifying certain combinations of primary and secondary land cover and/or land management it was possible to identify agroforestry points and stratify them in the three different systems. According to our estimate using the LUCAS database the total area under agroforestry in the EU 27 is about 15.4 million ha which is equivalent to about 3.6% of the territorial area and 8.8% of the utilised agricultural area. Of our three studied systems, livestock agroforestry covers about 15.1 million ha which is by far the largest area. High value tree agroforestry and arable agroforestry cover 1.1 and 0.3 million ha respectively. Spain (5.6 million ha), France (1.6 million ha), Greece (1.6 million ha), Italy (1.4 million ha), Portugal (1.2 million ha), Romania (0.9 million ha) and Bulgaria (0.9 million ha) have the largest absolute area of agroforestry. However the extent of agroforestry, expressed as a proportion of the utilised agricultural area (UAA), is greatest in Please refer to any applicable publisher terms of use.countries like Cyprus (40% of UAA), Portugal (32% of UAA) and Greece (31% of UAA). A cluster analysis revealed that a high abundance of agroforestry areas can be found in the south-west quadrat of the Iberian Peninsula, the south of France, Sardinia, south and central Italy, central and north-east Greece, south and central Bulgaria, and central Romania. Since the data were collected and analysed in a uniform manner it is now possible to make comparisons between countries and identify regions in Europe where agroforestry is already widely practiced and areas where there are opportunities for practicing agroforestry on a larger area and introducing novel practices. In addition, with this method it is possible to make more precise estimates on the extent of agroforestry in Europe and changes over time. Because agroforestry covers a considerable part of the agricultural land in the EU, it is crucial that it gets a more prominent and clearer place in EU statistical reporting in order to provide decision makers with more reliable information on the extent and nature of agroforestry. Reliable information, in turn, should help to guide policy development and implementation, and the evaluation of the impact of agricultural and other policies on agroforestry.Keywords: land use, land cover, high natural and cultural value, high value trees, Land Use/Cover A...

Several management actions are applied to restore ecosystem services in degraded Mediterranean rangelands, which range from adjusting the grazing pressure to the removal of grazers and pine plantations. Four such actions were assessed in Quercus coccifera L. shrublands in northern Greece:(1) moderate grazing by goats and sheep, (2) no grazing, (3) no grazing plus pine (Pinus pinaster Aiton) plantation in forest gaps (gap reforestation), and (4) no grazing plus full reforestation of shrubland areas, also with P. pinaster. In addition, heavy grazing was also assessed to serve as a control action. We comparatively assessed the impact of these actions on key provisioning, regulating and supporting ecosystem services by using ground-based indicators. Depending on the ecosystem service considered, the management actions were ranked differently. However, the overall provision of services was particularly favored under moderate and no grazing management options, with moderate grazing outranking any other action in provisioning services, and the no grazing action presenting the most balanced provision of services. Pine reforestations largely contributed to water and soil conservation and C sequestration, but had a negative impact on plant diversity when implemented at the expense of removing natural vegetation in the area. Heavy grazing had the lowest provision of ecosystem services. It is concluded that degraded rangelands can be restored by moderating the grazing pressure rather than completely banning livestock grazing or converting them into pine plantations.

No abstract

No abstract