How green is greening? A fine-scale analysis of spatio-temporal dynamics in Germany

Lakes, Tobia; García-Marquez, Jaime; Müller, Daniel B.; Lakner, Sebastian; Pe’er, Guy

doi:10.18452/21031

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding goes beyond the scope of our investigation of policy effects on Swiss grasslands, but emerges as an important aspect in other countries as well (e.g. Daniel and Kilkenny 2009;Teillard et al 2012;Lakes et al 2020;Wolff et al 2021). Furthermore, we found significant and increasing spatial autocorrelation of ex-and intensification processes, expressed as global Moran's I.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Spatio-temporal dynamics of grassland use intensity in Switzerland

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land use intensity determines the provision of multiple important ecosystem services of agriculture. In Switzerland, agricultural policy developments have aimed and still aim to extensify agricultural systems and especially grassland use. We here provide a spatial and temporal analysis of changes in grassland use intensity and discuss them in the context of agricultural policy developments to assess potential policy impacts. We use farm-level census data over a period of 19 years. Spatio-temporal patterns of in- and extensification are investigated visually and by global and local Moran’s I measures. We find that while average changes in grassland use intensity are small, there is a substantial increase in the heterogeneity of grassland use intensity strategies over time, as indicated by increasing interquantile ranges of yearly boxplots. Our results suggest that both in- and extensification are profitable strategies for farmers within the given policy framework. Furthermore, Moran’s I measures show the emergence of regional clusters of in- and extensification. These intensification clusters possibly amplify environmental problems. Our analysis therefore highlights the need for spatial assessments of agricultural policies, i.e. local adverse environmental effects of intensive grassland use should be targeted by spatially tailored policy measures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Spatio-temporal dynamics of grassland use intensity in Switzerland

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Farm structure and environmental context drive farmers’ decisions on the spatial distribution of ecological focus areas in Germany

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) were designed as part of the greening strategy of the common agricultural policy to conserve biodiversity in European farmland, prevent soil erosion and improve soil quality. Farmers receive economic support if they dedicate at least 5% of their arable farmland to any type of EFA, which can be selected from a list of options drawn up at the European Union level. However, EFAs have been criticized for failing to achieve their environmental goals and being ineffective in conserving farmland biodiversity, mainly because they are not spatially targeted and because they promote economic rather than ecological considerations in farm management decisions. Objectives We used a spatially explicit approach to assess the influence of farm and field context as well as field terrain and soil conditions on the likelihood of whether or not a particular EFA type was implemented in a field. Methods We used a multinomial model approach using field-level land use and management data from 879 farms that complied with the EFA policy in 2019 in the Mulde River Basin in Saxony, Germany. Geospatial environmental information was used to assess which predictor variables (related to farm context, field context or field terrain and soil conditions) increased the probability of a field being assigned to a particular EFA. We tested the hypothesis that productive EFAs are more often implemented on fields that are more suitable for agricultural production and that EFA options that are considered more valuable for biodiversity (e.g. non-productive EFAs) are allocated on fields that are less suitable for agricultural production. Results We found that farms embedded in landscapes with a low proportion of small woody features or nature conservation areas mainly fulfilled the EFA policy with productive EFAs (e.g. nitrogen fixing crops). Conversely, farms with a higher proportion of small woody features or nature conservation areas were more likely to adopt non-productive EFAs. As predicted, large and compact fields with higher soil fertility and lower erosion risk were assigned to productive EFAs. Non-productive EFAs were placed on small fields in naturally disadvantaged areas. EFA options considered particularly beneficial for biodiversity, such as fallow land, were allocated far away from other semi-natural or nature protection areas. Conclusions Our results highlight that the lack of spatial targeting of EFAs may result in EFA options being assigned to areas where their relative contribution to conservation goals is lower (e.g. farms with higher shares of protected areas) and absent in areas where they are most needed (e.g. high intensity farms). To ensure that greening policies actually promote biodiversity in European agriculture, incentives are needed to encourage greater uptake of ecologically effective measures on intensively used farms. These should be coupled with additional measures to conserve threatened species with specific habitat requirements.

show abstract

How green is greening? A fine-scale analysis of spatio-temporal dynamics in Germany

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Spatio-temporal dynamics of grassland use intensity in Switzerland

Spatio-temporal dynamics of grassland use intensity in Switzerland

Farm structure and environmental context drive farmers’ decisions on the spatial distribution of ecological focus areas in Germany

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About