Landscape complexity and farmland biodiversity: Evaluating the CAP target on natural elements

Complex agricultural landscapes host more biodiversity than simple ones: A global meta-analysis

Agricultural land, the world’s largest human-managed ecosystem, forms the matrix that connects remnant and fragmented patches of natural vegetation where nondomesticated biodiversity struggles to survive. Increasing the resources that this matrix can offer to biodiversity is critical to halting biodiversity loss. Our comprehensive meta-analysis demonstrates the positive and significant effect on biodiversity of increasing landscape complexity in agricultural lands. We found more biodiversity in complex landscapes, potentially contributing to agriculture production, ecosystem resilience, and human well-being. Current biodiversity conservation strategies tend to focus on natural ecosystems, often ignoring opportunities to boost biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Our findings provide a strong scientific evidence base for synergistically managing agriculture at the landscape level for biodiversity conservation and sustainable production.

Managing agricultural landscapes to support biodiversity conservation requires profound structural changes worldwide. Often, discussions are centered on management at the field level. However, a wide and growing body of evidence calls for zooming out and targeting agricultural policies, research, and interventions at the landscape level to halt and reverse the decline in biodiversity, increase biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes, and improve the resilience and adaptability of these ecosystems. We conducted the most comprehensive assessment to date on landscape complexity effects on nondomesticated terrestrial biodiversity through a meta-analysis of 1,134 effect sizes from 157 peer-reviewed articles. Increasing landscape complexity through changes in composition, configuration, or heterogeneity significatively and positively affects biodiversity. More complex landscapes host more biodiversity (richness, abundance, and evenness) with potential benefits to sustainable agricultural production and conservation, and effects are likely underestimated. The few articles that assessed the combined contribution of linear (e.g., hedgerows) and areal (e.g., woodlots) elements resulted in a near-doubling of the effect sizes (i.e., biodiversity level) compared to the dominant number of studies measuring these elements separately. Similarly, positive effects on biodiversity are stronger in articles monitoring biodiversity for at least 2 y compared to the dominant 1-y monitoring efforts. Besides, positive and stronger effects exist when monitoring occurs in nonoverlapping landscapes, highlighting the need for long-term and robustly designed monitoring efforts. Living in harmony with nature will require shifting paradigms toward valuing and promoting multifunctional agriculture at the farm and landscape levels with a research agenda that untangles complex agricultural landscapes’ contributions to people and nature under current and future conditions.

An Analysis of Agricultural Systems Modelling Approaches and Examples to Support Future Policy Development under Disruptive Changes in New Zealand

Agricultural systems have entered a period of significant disruption due to impacts from change drivers, increasingly stringent environmental regulations and the need to reduce unwanted discharges, and emerging technologies and biotechnologies. Governments and industries are developing strategies to respond to the risks and opportunities associated with these disruptors. Modelling is a useful tool for system conceptualisation, understanding, and scenario testing. Today, New Zealand and other nations need integrated modelling tools at the national scale to help industries and stakeholders plan for future disruptive changes. In this paper, following a scoping review process, we analyse modelling approaches and available agricultural systems’ model examples per thematic applications at the regional to national scale to define the best options for the national policy development. Each modelling approach has specificities, such as stakeholder engagement capacity, complex systems reproduction, predictive or prospective scenario testing, and users should consider coupling approaches for greater added value. The efficiency of spatial decision support tools working with a system dynamics approach can help holistically in stakeholders’ participation and understanding, and for improving land planning and policy. This model combination appears to be the most appropriate for the New Zealand national context.

Importance of natural land cover for plant species' conservation: A nationwide study in The Netherlands

While shifts to high-intensity land cover have caused overwhelming biodiversity loss, it remains unclear how important natural land cover is to the occurrence, and thus the conservation, of different species groups. We used over 4 million plant species’ observations to evaluate the conservation importance of natural land cover by its association with the occurrence probability of 1 122 native and 403 exotic plant species at 1 km resolution by species distribution models. We found that 74.9% of native species, 83.9% of the threatened species and 77.1% rare species preferred landscapes with over 50% natural land cover, while these landscapes only accounted for 15.6% of all grids. Most species preferred natural areas with a mixture of forest and open areas rather than areas with completely open or forested nature. Compared to native species, exotic species preferred areas with lower natural land cover and the cover of natural open area, but they both preferred extremely high and low cover of natural forest area. Threatened and rare species preferred higher natural land cover, either cover of natural forest area or cover of natural open area than not threatened and common species, but rare species were also more likely to occur in landscapes with 0–25% cover of natural open area. Although more natural land cover in a landscape will not automatically result in more native species, because there is often a non-linear increase in species occurrence probability when going from 0% to 100% natural land cover, for conserving purposes, over 80% natural land cover should be kept in landscapes for conserving threatened and very rare species, and 60% natural land cover is the best for conserving common native species. Our results stress the importance of natural areas for plant species’ conservation. It also informs improvements to species conservation by increasing habitat diversity.

Twenty Years of Common Agricultural Policy in Europe: A Bibliometric Analysis

The last few years have been marked by the increasing attention paid by policymakers to agricultural policies. Within this scenario, the Common Agricultural Policy represents one of the main initiatives developed by the European Commission to enhance the agricultural sector. Academics have actively contributed to the debate through empirical studies in order to evaluate the main strengths and weakness related to the public investments made by the European Commission. However, despite the relevance of the topic, the scientific debate is characterized by a high degree of fragmentation caused by the involvement of academics with different scientific backgrounds. Building on this evidence, this paper aims to contribute to the scientific debate on Common Agricultural Policy through a bibliometric analysis. The findings reveal the existence of three independent and complementary research clusters.

Exposure to green space and pollen allergy symptom severity: A case-crossover study in Belgium

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of pollen allergy has increased due to urbanization, climate change and air pollution. The effects of green space and air pollution on respiratory health of pollen allergy patients are complex and best studied in spatio-temporal detail.

METHODS

We tracked 144 adults sensitized to Betulaceae pollen during the tree pollen season (January-May) of 2017 and 2018 and assessed their spatio-temporal exposure to green space, allergenic trees, air pollutants and birch pollen. Participants reported daily symptom severity scores. We extracted 404 case days with high symptom severity scores and matched these to 404 control days. The data were analyzed using conditional logistic regression with a 1:1 case-crossover design.

RESULTS

Case days were associated with exposure to birch pollen concentration (100 grains/m³) [adjusted odds ratio 1.045 and 95% confidence interval (1.014-1.078)], O₃ concentration (10 μg/m³) [1.504 (1.281-1.766)] and PM₁₀ concentration (10 μg/m³) [1.255 (1.007-1.565)] on the day of the severe allergy event and with the cumulative exposure of one and two days before. Exposure to grass cover (10% area fraction) [0.655 (0.446-0.960)], forest cover (10% area fraction) [0.543 (0.303-0.973)] and density of Alnus (10%) [0.622 (0.411-0.942)] were protective for severe allergy, but only on the day of the severe allergy event. Increased densities of Betula trees (10%) were a risk factor [unadjusted OR: 2.014 (1.162-3.490)].

CONCLUSION

Exposure to green space may mitigate tree pollen allergy symptom severity but only when the density of allergenic trees is low. Air pollutants contribute to more severe allergy symptoms. Spatio-temporal tracking allows for a more realistic exposure assessment.

Food production, ecosystem services and biodiversity: We can't have it all everywhere

Debate about how sustainable intensification and multifunctionality might be implemented continues, but there remains little understanding as to what extent they are achievable in arable landscapes. Policies that influence agronomic decisions are rarely made with an appreciation of the trade-offs that exist between food production, biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision. We present an approach that can reveal such trade-offs when used to assess current and future policy options that affect agricultural inputs (e.g. pesticides, nutrients) and practices. In addition, by demonstrating it in a pesticide policy context, we show how safeguarding a range of ecosystem services may have serious implications for UK food security. We suggest that policy change is most usefully implemented at a landscape scale to promote multifunctionality, tailoring pesticide risk assessment and incentives for management that support bundles of ecosystem services to specific landscape contexts. In some instances tough trade-offs may need to be accepted. However, our approach can ensure that current knowledge is used to inform policy decisions for progress towards a more balanced food production system.