BESTMAP: behavioural, Ecological and Socio-economic Tools for Modelling Agricultural Policy

Delineating the spatial drivers of agri-environment scheme adoption at field and farm levels

Agri-environment schemes (AES), introduced by the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), aim to compensate land owners for implementing environmentally-friendly practices. Whilst literature has examined their effectiveness and how farmer characteristics govern AES adoption, there is a lack of knowledge about the spatial drivers of AES, particularly structural, biophysical and landscape factors in the UK. Using the Humber region as a case study, this paper explores how the uptake of Countryside Stewardship options has varied from 2016 to 2021. It also examines 2500 farms from the field- and farm-level data of 2019 to better understand what type of land British farmers are adopting AES on. Logistic regression analysis is used to identify the factors (including farm and landscape characteristics, designated sites and land quality) that best explain overall AES adoption, as well as specific scheme adoption, at the field- and farm-level. Our analysis reveals that 'buffer strips', 'hedgerow management', 'permanent grassland', and 'winter bird food' are the most commonly adopted schemes of 2019. AES are generally adopted on larger fields and farms that feature marginalised, unproductive and vulnerable land, except for 'buffer strips' which showed a larger tendency to appear on fields with more profitable, higher quality land. This study, therefore, supports the notion that AES are generally placed on lower quality land and that large proportions of agricultural land owners are not effectively targeted. With the expected loss of direct payments to farmers in the UK as a result of the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) post-Brexit re-evaluation of rural policy, these results call for the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) to be made more accessible and inclusive to a broader diversity of farmers.

Landscape-level heterogeneity of agri-environment measures improves habitat suitability for farmland birds

Agri-environment schemes (AESs), ecological focus areas (EFAs), and organic farming are the main tools of the common agricultural policy (CAP) to counteract the dramatic decline of farmland biodiversity in Europe. However, their effectiveness is repeatedly doubted because it seems to vary when measured at the field-versus-landscape level and to depend on the regional environmental and land-use context. Understanding the heterogeneity of their effectiveness is thus crucial to developing management recommendations that maximize their efficacy. Using ensemble species distribution models and spatially explicit field-level information on crops grown, farming practice (organic/conventional), and applied AES/EFA from the Integrated Administration and Control System, we investigated the contributions of five groups of measures (buffer areas, cover crops, extensive grassland management, fallow land, and organic farming) to habitat suitability for 15 farmland bird species in the Mulde River Basin, Germany. We used a multiscale approach to identify the scale of effect of the selected measures. Using simulated land-use scenarios, we further examined how breeding habitat suitability would change if the measures were completely removed and if their adoption by farmers increased to meet conservation-informed targets. Buffer areas, fallow land, and extensive grassland were beneficial measures for most species, but cover crops and organic farming had contrasting effects across species. While different measures acted at different spatial scales, our results highlight the importance of land-use management at the landscape level-at which most measures had the strongest effect. We found that the current level of adoption of the measures delivers only modest gains in breeding habitat suitability. However, habitat suitability improved for the majority of species when the implementation of the measures was increased, suggesting that they could be effective conservation tools if higher adoption levels were reached. The heterogeneity of responses across species and spatial scales indicated that a mix of different measures, applied widely across the agricultural landscape, would likely maximize the benefits for biodiversity. This can only be achieved if the measures in the future CAP will be cooperatively designed in a regionally targeted way to improve their attractiveness for farmers and widen their uptake.

Open science in practice: 300 published research ideas and outcomes illustrate how RIO Journal facilitates engagement with the research process

Since Research Ideas and Outcomes was launched in late 2015, it has stimulated experimentation around the publication of and engagement with research processes, especially those with a strong open science component. Here, we zoom in on the first 300 RIO articles that have been published and elucidate how they relate to the different stages and variants of the research cycle, how they help address societal challenges and what forms of engagement have evolved around these resources, most of which have a nature and scope that would prevent them from entering the scholarly record via more traditional journals. Building on these observations, we describe some changes we recently introduced in the policies and peer review process at RIO to further facilitate engagement with the research process, including the establishment of an article collections feature that allows us to bring together research ideas and outcomes from within one research cycle or across multiple ones, irrespective of where they have been published.