Abstract

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was established by the European Community in the 1950s to provide financial support to farmers in member states, increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress, and ensure a fair standard of living for farmers. Over time; awareness about the externalities of intensive farming would prompt environmentally friendly practices. These include, in the current programming period 2014–2020, the so-called “greening”, which consists of: (i) crop diversification; (ii) the maintenance of permanent grassland surfaces; and (iii) the availability of 5% of arable land for ecological focus areas devoted to agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment. These provisions, spurred by a decades-long debate that also stresses the importance of creating/restoring ecological connectivity on different scales to counter land fragmentation, are in tune with spatial planning initiatives throughout Europe. Here the point is how to combine these directions with either “ecological networks” (EN), designed as physical corridors to be preserved and enhanced for plants and animals’ mobility needs; or “green infrastructure” (GI), defined on the European level as a “strategically planned network of natural and semi-natural areas with other environmental features designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services” (European Commission; 2013). While in several European countries environmental measures targeting farmers and ecological networks directed at specific areas have been merged in a place-based approach, Italy is lagging behind. In general, no guidelines have been provided on the national level to support regional paths, while regions and municipalities lack the resources to implement GI. Conversely, while greening policies in the framework of the CAP are properly funded, they lack directions to be efficiently allocated. Against the backdrop of such concerns, this paper frames and reflects upon ongoing practices in three pilot areas in different Italian regions, selected based on desk analysis, in-depth interviews, and direct knowledge. Here, despite or thanks to the legislative framework, experimental approaches have been adopted to harness performance issues in targeted areas through broad participation by public and private stakeholders and multilevel governance schemes, opening possible pathways in view of the forthcoming programming period.

Highlights

  • On the European level, there is broad agreement about the need to integrate environmental issues related to biodiversity and ecological continuity with other sectoral policies within a territorial framework in order to strengthen their effectiveness

  • Regional planning tools have been supportive in addressing a wide range of “open space” features and types ranging from ecological networks (EN) to green infrastructure (GI)

  • GI has recently been defined by the homonymous European strategy as “strategically planned network of natural and semi-natural areas with other environmental features designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services,” which are in turn defined “as the direct and indirect contributions of ecosystems to human well-being” [5,6,7]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

On the European level, there is broad agreement about the need to integrate environmental issues related to biodiversity and ecological continuity with other sectoral policies within a territorial framework in order to strengthen their effectiveness. GI has recently been defined by the homonymous European strategy as “strategically planned network of natural and semi-natural areas with other environmental features designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services,” which are in turn defined “as the direct and indirect contributions of ecosystems to human well-being” [5,6,7] This statement, encompassing the production of food and water, the control of climate and disease, nutrient cycles and oxygen production, and spiritual and recreational benefits among ecosystem services [8], turns to GI for sustainable development issues on various scales, allowing multi-level governance models while accommodating land-use provisions and requirements [9]

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call