Agri-environment Schemes Research Articles

Improving the evidence base for delivery of public goods from public money in agri-environment schemes

There is growing interest around the world in more effectively linking public payments to the provision of public goods from agriculture. However, published evidence syntheses suggest mixed, weak or uncertain evidence for many agri-environment scheme options. To inform any future “public money for public goods” based policy, further synthesis work is needed to assess the evidence-base for the full range of interventions currently funded under agri-environment schemes. Further empirical research and trials should then focus on interventions for which there is mixed or limited evidence. Furthermore, to ensure the data collected is comparable and can be synthesised effectively, it is necessary to reach agreement on essential variables and methods that can be prioritised by those conducting research and monitoring. Future policy could then prioritise public money for the public goods that can most reliably be delivered, offering better value for taxpayers and improving the provision of ecosystem services from agricultural landscapes.

Improving the evidence base for delivery of public goods from public money in agri-environment schemes

There is growing interest around the world in more effectively linking public payments to the provision of public goods from agriculture. However, published evidence syntheses suggest mixed, weak or uncertain evidence for many agri-environment scheme options. To inform any future “public money for public goods” based policy, further synthesis work is needed to assess the evidence-base for the full range of interventions currently funded under agri-environment schemes. Further empirical research and trials should then focus on interventions for which there is mixed or limited evidence. Furthermore, to ensure the data collected is comparable and can be synthesised effectively, it is necessary to reach agreement on essential variables and methods that can be prioritised by those conducting research and monitoring. Future policy could then prioritise public money for the public goods that can most reliably be delivered, offering better value for taxpayers and improving the provision of ecosystem services from agricultural landscapes.

Stability of crop pollinator occurrence is influenced by bee community composition

Bees provide a vital ecosystem service to agriculture by contributing to the pollination of many leading global crops. Human wellbeing depends not only on the quantity of agricultural yields, but also on the stability and resilience of crop production. Yet a broad understanding of how the diversity and composition of pollinator communities may influence crop pollination service has previously been hindered by a scarcity of standardized data. We used outputs from Bayesian occupancy detection models to examine patterns in the inter-annual occupancy dynamics of the bee pollinator communities of four contrasting crops (apples, field bean, oilseed and strawberries) in Great Britain between 1985 and 2015. We compared how the composition and species richness of different crop pollinator communities may affect the stability of crop pollinator occurrence. Across the four crops, we found that the inter-annual occupancy dynamics of the associated pollinator communities tended to be more similar in smaller communities with closely related pollinator species. Our results indicate that crop pollinator communities composed of a small number of closely related bee species show greater variance in mean occupancy compared to crops with more diverse pollinator communities. Lower variance in the occurrence of crop pollinating bee species may lead to more stable crop pollination services. Finally, whilst our results initially indicated some redundancy within most crop pollinator communities, with no, or little, increase in the variance of overall mean occupancy when species were initially removed, this was followed by a rapid acceleration in the variance of crop pollinator occurrence as each crop's bee pollinator community was increasingly depreciated. High inter-annual variations in pollination services have negative implications for crop production and food security. High bee diversity could ensure more stable and resilient crop pollination services, yet current agri-environment schemes predominantly benefit a limited suite of common species. Management may therefore benefit from targeting a wider diversity of solitary species in order to safeguard crop pollination service in the face of increasing environmental change.

The effects of a decade of agri‐environment intervention in a lowland farm landscape on population trends of birds and butterflies

Abstract Declines in farmland biodiversity remain evident despite over three decades of research and implementation of agri‐environment schemes (AES). Although positive effects of AES are often demonstrated locally or in the short term, studies exploring longer term trends in biodiversity often show contradictory results. Evidence for the potential of AES to drive beneficial changes in populations remains sparse, especially for mobile taxa such as birds and butterflies. We analysed the abundance of 12 widespread bird and 9 butterfly species from a 10‐year study of AES intervention in a farmland landscape in southern England. We compared estimates of annual population growth rates from our study landscape with rates derived from large‐scale national monitoring schemes in equivalent landscapes without substantial AES. Species trends in our study landscape were frequently stable or increasing, in contrast to concurrent declining trends in equivalent landscapes without AES. These differences were significant for total abundance of granivorous species and for chaffinch Fringilla coelebs, blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus and great tit Parus major individually. For butterflies, differences in trends were significantly more positive for gatekeeper Pyronia tithonus and green‐veined white Pieris napi, while small white P. rapae showed a trend that was significantly more negative in our study landscape. Synthesis and applications. Our results demonstrate that, for some bird and butterfly species, the higher abundances associated with areas of AES uptake within a typical commercial farmland landscape can co‐occur with positive or stable population trends over long time scales and that these trends can show significant differences from those in equivalent landscapes without substantial AES interventions. Our results suggest that previously observed inconsistencies in AES benefits may in part reflect a lack of long‐term studies with accurate data on AES uptake and quality (i.e. successful implementation and management). Our results, thus, affirm the importance of delivering and monitoring high‐quality AES options if the design and implementation of the next generation of AES is to achieve significant benefits for biodiversity.

Examining the relationship between farmer participation in an agri-environment scheme and the quantity and quality of semi-natural habitats on Irish farms

Agri-environment schemes (AESs) have been developed by governments to improve biodiversity, reduce pollution from farming and encourage the provision of agriculture’s non-market benefits. Despite the substantial amount of money spent on designing, implementing and monitoring AESs, their environmental effectiveness is ambiguous. The objective of this paper is to investigate the relationship between farmer participation in an AES and the quantity and quality of semi-natural habitats found on farms. This study combines socio-economic survey data from Irish farms in 2012 with farmland habitat data collected in 2015–16 from a subset of participating farms in the original 2012 socio-economic survey. Given the voluntary nature of AESs, a matching technique is applied to control for self-selection bias and test whether farmer participation in an AES is related to the quantity and quality of habitats found on Irish farms. Although farmer participation in an AES is found to be positively related to habitat quantity and quality, we are unable to reject the null hypothesis of no statistically significant differences between habitat quantity and quality of participants in an AES and non-participants. However, results highlight that the share of habitat area (proxy variable for habitat quantity) varies significantly across farm households with different socio-economic characteristics, soil type, farm structures and location. Future policies could scale up the implementation of outcome-based payments or market-based instruments to incentivize farmers in improving their environmental performance. However, such policy improvements would still require the development of robust and transparent monitoring mechanisms.

Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective

Results-based agri-environmental schemes (AES) seek to overcome reluctance to adopt other forms of AES in the European Union. Instead of complying with inflexible land management prescriptions, farmers receive payments after certain contracted environmental results are verified. In addition to reducing the organizational and administrative burdens, this practice allows farmers to focus on which practices can achieve the desired environmental outcomes. Farmer uptake of results-based payments may be limited by risk-adverse behavior, such as fear of not meeting environmental targets and forfeiting the contracted payment. This study investigated participation in a hypothetical results-based AES among arable farmers in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia and the number of hectares enrolled (participation intensity). Our hypothetical scheme sought to foster biodiversity in pollinator and bird species by supporting weed-species richness in intensive arable production. Our split-treatment research design investigated how social nudging influences acceptance and intensity. Approximately 60% of the 63 farmers in our convenience sample expressed a willingness to participate in our hypothetical scheme. Using a Heckman style selection model, we could not detect any effect of the social nudge tested on the likelihood of participation or its intensity. Cognitive factors correlated positively with the likelihood of participation, whereas social and dispositional factors correlated with participation intensity. Perceived lack of control was the main obstacle found to adoption. The findings suggest that policies can mitigate barriers to acceptance by reducing the bureaucratic burden and being transparent over expected costs and ecosystem benefits. This study was the first to investigate farmers' acceptance of a hypothetical results-based AES that targets the enrichment of biodiversity in arable farming and thus may serve as a stepping stone for follow-up studies.

Pioneering Farmers Value Agronomic Performance of Cover Crops and Their Impacts on Soil and Environment

Cover crops (CCs) have aroused a great deal of interest as a multifunctional measure to improve the sustainability of agriculture. Understanding farmers’ views are important for future farm-scale implementation. A farmer survey was carried out in Finland in 2021 with the aims to gather farmers’ views on agronomic performance of CCs, their environmental impacts and contribution to climate smart agriculture, and understand how farmers’ views on CCs differed depending on farm/farmer characteristics. The farmers’ sample was conventional and organic farms that had selected CCs as a registered measure in 2020. 6493 farmers were invited to answer a questionnaire with 18 statements (a Likert scale, 5 answer choices), and 1130 responded (17.4%). A Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test was used to measure the strength of the association between ten characteristics of the respondents and 18 statements. Farmers considered CCs to have wide-ranging benefits for soil conditions. Only 21% of farmers agreed that CCs increase the need for nitrogen fertilizer use. 49% of farmers agreed that CCs reduce weed problems. Farmers mostly agreed (ca. 80%) that CCs reduce nutrient leaching and erosion. They were in general more uncertain about CCs’ contribution to climate change mitigation (53% agreed), adaptation (51%), and resilience (58%). In agri-environmental schemes subsidies for use of CCs should aim large-scale implementation with two important target groups: younger farmers (≤50 years) as they were slightly more skeptical than older ones and farmers with less diverse land use as they were more doubtful of benefits provided by CCs.

Effects of Agri-Environment Schemes in Terms of the Results for Soil, Water and Soil Organic Matter in Central and Eastern Europe

Building on the agri-environment framework in Central and Eastern Europe, the article emphasizes the role and the use of the agri-environment in provision of different ecosystem services. It shows that relevant conservation measures with regard to ameliorating soil degradation contribute to the existence of sustainable land systems. In our study, we (i) identified what the soil water aggregate means, (ii) reviewed how agri-environment schemes (AES) function to support soil water requirements, and (iii) how appropriate soils are identified with regard to the implementation of soil conservation under the agri-environment. Empirical data were surveyed to assess AES as the pivotal subsidy in four countries: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Quantitative data were assessed to contribute to evidence on and the expenditure effect of the measures. This review found that AES schemes in arable land systems implement several approaches such as cover crops and the reversion of arable land systems to grassland. The costs of AE measures reflect the costs of the particular agri-environmental practice and its constraints on commercial performance by the farmer. The AES budget analysis showed that subsidization moderately increased over the 2000–2020 time frame. However, the magnitude of the AES budget is still largely overshadowed by generic subsidies at farm level.

Mowing detection using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 time series for large scale grassland monitoring

Managed grasslands cover about one third of the European utilized agricultural area. Appropriate grassland management is key for balancing trade-offs between provisioning and regulating ecosystem services. The timing and frequency of mowing events are major factors of grassland management. Recent studies have shown the feasibility of detecting mowing events using remote sensing time series from optical and radar satellites. In this study, we present a new method combining the regular observations of Sentinel-1 (S1) and the better accuracy of Sentinel-2 (S2) grassland mowing detection algorithms. This multi-source approach for grassland monitoring was assessed over large areas and in various contexts. The method was first validated in six European countries, based on Planet image interpretation. Its performances and sensitivity were then thoroughly assessed in an independent study area using a more precise and complete reference dataset based on an intensive field campaign. Results showed the robustness of the method across all study areas and different types of grasslands. The method reached a F1-score of 79% for detecting mowing events on hay meadows. Furthermore, the detection of mowing events along the growing season allows to classify mowing practices with an overall accuracy of 69%. This is promising for differentiating grasslands in terms of management intensity. The method could therefore be used for large-scale grassland monitoring to support agri-environmental schemes in Europe.

Landscape attributes shape dung beetle diversity at multiple spatial scales in agricultural drylands

Land-use change is one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss worldwide, but its negative effects can vary depending on the spatial scale analyzed. Considering the continuous expansion of agricultural demand for land, it is urgent to identify the drivers that shape biological communities in order to balance agricultural production and biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes. We used a patch-landscape design and a multimodel inference approach to assess the effects of landscape composition and configuration at two spatial scales (patch and landscape) on the structure of dung beetle assemblages. We performed our study in the Caatinga, the largest dry forest in South America. We sampled 3,526 dung beetles belonging to 19 species and 11 genera. At patch scale, our findings highlight the positive relationship of forest cover and landscape heterogeneity with dung beetle diversity, which are the major drivers of beetle assemblages. Edge density, in turn, is a major driver at the landscape scale and has a negative effect on beetle diversity. Our results support the hypothesis that landscapes combining natural vegetation remnants and heterogeneous agricultural landscapes are the most effective at conserving the biodiversity of dung beetles in the Caatinga landscapes. Directing efforts to better understand the dynamics of dung beetles in agricultural lands can be helpful for policymakers and scientists to design agri-environment schemes and apply conservation strategies in tropical dry forests.

Reducing MCPA herbicide pollution at catchment scale using an agri-environmental scheme

In river catchments used as drinking water sources, high pesticide concentrations in abstracted waters require an expensive treatment step prior to supply. The acid herbicide 2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA) is particularly problematic as it is highly mobile in the soil-water environment following application. Here, an agri-environmental scheme (AES) was introduced to a large-scale catchment (384 km2) to potentially reduce the burden of pesticides in the water treatment process. The main measure offered was contractor application of glyphosate by weed wiping as a substitute for boom spraying of MCPA, supported by educational and advisory activities. A combined innovation applied in the assessment was, i) a full before-after-control-impact (BACI) framework over four peak application seasons (April to October 2018 to 2021) where a neighbouring catchment (386 km2) did not have an AES and, ii) an enhanced monitoring approach where river discharge and MCPA concentrations were measured synchronously in each catchment. During peak application periods the sample resolution was every 7 h, and daily during quiescent winter periods. This sampling approach enabled flow- and time-weighted concentrations to be established, and a detailed record of export loads. These loads were up to 0.242 kg km−2 yr−1, and over an order of magnitude higher than previously reported in the literature. Despite this, and accounting for inter-annual and seasonal variations in river discharges, the AES catchment indicated a reduction in both flow- and time-weighted MCPA concentration of up to 21% and 24%, respectively, compared to the control catchment. No pollution swapping was detected. Nevertheless, the percentage of MCPA occurrences above a 0.1 μg L−1 threshold did not reduce and so the need for treatment was not fully resolved. Although the work highlights the advantages of catchment management approaches for pollution reduction in source water catchments, it also indicates that maximising participation will be essential for future AES.

Trees for bees: could woody plant pollen be used as a consistent resource in bee-focused agri-environment schemes?

Trees for bees: could woody plant pollen be used as a consistent resource in bee-focused agri-environment schemes?

Humid grassland fallows promote spider diversity in a traditionally managed landscape

Agricultural intensification is an important driver of biodiversity decline. Regarding grassland ecosystems, traditionally managed hay meadows, as opposed to highly productive silage grassland, are often of high conservation value. Here, we compare spider assemblages among five grassland management regimes along an intensification gradient, ranging from long-term fallows (not farmed for ≥ 30 years) via traditionally managed hay meadows to high-intensity silage grassland. Humid long-term fallows harboured highest species richness and diversity, and their assemblages differed strongly from other management regimes. There was surprisingly little variation though among different types of hay meadows and silage grassland. We also included environmental parameters and land-cover types in the surroundings of study sites, indicating that spider assemblages were most strongly shaped by fallow-related parameters and the proportion of forests. The high spider diversity on fallows may result from their undisturbed vegetation structure, while management, regardless of frequency, may have detrimental effects. Our results demonstrate the high importance of unmanaged areas even in regions with an overall low land-use intensity, such as grassland ecosystems. We thus recommend the inclusion of temporal grassland fallows (unmanaged for 3-5 years) in agri-environmental schemes to increase landscape heterogeneity and preserve spider diversity.

Role of management in the long-term provision of floral resources on farmland

Floral abundance and richness on farmland has been declining since the mid 1900 s. Agri-environment schemes (AES) can improve floral resource availability through establishment of flower-rich areas or careful management of areas set-aside to naturally regenerate on farmland. Ideal management regimes include sowing and re-sowing of seed mixes, regular cuts of growth, and removal of cuttings to optimise floral diversity. Our aim was to determine which areas and managements on farmland provided greatest floral resources for insect pollinators, and if these persisted over time. We surveyed 67 non-crop areas across eight farms in the south of England during 2014 and again in 2018, recording each flowering species present and the estimated floral abundance of each species. We then interviewed the farmers to determine management details and history for each surveyed area. Our results showed that floral abundance was initially greatest in sown Pollen & Nectar Strips and Florally Enhanced (FE) Grass Margins, but subsequently declined: from 1 to 5 years to 6–10 years for Pollen & Nectar Strips, and from 1 to 10 years to 11–20 years for FE Grass Margins. Additionally, only a handful of sown species known to be beneficial for insect pollinators persisted over time: Centaurea nigra, Lotus corniculatus, Trifolium pratense and Leucanthemum vulgare. It is vital that policy makers move forward with pollinator-targeting AES that can successfully support a variety of insects, including both pollinators and crop-pest predators. Species lists for AES seed mixes should include higher proportions of persistent perennial species, and a better support structure is needed in order to aid farmers with AES managements.

Not only hedgerows, but also flower fields can enhance bat activity in intensively used agricultural landscapes

Agri-environment schemes (AES) have become important tools for farmland biodiversity conservation, providing suitable habitats, resources, and connectivity within the agricultural landscapes. Bats are rarely studied in relation to AES effectiveness in contrast to birds, even though their presence and activity as biological control agents on insects, especially pest species, can be important for agricultural crops. While the role of hedgerows for bat occurrence and activity, as well as for their prey's diversity and abundance has been widely studied, the role of other AESs such as flower fields remains unclear. We monitored the activity of the main functional groups (edge, narrow and open space foragers) using ultrasound recorders, as well as potential prey abundances using light traps, across 35 study sites representing different AES in Central Germany from late July to September 2018. The sampled AES consisted of annual flower fields, mixed flower fields (with annual and biennial vegetation), perennial flower fields (sown every 5 years), hedgerows (surrounded by meadows and agricultural fields), and were compared to winter wheat (control) in a balanced design. Bat activity over hedgerows increased threefold for edge space foragers and sevenfold for narrow space foragers compared to wheat fields. Compared to wheat fields, narrow space forager activity increased fourfold over perennial flower fields, threefold over annual and twofold over mixed flower fields. This group's activity over hedgerows also increased almost threefold compared to mixed flower fields. However, the number of feeding buzzes and prey abundance did not differ significantly between AES. We detected foraging group-specific differences in bat activity between the studied AES. Thus, to promote bats in agricultural landscapes and to ensure their biological control services, it is important to establish more AES, such as hedgerows and flower fields, to increase their diversity and connectivity in intensively used agricultural landscapes.

Ecological–Economic Modelling of Traditional Agroforestry to Promote Farmland Biodiversity with Cost-Effective Payments

Orchard meadows, a traditional agroforestry system in Switzerland combining the dual use fruit and fodder production, are declining, even though the farmland managed under agri-environmental schemes (AES) has been expanding. Despite increasing interest in agroforestry research for developing sustainable agriculture, it is poorly understood how subsidies contribute to the maintenance of trees on agricultural land and the promotion of farmland biodiversity. Therefore, the objective of the present study is to examine the effects of incentive-based AES on both farmers’ decisions regarding trees and biodiversity by developing an ecological–economic assessment model. To explore cost-effective AES, we explicitly consider the heterogeneity of farm types. We apply this integrated model to the farms in Schwarzbubenland, a small hilly region in Northern Switzerland. Results show that the adoption of AES and the compliance costs of participating in AES considerably vary among farm types, and the current AES do not provide farmers with sufficient payments to maintain any type of orchard meadows, despite the ecological benefits of orchard meadows. The integrating modeling developed in this study enables us to better understand the relationship between subsidies and biodiversity through farmers’ decisions on land use and facilitates the design of cost-effective payments for the maintenance of agroforestry.

Implementing policy interventions to support farmer cooperation for environmental benefits

In policy and academic literature, landscape-scale agri-environment schemes (AES) are discussed in conjunction with farmer collaboration, reflecting the assumption that the two concepts are synergistic. However, farmers cooperate in different ways and for different purposes, with agri-environmental collaboration representing a different, more unique, case in relation to cooperation. Collective action among farmers may occur as cooperation (often facilitated by a third party) or as direct collaboration between farmers. Farmers’ general willingness to cooperate should not be conflated with collaboration under the demands and constraints of a landscape-scale AES. This paper investigated the Countryside Stewardship Facilitation Fund (CSFF) in England as a policy intervention to develop cooperation amongst farmers and agree the agri-environmental management priorities that they plan to take forward across their holdings. Data from empirical research on the actual operation of six CSFF-funded groups in Cumbria and East Anglia was analysed from a social capital and collective action perspective. We found that key elements of social capital (connectedness, trust, norms) differed between cases, leading to different starting points for establishing groups. The resulting cooperation in agri-environmental management also varied depending on pre-existing networks. The CSFF supported steps to increase the capacity of individuals (and in some cases groups) to deliver agri-environmental outcomes via a facilitator, but struggled to create self-sustaining groups of farmers collaborating on agri-environmental management. The design of similar policy interventions needs to be explicit what kind of farmer cooperation is aimed for. It also needs to take into account the time required for building the prerequisite social capital, tensions between priorities of farmer-led groups and state-funded AES, and trade-offs between group cohesion and landscape-scale working.

The effect of agri‐environment schemes on Bombus terrestris colony success

As with other species linked to agricultural environments, many bumblebee species are exhibiting significant population declines. This study assesses the success of colonies of Bombus terrestris audax on farms differing in conservation inputs via agri-environment schemes (AES). B. terrestris audax colonies were placed on farms of three treatments: Conventionally managed, AES Entry-Level Stewardship (ELS), or AES Higher-Level Stewardship. Colonies on AES-compliant farms gained significantly more mass than those on conventional farms, which decreased in mass. Nests on conventional farms were also more likely to become infested by the wax moth Aphomia sociella, followed by ELS-compliant farms. The results suggest that adopting an AES can increase bumblebee colony success through the production of larger colonies and with greater ability to combat parasite infestations.

Scale-dependent effectiveness of on-field vs. off-field agri-environmental measures for wild bees

The effectiveness of agri-environment schemes depends on scheme type, taxon and landscape. Here, we show how spatial scale, i.e. studied transect, field or farm level, and controlling for yield loss, can drastically change the evaluation of biodiversity benefits of on-field (organic farming) vs. off-field (flower strips) schemes. We selected ten agricultural landscapes in Central Germany, each with a triplet of winter wheat fields: one organic, one conventional with flower strip, and one conventional without flower strip as a control. We surveyed the abundance of wild bees at field edges for two years. We found that comparing data at the transect level may lead to misleading conclusions, because flower strips, covering only 5% of conventional fields, support fewer bees than large organic fields. However, a 50% cereal yield loss of organic farming can be considered as equivalent to yield levels of 50 ha conventional plus 50 ha flower strip. This would promote 3.5-times more bees than 100 ha organic farming. In conclusion, considering various scales in the evaluation of agri-environment scheme measures is necessary to reach a balanced understanding of their ecological and economic effects and their effectiveness.

Species-Enriched Grass-Clover Mixtures Can Promote Bumblebee Abundance Compared with Intensively Managed Conventional Pastures

(1) Land use intensification has led to serious declines in biodiversity, including in forage production systems for dairy cows. Agri-environmental schemes, such as enriching grasslands in floral species, were shown to be an effective tool to promote biodiversity in higher trophic levels. Here, we studied an innovative pasture-based dairy production system with floral-species-enhanced temporary grasslands, with respect to the effect on wild bee abundance and species richness. (2) We studied three grass-clover mixtures with perennial ryegrass and clover species with different levels of plant diversity for flower cover and wild bees. The grass-clover pastures were rotationally stocked with cattle and parts of the pastures were excluded from grazing. Intensively managed conventional permanent grasslands were studied as the common land use type. Wild bees were caught by sweep netting. Wild bee diversity was analysed with a general linear mixed model. For species richness, an incidence-based coverage estimator was calculated. (3) In total, 541 wild bees from 10 species were found. No wild bees were caught on the conventional grasslands. Wild bee abundance and species richness did not differ among the three grass-clover mixtures, but with increasing flower cover of white clover (Trifolium repens), wild bee abundance increased. Except for one solitary wild bee individual, the recorded community exclusively consisted of bumblebees. While generalist species that are commonly found on farmland dominated, rare long-tongued bumblebees made up 10% on the grazed sites of the multispecies mixture and made up 20% on the ungrazed strips of the binary mixture and multispecies mixture. (4) We conclude that multispecies mixtures can provide resources for generalist bumblebee species, especially when compared with conventional grasslands that offer no resources. Considering that the multispecies mixture has been also shown to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and nitrate leaching, while maintaining high forage yields, our findings add to the potential to promote a wide range of ecosystem services. Yet, should their full potential be enfolded, grazing should partially be excluded, and the mixture should be extended by plant species with more open flowers, suitable for solitary wild bees.