Ecological Focus Areas Research Articles

Development of insects in newly established grassland over six years: Increased conservation benefits through diverse plant communities

Agri-environmental schemes seek to mitigate the loss of biodiversity by subsidizing the restoration of grassland in Europe. However, little is known about the colonization of newly established grasslands by insects, especially over periods exceeding 1–2 years. Therefore, we investigated the development of species richness, abundance and species assemblages of wild bees, syrphids, butterflies, orthopterans and true bugs in two types of newly established grassland strips in an agricultural landscape in Austria over a six-year time span. We compared currently subsidized plant-species poor grassland strips (SG; Ecological Focus Areas) with newly established grassland strips (NG) that were created with a diverse, regionally adapted seed mixture, to find out whether diverse seed mixtures can ensure lasting improvements in the insect species richness of grassland strips over a 6-year period. We used permanent seminatural grasslands (old grassland OG) as reference habitat. From the first year after establishment, we found no differences in syrphid assemblages between OG and NG. In contrast, true bug assemblages in NG differed significantly from those in OG still five years after establishment. Wild bee, butterfly and orthopteran species composition differences between grassland strips (NG, SG) and permanent grasslands (OG) were decreasing over time. However, we found no evidence of a successional change in insect species assemblages in NG and SG. NG promoted a significantly higher wild bee richness and equivalent syrphid, butterfly, orthoptera and true bug richness compared with OG. Over the study period, NG showed sustained insect diversity, outperforming plant species-poor SG in promoting wild bee, syrphid and true bug richness. Therefore, we suggest that diverse and regional seed mixtures could enhance the effectiveness of grassland restoration for insect conservation and could make re-sowing within the first 6 years after establishment unnecessary.

Agricultural production and biodiversity conservation: A typology of Swiss farmers’ land use patterns

Understanding farmers' land use behaviour is a prerequisite for designing effective policies that aim to protect and enhance biodiversity in agriculture. We develop a typology of Swiss farmers' land use patterns in terms of their agricultural production and biodiversity conservation. We contribute by adopting a comprehensive perspective encompassing not only EFAs (Ecological Focus Areas) but also non-EFAs. Relying on a sample of 2341 Swiss farm observations from the Farm Agri-Environmental and the Farm Accountancy Data Network, we conducted – for each agricultural region (plain, hill and mountain) – a K-means clustering to identify farmland use patterns. We considered four clustering variables, namely agricultural production intensity, the extent of a farm's participation in agri-environmental payment schemes and the impact of farm agricultural practices on the organismal biodiversity of 1) EFAs and 2) non-EFAs. The analysis reveals four distinct farmland use patterns beyond the classical dichotomy of low shares of EFAs and high agricultural production intensity versus high shares of EFAs and low agricultural production intensity. Three of the four land use patterns are similar across all agricultural regions. Our findings show that biodiversity enhancement is possible outside of EFA direct payment programmes. One cluster succeeded in exhibiting both a high agricultural production intensity and a high overall biodiversity score, which highlights that these dimensions are not mutually exclusive. The low or moderate use intensity of mineral fertilisers, pesticides and purchased feedstuffs in combination with a high use efficiency of these inputs seems to be the key to reconciling agricultural production and biodiversity conservation.

Additive effects of two agri-environmental schemes on plant diversity but not on productivity indicators in permanent grasslands in Switzerland

Different agri-environmental schemes (AES), such as ecological focus areas and organic farming, have been suggested to reduce the impact of intensive agriculture on the environment and to conserve or even restore farmland biodiversity. However, the effectiveness of such schemes, their ability to actually support biodiversity and associated trade-offs with agricultural production are still debated. We analysed a large dataset from the biodiversity monitoring in the Swiss agricultural landscape to assess the effects of two different grassland AES, i.e., extensively managed ecological focus areas (EFAs versus non-EFAs) and organic farming (versus conventional), on plant diversity, plant community composition and productivity indicators, i.e., weed abundance, forage value and nutrient availability. We also considered environmental factors, i.e., topography and soil conditions, which potentially modulate AES effects on biodiversity. We used in total 1170 plots in permanent grasslands, managed as meadows or pastures.Both AES had significant positive effects on plant diversity. However, EFAs increased plant richness considerably stronger (+6.6 species) than organic farming (+1.8 species). Effects of the two schemes were additive with organic EFA grasslands exhibiting highest plant diversity. Differences in topography partly explained AES effects on diversity as both AES were associated with differences in elevation and slope. Thus, future assessments of the effectiveness of AES need to consider the non-random placement of AES across heterogeneous landscapes. EFA grasslands revealed a considerably reduced agricultural productivity as shown by low forage values and low nutrient availability. Yet, the abundance of agricultural weeds, i.e., agriculturally undesired plant species, was lower in EFA compared to non-EFA grasslands. Productivity indicators were only weakly affected by organic farming and other than for plant diversity, productivity did not differ between organic and conventional EFA grasslands.The positive additive diversity effects of EFAs and organic grassland farming underline the potential of both AES to contribute to biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes, though to a different extent. Comparing the effects of the two AES revealed that the lower the reduction in agricultural productivity associated with an AES, the smaller the gains in plant diversity, highlighting the inevitable trade-off between productivity and plant diversity in semi-natural grasslands.

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

ContextEcological 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.ObjectivesWe 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsWe 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.ConclusionsOur 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.

Different effects of local and landscape context on pollen foraging decisions by two managed orchard pollinators, Osmia cornuta and Bombus terrestris

Populations of managed pollinators are often introduced in agricultural fields to increase pollination levels. Ideally, managed pollinators should show a strong affinity for the target crop, which depends on innate preferences, but also on the availability of alternative co-blooming flower resources. In this study we compared pollen collection in Osmia cornuta and Bombus terrestris populations introduced in orchards, and we analysed how it is affected by local and landscape floral context. Based on pollen preferences and foraging rates of the two species, we expected O. cornuta to collect more fruit tree pollen than B. terrestris and to be less influenced by landscape factors. We sampled 16 orchards of various fruit tree species (almonds, apricots, cherries, apples). In each orchard, we characterized local flower availability and landscape composition, and identified pollen samples from 20 to 30 individuals of each pollinator species. O. cornuta collected a greater proportion of fruit tree pollen than B. terrestris (92% vs 81%), irrespective of the availability of alternative flower resources at the local and landscape levels. The diversity of pollen collected by B. terrestris increased with the availability of alternative flower resources, both at the local and landscape levels, suggesting that some of the foraging by this species took place away from the target orchard. Our results demonstrate that wild flowers do not compete with fruit tree flowers for O. cornuta visitation. Therefore, the use of managed O. cornuta populations to supplement pollination services in orchards is compatible with the implementation of agri-environmental measures (flower strips, ecological focus areas) to promote wild pollinator communities.

Spiders indicate delivery of an agri-environment scheme at multiple diversity levels

Agri-environment schemes (AES) are expected to counteract the negative impacts of intensive agriculture on biodiversity. These schemes were specifically designed to target farmland biodiversity and included, for instance, ecological focus areas (EFAs). In Switzerland, in order to qualify for direct payments, farmers must manage 7% or more of their land as biodiversity promotion areas (BPAs). BPAs encompass extensively managed and low intensity hay meadows, fallows (wildflower strips), traditional orchards with high-stem trees and hedgerows. Evaluation of AES delivery for biodiversity is of crucial importance but must be performed across several years and considering the various components of species diversity to avoid incomplete or wrong conclusions. From a complex study design comprising 478 fields in three regions and sampling over 7 years with four sampling times, spider assemblages of BPA habitats were compared to corresponding conventionally managed fields. A battery of investigations was performed including alpha- and beta-diversity analysis, multivariate dispersion, indicator species and species specificity to understand what BPAs deliver for spiders in the habitat scale and farming landscape. Results showed that alpha-diversity (average number of species) was usually higher in BPA habitats than in conventionally managed fields but the species composition (beta-diversity) had more power to perceive AES impact. Furthermore, the various environmental conditions of BPAs in the farming landscape led to highly diverse spider assemblages (multivariate dispersion) emphasizing that not only the agricultural management plays a role in determining species diversity but the environmental heterogeneity. Indicator (and rare) species were mostly found in woody BPAs (hedges and high-stem tree orchards) revealing the high importance of these BPA habitats for spider conservation. At regional scale, BPA hedges contributed most to the regional diversity of spiders in grassland and mixed regions while BPA meadows and wildflower strip BPAs were first delivering in the region of arable crops. Recommendations highlight the role of the woody habitats and of the environmental heterogeneity in the farming landscape as well as of regional planning to make AES effective.

An improved indicator framework to assess and optimise ecosystem services provided by permanent grasslands

Livestock farming systems are criticised for their environmental impacts, but they can also provide various ecosystem services to society, especially permanent grasslands. This study aimed to develop a method to assess impacts of permanent grasslands and their management on the supply of regulation and maintenance ecosystem services applicable at the field and/or farm level. To this end, an existing framework, the Ecological Focus Areas Calculator, was adapted to (i) consider attributes and location parameters of permanent grasslands and (ii) integrate impacts of permanent grassland management on the provision of ecosystem services, which yielded a score for each ecosystem service. The method developed was tested with two farms. Analysis of mapping results, which calculated a score for each ecosystem service for each permanent grassland field on each farm, highlighted the direct relation between the novel approach and the underlying ecological theory of impacts on ecosystem services. On each farm, management practices influenced ecological processes differently, which led to different changes in ecosystem service scores. Applying this novel approach directly with farmers can help them identify win–win situations and trade-offs and target their management, by identifying the fields where it may be more optimal to focus certain management practices to decrease the farm’s overall impacts based on trade-offs at the individual-field scale. The novel approach combined representation of the complexity of interactions between management practices and ecological processes with the ability to provide results that are easy to use and interpret. Future development could help increase the accuracy of estimated impacts of management practices on ecosystem services, such as by adding additional practices or considering their long-term effects on ecological processes. The novel approach could also be updated to assess impacts of other types of land use, such as arable land, or management practices. The final goal of such a tool is to support decision-making to optimise the ecosystem services supplied by farming systems, which has advantages for society and for farmers.

Does CAP greening affect farms’ economic and environmental performances? A regression discontinuity design analysis

Abstract The Common Agricultural Policy reform 2013–2020 has conditioned 30 per cent of the direct payments to greening requirements. Our study investigates whether one of these requirements, the ecological focus area (EFA) obligation, has led to environmental improvements while preserving farms’ economic sustainability. We apply a regression discontinuity design approach on a sample of Italian arable crop farms. Our results suggest that the EFA requirement has no significant effects on farms’ application of fertilisers, pesticide expenditure, crop diversification or economic performance. However, farmers reacted to the EFA requirement by changing their crop mix, mostly by increasing their share of leguminous crops.

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.

Sentinel-2 Enables Nationwide Monitoring of Single Area Payment Scheme and Greening Agricultural Subsidies in Hungary

The verification and monitoring of agricultural subsidy claims requires combined evaluation of several criteria at the scale of over a million cultivation units. Sentinel-2 satellite imagery is a promising data source and paying agencies are encouraged to test their pre-operational use. Here, we present the outcome of the Hungarian agricultural subsidy monitoring pilot: our goal was to propose a solution based on open-source components and evaluate the main strengths and weaknesses for Sentinel-2 in the framework of a complex set of tasks. These include the checking of the basic cultivation of grasslands and arable land and compliance to the criteria of ecological focus areas. The processing of the satellite data was conducted based on random forest for crop classification and the detection of cultivation events was conducted based on NDVI (Normalized Differential Vegetation Index) time series analysis results. The outputs of these processes were combined in a decision tree ruleset to provide the final results. We found that crop classification provided good performance (overall accuracy 88%) for 22 vegetation classes and cultivation detection was also reliable when compared to on-screen visual interpretation. The main limitation was the size of fields, which were frequently small compared to the spatial resolution of the images: more than 4% of the parcels had to be excluded, although these represent less than 3% of the cultivated area of Hungary. Based on these results, we find that operational satellite-based monitoring is feasible for Hungary, and expect further improvements from integration with Sentinel-1 due to additional temporal resolution.

Improving insect conservation values of agri-environment schemes through diversified seed mixtures

To counteract ongoing biodiversity declines, many European countries have implemented agri-environment schemes (AES) such as ecological focus areas (EFAs), the efficiency of which is often questioned due to low levels of habitat quality. We established new grasslands (NG) using a more diverse seed mixture specifically adapted to mimic low-intensity meadows occurring in our study region in Lower Austria. We compared abundance, species richness, species assemblages and β diversity of solitary bees, bumblebees, syrphids, butterflies, orthopterans, true bugs and cicadas in currently subsidized legume-grass mixtures targeted at supporting pollinators (SG), old grasslands (OG) and NG over a two-year period. Bees, bumblebees and syrphids clearly profited from NG in terms of abundance and species richness, while SG were significantly less attractive. Butterflies were most abundant in OG and significantly less attracted to both SG and NG. True bugs were particularly attracted to NG and SG. However, we did not find any preference in cicadas. Orthopteran species richness was similar in all three types, but individual numbers were significantly lower in NG than in OG. OG and NG supported highly distinctive species assemblages. For solitary bees, syrphids, true bugs and cicadas distinctiveness of sites (β diversity) was more decisive for overall diversity than local diversity. We urge policy makers to put more effort into the establishment of EFAs by using high quality seed mixtures of regionally adapted species and increased plant diversity. Furthermore, preserving permanent grasslands, which support different sets of insect assemblages, should be focused as well to maximize biological conservation value.

Farmland use data and remote sensing for ex-post assessment of CAP environmental performances: An application to soil quality dynamics in Lombardy

With the reform of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 2013, subsidies to farms are now bound to the fulfilment of environmentally friendly measures, such as crop diversification and allocation of a share of their farmland to Ecological Focus Areas, the so-called “Greening requirements”. Research on the effects of these policy changes so far have focused mainly on land use transition; however, a detailed investigation of how CAP greening affects the properties of agricultural land is required to assess the actual environmental benefits of the reform. In this study, we present a first attempt to assess the impacts of CAP greening on selected soil quality indices in Lombardy, a populated region in northern Italy where high-intensity agriculture is widespread. We combine high resolution (10/30 m) soil indices from remote sensing based on Landsat-8 and Sentinel-2 data with a regional administrative database covering all agricultural parcels of the region. We then perform a correlation analysis to investigate whether and to what extent greening prescriptions affect the soil quality indices from 2014, representing pre-greening conditions, to 2017, representing greening conditions after 3 years of implementation. Our analysis indicates a high persistence of soil quality indicators and suggests that some crops might have a significant impact on soil quality dynamics, along with farm’s compliance with CAP greening. Although we identified some uncertainties in the soil indices, by integrating a large volume of data and an efficient processing algorithm our method paves the way for ex-post environmental performance assessment of agricultural policies.

Mapping Ecological Focus Areas within the EU CAP Controls Framework by Copernicus Sentinel-2 Data

Greening is a Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) subsidy that ensures that all EU farmers receiving income support produce climate and environmental benefits as part of their farming activities. To receive greening support, it is mandatory for the farmer to carry out three agricultural practices that are considered environmentally and climate friendly: (a) crop diversification; (b) maintenance of permanent meadows and pastures; and (c) presence of an Ecological Focus Area (EFA). Contributions are delivered and monitored by paying agencies (PP) that ordinarily perform administrative checks and spot checks. The latter are provided through photo-interpretation of high-resolution satellite or aerial images and, in specific cases, through local ground checks (GC) as well. In this work, stimulated by the Piemonte Regional Agency for Payments in Agriculture (ARPEA), a prototype service to support PPs’ controls within the greening CAP framework was proposed with special concern for EFA detection. The proposed approach is expected to represent a valid alternative or supporting tool for GC. It relies on the analysis of NDVI time series derived from Copernicus Sentinel-2 data. The study was conducted in the provinces of Turin, Asti and Vercelli within the Piedmont Region (NW Italy), and over 12,500 EFA fields were assessed. Since the recent National Report No. 5465 stipulates that mowing and any other soil management operation is prohibited on set-aside land designated as an EFA during the reference period (RP) between 1st March and 30th June, a time series (TS) of NDVI in the same period was generated. Once averaged at plot level, NDVI trends were modelled by a first-order polynomial, and the correspondent statistics (namely, R2, MAE and maximum residual) was computed. These were assumed to play the role of discriminants in EFA detection based on a thresholding approach (Otsu’s method), calibrated with reference to the training dataset. The threshold satisfaction was therefore tested, and, depending on the number of satisfied thresholds out of the possible three, EFA and non-EFA plots were detected with a different degree of reliability. The correspondent EFA map was generated for the area of interest and validated according to GCs as provided by the ARPEA. The results showed an overall accuracy of 84%, indicating that the approach is promising. The authors retain that this procedure represents a valid alternative (or integrating) tool for ground controls by PPs.

Effects of wildflower strips, landscape structure and agricultural practices on wild bee assemblages – A matter of data resolution and spatial scale?

Agricultural systems in Central Europe were redesigned during the last century to attain maximum yields. The results often lead to homogeneous landscapes with only few structures of ecological value and have concurrently exacerbated habitat fragmentation. Perennial wildflower strips have become a significant agri-environmental measure (AEM) to counteract the ecological consequences for wild bees and other pollinators in agricultural landscapes. The effectiveness of AEMs depends on the landscape context, but information about geodata sources and spatial scales relevant for the analysis of landscape effects on wild bees is lacking. This study uses data from various sources on land cover and agricultural practices to assess their applicability in an evaluation of perennial wildflower strips as AEM for wild bees in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. We investigated the relationships of wild bee species diversity and abundance to the landscape context at spatial scales from 200 m to 10 km considering several factors: land cover/land use, protected areas, crop types, agri-environment schemes/greening, intensity of agriculture, and intensity of grassland farming. In general, our results revealed that landscape effects were more relevant for solitary than social wild bees on flower strips, pointing to a higher limitation of solitary wild bees in nesting resources as compared to social wild bees. Numbers of wild bee species and individuals benefitted from bare soil and ecological focus areas in the surroundings up to 3 km distance, whereas the share of Red List solitary bee species was positively influenced by a variety of factors (e.g., wood structures and grasslands) especially at large scales up to 10 km. The comparison of models based on different land cover data sources showed that the lack of geodata resolution can mask landscape effects on wild bees. Altogether, our results suggest a high potential of data from the Basic Digital Landscape Model (DLM), together with the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS), to indicate effects of landscape structures and agricultural practices on the species composition and distribution of wild bee assemblages in Germany.

Environmental Sustainability Assessment of Pig Farms in Selected European Countries: Combining LCA and Key Performance Indicators for Biodiversity Assessment

The aim of this study was to combine Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) with a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) assessment focusing on biodiversity in order to examine the environmental impacts of different pig farm types (13 breeding, 23 finishing and 27 breeding-to-finishing farms) in seven European countries. In addition, the relationship between environmental impacts and selected farm management characteristics was explored. Fossil energy depletion (FED), global warming (GWP), acidification (AP) as well as marine (MEP) and fresh water (FEP) eutrophication potential were assessed by an attributional LCA and expressed per kilogram body mass net sold (BMNS). In addition, the potential biodiversity performance of all crop-livestock farms within the sample (n = 56) was evaluated with a KPI assessment of biodiversity-related field management characteristics. We found no relationship between LCA results and biodiversity scores (KPI). LCA and biodiversity performance varied more within than across farm types (breeding, finishing, breeding-to-finishing). For example, the GWP expressed per kg BMNS of the breeding unit of breeding-to-finishing farms was on average (median) 2.77 (range: 1.40–4.78) and of breeding farms 2.57 (range: 1.91–3.23) kg CO2-eq. The average (median) biodiversity theme score for breeding farms was 51% (range: 36–70%), for breeding-to-finishing farms 38% (range: 30–68%) and for finishing farms 43% (range: 28–67%). Several farm management characteristics (e.g., FCR, productivity, proportion of solid manure) correlated with all/some LCA results. Biodiversity performance depended especially on KPIs related to ecological focus areas, fertiliser management and GMO crops. The large range regarding environmental performance in both LCA and KPI assessment across farm types indicates that farm-specific improvement measures should be implemented to enhance overall environmental sustainability on farm. In conclusion, combining LCA with KPI assessment provides a more comprehensive environmental impact assessment of pig farms.

Over winter cover crops provide yield benefits for spring barley and maintain soil health in northern Europe

A three-year field experiment investigated the potential yield benefits and soil effects from over winter cover crops in Scotland, U.K. Brassica composition of cover crops significantly increased the grain yield and grain nitrogen (N) concentration of the following spring barley crop. The increased yield with cover crops was outweighed by increased costs and thus without subsidy (Ecological Focus Area) payments there was decreased profitability for the following spring barley crop. Cover crop effects were mostly neutral on soil properties, but surface shear strength was significantly lower than in the stubble control. This indicates that even direct drilling of cover crops will loosen the surface soil. Cover crops varied in their effect on slug populations but in all cases slug numbers were below treatment thresholds. No cover crop effects were detected for total nematode and earthworm abundance or the total soil organic carbon concentration. This study indicates that cover crops can improve cereal production in a region with a short growing season with no negative impact on soil health or the agronomic sustainability.

Effects of Flower-Enriched Ecological Focus Areas on Functional Diversity Across Scales

Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) to benefit biodiversity became mandatory in intensively farmed landscapes after the reform of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 2013. The implementation of EFAs as uncropped field margins has been criticized as ineffective but created a window of opportunity to test if augmenting them with annual flower strips can benefit biodiversity. In this study, we investigated if annual flower strips on EFAs benefited functional biodiversity in intensively farmed landscapes. To this end we established eleven annual flower strips with a seed mixture targeted for both natural enemies and pollinators, on areas were farmers had planned for EFAs. We determined effects on aphids and their natural enemies in cereal fields close to six of the flower strips, and for solitary bees and wasp close to and in the surroundings of all eleven flower strips. We found that annual flower strips benefited the abundance of hoverfly larvae and possibly also that of solitary bees. However, there were neither any significant effects on natural enemies (other than hoverfly larvae), nor any difference in natural pest control as shown by lack of differences in aphid numbers and parazitation rates. Abundances of solitary bees and wasps in the surrounding landscapes were unaffected, although there was a tendency for more solitary bee cells closer to the strips. We suggest that the critical issue leading to the mostly negative results is the lack of permanent structures to sustain populations of arthropods that in turn can benefit from annual flower strips. Hence, future agri-environmental policies need to carefully consider if and how annual agri-environmental measures should be implemented in intensively managed agricultural landscapes, e.g., by combining them with more permanent structures.

Is the Greening Instrument a Valid Precedent for the New Green Architecture of the CAP? The Case of Spain

The Common Agricultural Policy 2014–2020, set up in 2015 and extended until 31 December 2022, introduced a payment instrument called Greening. The aim of Greening was to encourage agricultural practices that are beneficial for the environment while also contributing to economic and territorial dynamism. The purpose of this article is to study the effect that Greening has had in Spain. We consider five difference-in-difference models, one for each of the variables proposed: ecological focus areas, permanent grasslands over utilised agricultural area, CO2 emissions stemming from agricultural land use changes and the presence of woody crops, agricultural income, and affiliates of the special agricultural regime. The data used come from the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food, the Ministry for Inclusion, Social Security, and Migrations, and the Spanish Emissions Inventory System. For the diff-in diff estimations, we use Spain’s regions as control and treatment units from 2011 to 2018, the aim being to provide observations ex ante Greening (2011–2014) and ex post (2015–2018). The results show that Greening had a limited impact, questioning its efficiency for meeting its goal, and that it is not a sound precedent for building the new green architecture of the CAP.

Will Farmers Accept Lower Gross Margins for the Sustainable Cultivation Method of Mixed Cropping? First Insights from Germany

A decline in the legume cultivation has contributed to the biodiversity loss within the agricultural production across Europe. One possibility to include legumes into the production and promote sustainability is mixed cropping with legumes and non-legumes. However, the adoption of mixed cropping is challenging for farmers and information about the profitability is scarce. If mixed cropping should become a widely established production method, it is essential to gain an understanding of famers’ evaluation of the profitability mixed cropping needs to reach. Therefore, this article provides first empirical insights into farmers stated willingness to accept gross margin changes compared to current production possibilities. Based on a survey with results from 134 German non-adopters conducted in 2018 we can distinguish conventional farmers with a positive, neutral and negative willingness to accept reductions in gross margins as the trade-off for ecological benefits. Using an ordered logistic model we find that risk attitude, risk perception, the number of measures performed for ecological focus areas, the farmer’s age and being located in the south of Germany influence their willingness to accept gross margin changes compared to currently produced cereals.

Annual flowers strips benefit bumble bee colony growth and reproduction

Bumble bees are important crop pollinators but are negatively impacted by agricultural intensification and concomitant loss of floral resources. Flower strips can increase the abundance and sometimes the diversity of bumble bees at local scales, but the importance of flower strips for bumble bee populations at larger scales remains poorly understood. We investigated the effect of flower strips on bumble bee colony growth and reproduction at landscape scales. Commercial bumble bee colonies of a native species (Bombus terrestris) were placed and monitored at different distances from flower strips that were sown on existing ecological focus areas (European Common Agricultural Policy) in southern Sweden. Both the average colony growth (weight) and the production of reproductives (drones and queens) were highest for colonies adjacent to flower strips and declined with increasing distance. Colonies close to the flower strip also produced more reproductives per colony weight. Colony foraging activity was negatively related to the distance to flower strips whereas worker size was not affected. Annual flower strips in ecological focus areas benefit bumble bee colonies by increasing foraging success, colony growth and finally boosting sexual reproduction, demonstrating potential benefits for pollination within and between seasons. These effects were spatially limited but extended to foraging ranges of bumble bees. However, effects of increased colony growth on the abundance of foraging bees in the landscape may extend to larger distances because of forager movements within seasons and queen dispersal between seasons, suggesting that voluntary or incentivised collaboration between farmers may be needed to achieve optimal implementation of flower strips.