Search

Food systems require reorientation to take greater account of interactions with the environment, economy, health and society. Transitions to agroecological farming practices and systems can connect policy areas and realise environmental, economic and social aims. These transitions provide a lens for reviewing policy, practice and behaviours of actors in farming systems and value chains, identification of barriers to uptake, and policy areas to which they contribute or where there are gaps. Developing social and human capital, and governance structures that enable transitions to agroecology are key to their prospects of success. Education and life-long learning are key to developing the knowledge and skills of younger generations of land managers and other actors in value chains, throughout their careers. The outcome sought is for a shared understanding of the benefits of agroecological practices and systems, creating opportunities to rebalance policies towards delivering climate neutrality, reversing biodiversity loss, and enhancing rights of citizens. To realise those opportunities policies and strategies should be coherent across territorial and systems levels, and tailored to place, system, people, and stages of transitions. Overall, they should be designed to ensure all citizens are beneficiaries of transitions to agroecological farming systems, over the long term, and that no-one or place is disadvantaged by the processes of change or the outcome intended.

This document is the Annex of the report on the innovative market and policy instruments to promote the agro-ecological transition strategies (Galioto et al. 2021) which includes a more detailed description of all the 15 case studies.

This policy brief discusses options for promotion of biorefineries in Finland based on UNISECO-project case study in Nivala.

This policy brief discusses options for promoting biorefineries in Finland based on the UNISECO-project case study in Nivala.

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901.

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901

https://panda.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=ccd71365171a43ab9c9b7de1de6d4e7b Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901.

This document is the Annex of the report on the participatory analysis of market and policy instruments for agro-ecological transition (Linares Quero et al., 2020) which includes a more detailed description of all the 15 case studies.

The alignment of the environmental, economic and social sustainability of farms is necessary for enhancing the provision of public goods in farming. This study combines the use of three tools for the assessment of farm sustainability. It provides first insights into the sustainability performance of farms at different stages of agro-ecological transitions in 15 case studies covering a range of different farming systems across Europe. Each case study reflects a different-transition towards agro-ecological farming. The tools applied were COMPAS (an economic farm assessment tool); Cool Farm Tool (a greenhouse gas inventory, water footprint and biodiversity assessment tool); and the SMART Farm Tool (a multidimensional sustainability assessment tool)., First results of the use of combined sustainability assessments deepen the understanding of different farming systems. Sustainability performance varies greatly between farms, but overall, agro-ecological farms tend to enhance biodiversity and water quality. For soil quality, no clear patterns could be identified. The same applies to economic performance at different stages of the agro-ecological transition. Quality of life was generally rated medium to high on all investigated farms. The combined sustainability assessment enabled the identification of areas for further policy development., Aligning the tools required harmonising definitions, simplification and assumptions with regard to the input data of the tools., Landbauforschung: Journal of Sustainable and Organic Agricultural Systems, 70 (2), ISSN:2700-8711, ISSN:2194-3605

The overall aim of the UNISECO project is to provide recommendations on how the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems (AEFS) in Europe can be promoted. These recommendations build upon multi-actor engagement and practice-validated strategies. The project explores both of these approaches in 15 case studies across Europe. Every case study reflects an AEFS at a certain point of transition towards agro-ecological farming systems. A first step in all of the case studies was to characterize the status quo of the farm systems. Along with other methods to describe the status quo, three decision support tools (DST) were applied in the case studies to provide information on the environmental, economic and social performance of current AEFS. The tools applied were COMPAS, an economic performance assessment tool, Cool Farm Tool, a greenhouse gas inventory tool, and SMART, a multidimensional sustainability tool. This deliverable presents the overall approach taken to assess the farms along the agro-ecological transition, describes the tools, and presents results from their application in the case studies. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement N° 773901.

This document is the Annex of the report on governance networks supporting agro-ecological farming systems (10.5281/zenodo.4568421) includes a more detailed description of all the 15 case studies. &nbsp

This document represents the Deliverable D5.2 within Workpackage WP5 “Governance and policy assessment” of the EU Horizon 2020 project UNISECO (Understanding and improving the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems in the EU). The overall objective of this Deliverable (D5.2) is to identify and analyse the governance structures which characterise the different transition “patterns” in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. The specific objectives of D5.2 can be synthesized as: To identify and analyse the most relevant actors for addressing key agro-ecological dilemmas in each Case Study (across the seven main types of actors: farmers; authorities and administrations; agri-food value chain actors; science, innovation, advisory and capacity building actors; NGOs, civic society organisations, local community representatives; consumers; media); To identify and analyse the governance networks with relevance for the challenge. The focus is on power relations, conflicts, collaborations, collective action dynamics, the flows of knowledge and tangible goods. The purpose is to understand the decision-making process and how the network and its elements (actors and actor-actor links) can influence pathways of agro-ecological transitions. Social Network analysis (SNA) is the method that has been used to analyse the governance structures involved in the transition towards agro-ecological farming system (AEFS). The analysis went well-beyond the farm level, by looking at how different stakeholder groups are engaged in the transition processes towards sustainable agriculture and food systems. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 includes an introduction to the topic with particular attention to governance networks enabling the transition towards AEFS. Section 3 reports on the research method (Social Network Analysis) used for the data collection in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. Section 4 presents an overview of all case studies, while Section 5 provides a comparative analysis of the different governance networks. Conclusions are drawn in Section 6. The Annex (10.5281/zenodo.4568451) includes a more detailed description of all the 15 case studies.

This Deliverable outlines a prototype of a spatially explicit interactive online tool (Deliverable D6.3) and outlines the objectives for the development of a methodological handbook on transdisciplinary sustainability assessment (Deliverable D6.4). The document provides an outline of the technical elements for the tool, based upon the web app development environment of Esri (Story Maps). These elements include the graphical user interface (GUI) and server side data management, and a set of variables to be implemented, derived from the description of Socio-Ecological Systems which describe the different dimensions of sustainability. These specifications lay the foundation for building a prototype version of the tool, the development and content of which continues until release of the tool at the end of the UNISECO project. The overall purpose of the tool is to increase understanding of the sustainability of agriculture, and in particular the role that agro-ecological transitions can play in increasing sustainability of European agriculture. For this purpose the tool provides a channel for delivering and viewing information as an effective means of communication between actors involved in such transitions. The plans for development of the tools are to implement it on a platform which requires minimal technical knowledge for easy content creation at a local level, for example by other projects or farmers who want to share information on more sustainable practices in agriculture. The tool is based upon the use of maps of different aspects of sustainability of farming systems, available at different spatial resolutions. Maps provide interactive visual representations of the geography of an area (Tomlinson, 2013), to which stories of farmers and other value chain actors who aspire more sustainable solutions for food production can be associated. Maps also provide an output format for the communication of results of spatially distributed Decision Support Tools which can support illustrations of why some solutions work, and their limitations. The tool will include indicators of social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainability. The qualitative data collected will be used in stories developed about the project case studies, and quantitative data will be presented as maps created from statistical data and model outputs. The concept of the tool was discussed in workshops with stakeholders and members of the EU Multi-Actor Platform. Their feedback has informed the development of plans for the tool, including the inclusion of indicators such as biodiversity and pesticide use, which would be important considerations when communicating information on sustainability of agro-ecological farming. Other items highlighted in the feedback included the benefits of using audio-visual video material as part of stories of agro-ecological farms. It is proposed that the tool will be managed by a key stakeholder (WWF) to enable knowledge sharing after the completion of the UNISECO project. &nbsp

Undesirable landscape changes, especially from large infrastructure projects, may give rise to large welfare losses due to degraded landscape experiences. These losses are largely unaccounted for in Nordic countries’ planning processes. There is a need to develop practical methods of including people’s preferences and the value of landscape impacts in policy assessments and decision-making. The project aims to explore how the ecosystem service approach and values of landscape experiences can be better incorporated in actual cases. The project developed a two-step approach to assess, value and incorporate landscape impacts and tested these in case studies based on EIA documentation. We found that despite the lack of information generated in the EIAs, the step-wise method significantly improved upon evidence and conclusions of how people are impacted due to landscape changes.

Undesirable landscape changes, especially from large infrastructure projects, may give rise to large welfare losses due to degraded landscape experiences. These losses are largely unaccounted for in Nordic countries’ planning processes. There is a need to develop practical methods of including people’s preferences and the value of landscape impacts in policy assessments and decision-making. The project aims to explore how the ecosystem service approach and values of landscape experiences can be better incorporated in actual cases. The project developed a two-step approach to assess, value and incorporate landscape impacts and tested these in case studies based on EIA documentation. We found that despite the lack of information generated in the EIAs, the step-wise method significantly improved upon evidence and conclusions of how people are impacted due to landscape changes.

This dissertation examines the economic efficiency of nutrient abatement measures in agriculture, focusing on the case of Finland. The thesis consists of an introduction article and four separate studies, which consider the problem of nutrient abatement from different angles. Nutrient abatement was put on the environmental policy agenda decades ago because of the adverse impacts of eutrophication in surface waters, and remains there as water quality, in Europe and elsewhere, has not reached satisfactory levels. In particular, the Water Framework Directive of the European Union requires the member states to reach a good ecological surface water status. In Finland, agriculture accounts for a major share of nutrient loads and could play an important role in achieving the water quality targets. However, the current environmental policy, relying on subsidies paid to farmers, has not met the abatement targets set for agriculture. As the European farm subsidy regime is revised, new environmental policies could be adopted. To identify the policies that would reach water protection targets, more information on costs-efficient measures is required. The objective of this dissertation is to estimate nutrient abatement costs in agriculture and to rank the measures in terms of cost-efficiency. The focus is on the measures that have been considered in the agri-environmental support scheme. Analysis relies on empirical numerical models that are based on microeconomic theory. Numerical representative farm models were developed for dairy and crop production. Abatement costs were found to fluctuate, depending on the target abatement levels, environmental and market conditions as well as production structure of agriculture. It is argued that reaching the national abatement targets, set by the government for 2015, is unlikely; extending the measures currently common in Finland is insufficient. For such a high abatement targets, policies should aim at increasing the share of green fallow, which can be effective in cutting down both nitrogen and phosphorus loads and conserving biodiversity Tämä väitös tarkastelee maatalouden ravinnekuormituksen vähentämiskeinojen taloudellista tehokkuutta lähinnä suomalaiseen aineistoon nojautuen. Tutkimus koostuu johdantoluvusta ja neljästä artikkelista, joissa kuvataan tutkimuskysymystä eri näkökulmista. Johtuen vesistöjen rehevöitymisen haitallisista vaikutuksista, ravinteiden vähentäminen on ollut osa ympäristöpolitiikkaa Euroopassa ja muuallakin vuosikymmenten ajan. Ravinteiden vähentäminen on edelleen ajankohtainen ongelma, sillä vedenlaatu ei ole yhteiskunnallisesti tyydyttävällä tasolla. Etenkin Euroopan Unionin vesipuitedirektiivi edellyttää jäsenvaltioitansa tavoittamaan vesistöjen hyvän ekologisen tilan. Suomessa maatalouden osuus ravinnekuormituksesta on merkittävä ja sillä voi olla merkittävä rooli vesiensuojelutavoitteiden saavuttamisessa. Tästä huolimatta tukiaisiin perustuva maatalouden ympäristöpolitiikka ei ole toteuttanut maataloudelle asetettuja ravinteiden vähennystavoitteita. Euroopan yhteisen maatalouspolitiikan muutos mahdollistaa maatalouden ympäristöohjauksen kehittämisen. Vesiensuojelutavoitteet saavuttavan ympäristöpolitiikan suunnittelemiseksi on tunnettava vähennyskeinojen tehokkuus ja kustannukset. Tämän väitöksen tavoitteena on arvioida ravinteiden vähentämisen kustannuksia suomen maataloudessa ja asettaa vähennyskeinot järjestykseen kustannustehokkuuden perusteella. Pääpaino on maatalouden ympäristötukijärjestelmän toimenpiteillä. Analyysi nojaa mikrotalousteorian pohjalta laadittuihin laskentamalleihin, jotka käyttävät empiiristä aineistoa. Tutkimuksessa luotiin maito ja peltoviljely -tuotantosuuntia edustavat tilamallit. Tuloksista käy ilmi että ravinnekuormituksen vähentämisen kustannukset vaihtelevat riippuen vähennystasoista, ympäristöllisistä tekijöistä, markkinatilanteesta ja tuotantosuunnista. Kansallisten maataloudelle vuoteen 2015 asetettujen vähennystavoitteiden saavuttaminen nykyisten keinojen avulla vaikuttaa epätodennäköiseltä. Kun vähennystavoitteet on asetettu korkealle, niiden saavuttamiseksi tähtäävän politiikan kannattaisi lisätä viherkesantojen osuutta, sillä siten on tehokasta vähentää sekä typpeä että fosforia ja toisaalta suojella biodiversiteettiä.

Targeting has become the buzz word in the national agri-environmental policy reform in Finland. It is generally accepted that more environmental benefits could be reaped by implementing environmental protection measures where they have the biggest positive impact. However, considering one of the main environmental problems in Finland resulting from agriculture, eutrophication, the identification of first-best policy or even the biggest contributors among the diffuse nutrient sources remains as a considerable challenge. The model developed in this study aims to demonstrate how the agricultural nutrient load potential can be calculated in a way which supports the identifying of cost-efficient abatement policies. We use metamodeling of dynamic nutrient load model (ICECREAM) to establish load parameters for non linear economic optimization to derive abatement cost functions for nutrient loads of 2 Finnish catchments. We calculate the difference in costs of the spatially optimal allocation of reduction measures and compare with the costs based on average non-targeted measures.

Targeting has become the buzz word in the national agri-environmental policy reform in Finland. It is generally accepted that more environmental benefits could be reaped by implementing environmental protection measures where they have the biggest positive impact. However, considering one of the main environmental problems in Finland resulting from agriculture, eutrophication, the identification of first-best policy or even the biggest contributors among the diffuse nutrient sources remains as a considerable challenge. The model developed in this study aims to demonstrate how the agricultural nutrient load potential can be calculated in a way which supports the identifying of cost-efficient abatement policies. We use metamodeling of dynamic nutrient load model (ICECREAM) to establish load parameters for non linear economic optimization to derive abatement cost functions for nutrient loads of 2 Finnish catchments. We calculate the difference in costs of the spatially optimal allocation of reduction measures and compare with the costs based on average non-targeted measures.

This study introduces a prototype model for evaluating policies to abate agricultural nutrients in the Baltic Sea from a Finnish national point of view. The stochastic simulation model integrates nutrient dynamics of nitrogen and phosphorus in the sea basins adjoining the Finnish coast, nutrient loads from land and other sources, benefits from nutrient abatement (in the form of recreation and other ecosystem services) and the costs of agricultural abatement activities. The aim of this study is to present the overall structure of the model and to demonstrate its potential using preliminary parameters. The model is made flexible for further improvements in all of its ecological and economic components. Results of a sensitivity analysis suggest that investments in reducing the nutrient runoff from arable land in Finland would become profitable only if Finland’s neighbors in the northern Baltic committed themselves to similar reductions. Environmental investments for improving water quality yield the highest returns for the Bothnian Bay and the Gulf of Finland, and smaller returns for the Bothnian Sea. In the Bothnian Bay, the abatement activities become profitable because the riverine loads from Finland represent a high proportion of the total nutrient loads. In the Gulf of Finland, this proportion is low, but the size of the coastal population benefiting from improved water quality is high.

This study introduces a prototype model for evaluating policies to abate agricultural nutrients in the Baltic Sea from a Finnish national point of view. The stochastic simulation model integrates nutrient dynamics of nitrogen and phosphorus in the sea basins adjoining the Finnish coast, nutrient loads from land and other sources, benefits from nutrient abatement (in the form of recreation and other ecosystem services) and the costs of agricultural abatement activities. The aim of this study is to present the overall structure of the model and to demonstrate its potential using preliminary parameters. The model is made flexible for further improvements in all of its ecological and economic components. Results of a sensitivity analysis suggest that investments in reducing the nutrient runoff from arable land in Finland would become profitable only if Finland’s neighbors in the northern Baltic committed themselves to similar reductions. Environmental investments for improving water quality yield the highest returns for the Bothnian Bay and the Gulf of Finland, and smaller returns for the Bothnian Sea. In the Bothnian Bay, the abatement activities become profitable because the riverine loads from Finland represent a high proportion of the total nutrient loads. In the Gulf of Finland, this proportion is low, but the size of the coastal population benefiting from improved water quality is high.

Economists often rely on stylised models for analysis of environmental policies. This study demonstrates that abstracting from soil and topography can have profound effect on marginal abatement costs of nutrient loads. By extending earlier bioeconomic models to represent heterogeneous soils and slopes, it is possible to show that targeting the abatement methods on high load risk areas allows low cost reduction. Ignoring the heterogeneity can lead to significant overestimates of the abatement costs and hence to misleading policy recommendations. The results hold even for relatively Flat areas, such as the watershed of River Kalajoki, for which the model was applied to.

Economists often rely on stylised models for analysis of environmental policies. This study demonstrates that abstracting from soil and topography can have profound effect on marginal abatement costs of nutrient loads. By extending earlier bioeconomic models to represent heterogeneous soils and slopes, it is possible to show that targeting the abatement methods on high load risk areas allows low cost reduction. Ignoring the heterogeneity can lead to significant overestimates of the abatement costs and hence to misleading policy recommendations. The results hold even for relatively Flat areas, such as the watershed of River Kalajoki, for which the model was applied to.

Agricultural primary production is extensively influenced by policies and regulation. On the level of European Union the common agricultural policy (CAP), frames the production environment. This study analyses the conflict of environmental and income policies in the context of CAP reform, eutrophication, the Water Framework Directive and Finnish policies. As targets of the policies do not coincide and often conflict, the environmental problems of farming have not been solved in the past decades. The comparative analysis is conducted quantitatively under static non-linear optimisation framework of representative farms of cereal and milk production regions of Finland. The results indicate that the decoupling of subsidies from production has enabled more efficient abatement policy. The current policies are still far away from the first best abatement solution. According to the results, main policy failures lie in uniform instruments, which even on a national level ignore the heterogeneous farm structures and environmental conditions. Instead of providing tailored instruments for nutrient load problems, the reform of Finnish agri-environmental subsidy scheme fails to respond to growth trends of nutrient loads on animal intensive regions.

Agricultural primary production is extensively influenced by policies and regulation. On the level of European Union the common agricultural policy (CAP), frames the production environment. This study analyses the conflict of environmental and income policies in the context of CAP reform, eutrophication, the Water Framework Directive and Finnish policies. As targets of the policies do not coincide and often conflict, the environmental problems of farming have not been solved in the past decades. The comparative analysis is conducted quantitatively under static non-linear optimisation framework of representative farms of cereal and milk production regions of Finland. The results indicate that the decoupling of subsidies from production has enabled more efficient abatement policy. The current policies are still far away from the first best abatement solution. According to the results, main policy failures lie in uniform instruments, which even on a national level ignore the heterogeneous farm structures and environmental conditions. Instead of providing tailored instruments for nutrient load problems, the reform of Finnish agri-environmental subsidy scheme fails to respond to growth trends of nutrient loads on animal intensive regions.

Tässä selvityksessä tarkastellaan missä maatalouden ravinnekuormitukseen kohdistuvan nykyisen ohjauksen keskeiset ongelmat ovat, mitä hyötyjä ja muita huomioon otettavia seikkoja liittyy mahdollisten verojen käyttöön sekä mihin maatalouden vesistökuormitusta rajoittavassa ympäristöohjauksessa tulisi tulevaisuudessa kiinnittää huomiota. Kehitettävät asiat liittyvät toisaalta toimenpiteiden kohdentamiseen ja toisaalta ohjauksen kannustavuuteen. Selvityksen vertailukohtana käytetään Euroopan Unionin yhteistä maatalouspolitiikkaa sekä siihen liittyvää ympäristötukijärjestelmää erityisesti tukijärjestelmän niiden toimenpiteiden osalta, joilla pyritään suoraan vaikuttamaan ravinteiden käyttöön maataloudessa. Selvityksessä todetaan, ettei lannoiteverolla yksinään pystytä korvaamaan nykyistä ympäristötukijärjestelmää eikä se toisaalta olisikaan mahdollisen veron tarkoitus. Nykyisessä järjestelmässä lannoitevero olisi ennen kaikkea tiedollisen ohjauksen tehostamiskeino. Lannoiteveron avulla olisi mahdollista jossain määrin tehostaa maatalouden vesiensuojelua. Maatalouden koko tuki- ja verojärjestelmän tarkastelu ennen seuraavaa tukijärjestelmäuudistusta olisi perusteltu etenemistapa.

Designing efficient agri-environmental policies for agricultural nutrient load reductions calls for information on the costs of emission reduction measures. This study develops an empirical framework for estimating abatement costs for nutrient loading from agricultural land. Nitrogen abatement costs and the phosphorus load reductions associated with nitrogen abatement are derived for crop farming in southern Finland. The model is used to evaluate the effect of the Common Agricultural Policy reform currently underway on nutrient abatement costs. Results indicate that an efficiently designed policy aimed at a 50 % reduction in agricultural nitrogen load would cost $25 to $28 million, or $1995 to $2197 per farm.

Designing efficient agri-environmental policies for agricultural nutrient load reductions calls for information on the costs of emission reduction measures. This study develops an empirical framework for estimating abatement costs for nutrient loading from agricultural land. Nitrogen abatement costs and the phosphorus load reductions associated with nitrogen abatement are derived for crop farming in southern Finland. The model is used to evaluate the effect of the Common Agricultural Policy reform currently underway on nutrient abatement costs. Results indicate that an efficiency designed policy aimed at a 50 % reducton in agricultural nitrogen load would cost 25 to 28 million euro, or 1995 to 2197 euro per farm.

Designing efficient agri-environmental policies for agricultural nutrient load reductions calls for information on the costs of emission reduction measures. This study develops an empirical framework for estimating abatement costs for nutrient loading from agricultural land. Nitrogen abatement costs and the phosphorus load reductions associated with nitrogen abatement are derived for crop farming in southern Finland. The model is used to evaluate the effect of the Common Agricultural Policy reform currently underway on nutrient abatement costs. Results indicate that an efficiently designed policy aimed at a 50 % reduction in agricultural nitrogen load would cost $25 to $28 million, or $1995 to $2197 per farm.

Successful transitions to agroecology require shared understanding of the sustainability implications of transitions for food systems. To gain such understanding, a transdisciplinary approach is increasingly called for by funders, end users of research and scientists. Transdisciplinary processes were used in the UNISECO project to develop strategic pathways that enable transitions to agroecology in case studies across Europe. These strategic pathways were combined with scenarios of EU food systems in 2050, in which combinations of agroecological farming and food consumption practices were assessed. These were then reviewed considering selected UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a reference for discussing the sustainability implications of transitions to agroecology. Sustainability implications were identified for several SDGs including Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Quality Education (SDG 4), Responsible Consumption and Production (SDG 12), Climate Action (SDG 13) and Life on Land (SDG 15). Key factors contributing to the sustainability of transitions to agroecology are: i) mature social capital and improved farmer knowledge of the benefits of agroecological practices; ii) strengthened collaborative actions and collective institutions to increase negotiating power within the value-chain; and, iii) changes in consumer behaviour and diets. These factors highlight the need for a food system perspective in transitions to agroecology and supporting policies. This in turn highlights the meaningful role of transdisciplinary research in strengthening the sustainability of European food systems.

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901.

The overall aim of the UNISECO project is to provide recommendations on how the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems (AEFS) in Europe can be promoted. These recommendations build upon multi-actor engagement and practice-validated strategies. The project explores both of these approaches in 15 case studies across Europe. Every case study reflects an AEFS at a certain point of transition towards agro-ecological farming systems. A first step in all of the case studies was to characterize the status quo of the farm systems. Along with other methods to describe the status quo, three decision support tools (DST) were applied in the case studies to provide information on the environmental, economic and social performance of current AEFS. The tools applied were COMPAS, an economic performance assessment tool, Cool Farm Tool, a greenhouse gas inventory tool, and SMART, a multidimensional sustainability tool. This deliverable presents the overall approach taken to assess the farms along the agro-ecological transition, describes the tools, and presents results from their application in the case studies. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement N° 773901.

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901

https://panda.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=ccd71365171a43ab9c9b7de1de6d4e7b Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901.

Story maps are a specific form of website to tell stories by making use of multimedia elements such as pictures, maps and videos. The purpose of story maps in UNISECO is to share the results of the assessment of social-ecological systems (SES) in the case studies with a wider public. The story maps also build on the results of sustainability assessments in Task 3.2 (Landert et al., 2019) and the governance and network assessment in Task 5.2 (Vanni et al., 2019). These story maps comprise easily understood messages from farmers, rural communities and civil society, businesses and authorities referencing environmental, social, economic and governance issues across rural areas in 15 countries of Europe. The story maps were the basis for co-constructing strategies to support transition of farming systems towards agroecology. The final UNISECO outcomes informed then again an update of existing and new story maps, leading to an updated set of story maps published on the website of the European Network for Rural Development, on WWF Globil and in Deliverable D3.6.

In 15 case studies representing different European farming systems and stages along the agro-ecological transition, related barriers have been analysed and strategies co-constructed with the Multi-Actor Platforms over the course of the UNISECO project. The strategies are the result of different assessments (such as sustainability assessment or social network analysis), interviews and workshops with local stakeholders. Narratives that derive the main lessons learnt on governance changes and sustainability implications of agro-ecological transitions have been developed in a set of web pages (story maps) to make the research outcomes accessible in an easy to understand language to practitioners, policy stakeholders and the wider public. While there are unique lessons learnt in each case study, there are three common domains of lessons learnt, namely (1) knowledge and social capital, (2) market access, processing and value added and (3) innovative policy support. Based on existing policies such as support for organic farming, the latter needs specially to focus on fostering cooperation, supporting of the knowledge system, result-based payments and green public procurement. UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901. This publication reflects only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

This report is Deliverable D6.2 in Work package 6 “Integrated sustainability assessment, end-user tools and recommendations” of the H2020 project UNISECO. This report integrates the results of the case studies on agro-ecological transitions with the territorial level assessments and explores the potential contributions of the strategies for agro-ecological transitions to the Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs). The review of the potential contributions to the SDGs pays particular attention to the role of the transdisciplinary research approach in UNISECO, and the strengths and weaknesses of the co-construction of strategies for agro-ecological transitions in strengthening the sustainability of farming systems in Europe. The review builds on the main results of the UNISECO project, including: i) co-constructed strategies for agro-ecological transitions in the case studies (Schwarz et al., 2021, D3.4; Galioto et al., 2021, D5.4); ii) assessments of the implementation of agro-ecological practices at farm level (Landert et al., 2019, D3.1; Albanito et al., 2021, D3.5); iii) territorial level assessments of large-scale implementations of agro-ecological practices in the context of different food scenarios (Mayer et al., 2021, D4.3; Röös et al., 2021, D4.2); iv evaluation of the transdisciplinary approach and the engagement of actors in Multi-Actor Platforms (Smyrniotopoulou and Vlahos, 2021; D7.3). UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901. This publication reflects only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Agro-ecological approaches are fundamental for sustainable food production in the future, and the overarching objective of UNISECO is to co-develop improved and practice-validated strategies and incentives for the promotion of improved agro-ecological approaches. The key dilemma is how to produce public goods whilst maintaining viable production of private goods, securing economic and social sustainability at a farm level. In this context, it is important to identify the farm management changes and innovative agro-ecological practices with win-win relationships and those with fewer trade-offs between social, ecological and economic dimensions. In this report (Deliverable report D3.5), we investigate this question by exploring, in thirteen European case studies, the sustainability implications of implementing a range of different agro-ecological practices (AEPs) as part of different transitions strategies towards more sustainable agriculture. We implemented an analytical framework including the use of decision support tools (DSTs) to convey process-based information on the performance of 28 different AEPs, co-developed with local stakeholders, that are expected to improve the resilience and sustainability of farms. In particular, through the DSTs we identified and analysed 17 sustainability indicators that convey information on the potential environmental and socio-economic synergies and trade-offs, arising from the implementation of different AEPs at farm level. We classified different AEPs across three different categories: i) Efficiency increase, ii) Substitution practices, and iii) Farm re-design. The category “Efficiency increase” included technological AEPs such as the installation of weather stations to integrate real time pest monitoring with fast prevention activities in vineyards, or improvement of mineral balance in ruminant diets through the provision of enriched boluses, or the re-configuration of canopies in tree orchards to enhance their productivity and resilience. Overall, these AEPs showed only win-win situations generated from livestock and crop health and yield provision. The category “substitution practices” included the simulation of distinct AEPs, such as soil organic fertilization, use of biofertilizers and biofuels, as well as more complex strategies such as organic agriculture. Overall, this category emphasised the centrality for agro-ecological practices in reducing the use of external inputs and the simultaneous improvement in the quality and use-efficiency of input at farm level. Depending on the approach applied in the simulation of the AEPs, the transition from mineral to organic fertilization generated trade-offs between the increase of biodiversity benefits and the provision of yield, and between the carbon footprint and yield at farm level. Finally, the “re-design” category includes single or bundle of AEPs, which are aimed at soil conservation and biodiversity benefits and increasing the diversification of farming systems. These included conservation agriculture practices, such as reduced tillage, permanent soil cover through cover crops or mulching, and intercropping with nitrogen fixing crops, the extensification of mixed crop-livestock systems, and more complex farm re-design driven by the reorganization of the resources in the farms and the reshuffling of arrangements ‘downstream’ of farms. Given the heterogeneity of this category, the environmental and socio-economic sustainability of the above agro-ecological strategies depended on several external factors such as farm type and size, initial farm infrastructure, as well as the dilemmas and objectives characterising the agricultural decision context in each case study. In this report, we outline the effect on the relationships between different farm-level sustainability indicators, as a result from the implementation of agro-ecological practices. UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901. This publication reflects only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

The overall objective of this report is to summarise the analysis of barriers and drivers hindering or facilitating the implementation of agro-ecological practices, and the strategies identified that address the barriers and drivers of agro-ecological transitions in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. The co-construction of the transition strategies with the local actors aims to propose changes in the governance of the farming system to address the key barriers and drivers of implementing the practices, and to identify market and policy incentives that are expected to support an agro-ecological transition. Particular attention is paid on how cooperation between actors can help to address the key drivers and barriers. Key aspects for successful agro-ecological transitions are improved knowledge on the benefits of agro-ecological practices and economic opportunities, the importance of education, training and life-long learning, and mature social capital and strengthened collaborative action and collective institutions in agro-ecological value chains. This would enable higher prices to be charged for agro-ecological products and utilise the potential of agro-ecological farming to be economically viable. Such processes need to be supported by policy and the public sector, to address issues of economic exploitation and power relations as well as problems of over-consumption and food waste in food chains, with implications for public health, social justice and food security. The outcome of the co-construction of the strategies has informed: i) the assessment of trade-offs at farm level (Albanito et al., 2021, Deliverable D3.5) by providing information on the farm management changes and agro-ecological practices that are seen as effective and acceptable; ii) the multi-criteria assessment of policy instruments and incentives (Galioto et al., 2021, Deliverable D5.4) by identifying innovative market and policy incentives that are suitable to promote agro-ecological transition; and iii) the lessons learnt for agro-ecological transitions reflecting the different local and place-based context of the story maps from each case study (Landert et al., 2021, Deliverable D3.6). This document is Deliverable D3.4 in Work package “Assessment at farm level” of the EU Horizon 2020 project UNISECO. UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project on: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901. This publication reflects only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Story maps are a specific form of website to tell stories by making use of multimedia elements such as pictures, maps and videos. The purpose of story maps in UNISECO is to share the results of the assessment of social-ecological systems (SES) in the case studies with a wider public. The story maps also build on the results of sustainability assessments in Task 3.2 (Landert et al., 2019) and the governance and network assessment in Task 5.2 (Vanni et al., 2019). These story maps comprise easily understood messages from farmers, rural communities and civil society, businesses and authorities referencing environmental, social, economic and governance issues across rural areas in 15 countries of Europe. The story maps were the basis for co-constructing strategies to support transition of farming systems towards agroecology. The final UNISECO outcomes informed then again an update of existing and new story maps, leading to an updated set of story maps published on the website of the European Network for Rural Development, on WWF Globil and in Deliverable D3.6.