Search

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.

The environmental impact assessment of rural development policies is an issue that needs to be constantly monitored by both practitioners and policy makers within the EU and its Member States. Impact assessment methodologies are well established in the literature on agri-environmental policies, both at micro and macro scale, considering different public goods (water, biodiversity, etc.) as specific foci of these policies. However, there are several challenges and gaps related to their use, concerning both the fitness of indicators, models and methodologies for the expected outcomes, and the adoption of the most suitable scale for the analysis. This report presents a conceptual framework in order to systematise the most commonly used methodologies to assess micro-level environmental performance of agricultural policies. It deals with issues relating to the specific use for some methodologies (or models, or indicators) for a single public good, aiming to contribute to systematise the current knowledge on evaluation methods. It tries to clarify the role of methodologies and their integration in the evaluation process, particularly to fill the gap of knowledge of the agriculture-environment relationships within the complexity of multi-scale and multi-levels approaches. From a micro-level perspective, it is important to consider the role of individuals and analyse in depth the different forms of organisation (spatial, networks, hierarchies) and interactions among different organisational and intervening levels. Only with multi-scale integration and the combination of results it is possible to efficiently generalise (up-scale) micro-level results in a macro-level perspective. Field measurements, farm management surveys and farming system models essentially refer to the farm as the simplest management unit of an agricultural system, analysed from the point of view of a farmer who decides whether or not to participate in rural development schemes. In most of the case study areas only naïve quantitative analysis has been applied due to difficulties in data availability and data access, with negative effects from the methodological point of view when the statistical significance of the parameters was not verified. The statistics-based approach to the counterfactual needs well-defined samples with a sufficient number of observations to perform regression models and spatial analysis.

The purpose of the ENVIEVAL Handbook is to provide guidance on a methodological framework for use in the evaluation of the environmental impacts of RDP measures and programmes. The Handbook provides flexible guidance to evaluators and managing authorities on a process for designing evaluations of the net effects of RDP measures and is not an ‘off the shelf’ recipe book. It focuses on the establishment of a suitable counterfactual and the delivery of an assessment of net effects with a requirement for consistency between micro and macro level evaluations. The Handbook presents a range of possible solutions (e.g. counterfactual scenario setup or choice of appropriate methods for data analysis) with an aim of selecting the most appropriate options for use in evaluations. The output is a basis for deciding on the most consistent and cost-effective approach. The Handbook is developed around a logic model of the process of assessing the environmental effects of RDP measures. It functions as a methodological framework, guiding the evaluator and managing authority through the design of the evaluation, suggesting different routes depending upon factors such as data availability or type of indicator selected. The step-by-step flow of the logic model(s) helps in the design of a consistent evaluation workflow. An aim of the Handbook is to help the evaluator to design the ex-ante evaluation in the overall context of the programme, and RDPs and area of interest, in a step-by-step guide for mid-term and ex-post assessments. Competent authorities can use the handbook as support for the overall design of the Terms of References for RDP evaluations. The ENVIEVAL Handbook summarizes the key characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of evaluation methods recommended, or available, for use in addressing the evaluation of net effects and environmental impacts with respect to a range of public goods. The conceptual description of the different evaluation steps is supported by practical examples of their application and fact sheets of the indicators and methods tested in the ENVIEVAL project which provide information about how to address evaluation challenges, as defined by stakeholders. This handbook compliments the range of guidance documents dedicated to the evaluation of RDPs, in particular those developed by the European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.

The main aim of the report is to provide an overview of the results of the case studies testing a range of indicators and methods for the evaluation of rural development measures and Rural Development Programme (RDP) impacts on environmental public goods, and to derive recommendations for adjustments to the methodological framework in WP3 to WP5 as a basis for the methodological handbook (Morkvenas et al., 2015). &nbsp

The final outcome of the ENVIEVAL project is a handbook for the evaluation of environmental impacts of RDPs summarising the key characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of the different developed and tested indicators and evaluation methods in response to the main evaluation challenges. An important part of the handbook is the fact sheets for the different indicators and evaluation tools. The fact sheets are the final outcome of WP8 and provide a short summary of the main characteristics of the indicators and methods tested in the ENVIEVAL project. They provide information on why and for which policy aspects the indicators or methods can be used, and where the required data can be sourced and obtained. The fact sheets summarise the strengths and weaknesses of the indicators and methods, and highlight their contribution to addressing the main challenges. An adjusted ‘SWOT’ framework is used to synthesise the key advantages, disadvantages and contributions of the indicator / method. The general structure of the indicator and method fact sheets is as follows: Indicator fact sheets: Definition / description of the indicator, including environmental public good, type of indicator, reflected RDP priority and focus area, unit of measurement, type of data required and scale and level of application Existing data sources including EU, member states and regional databases Context of the case study testing, including case study area, policy context, used data and evaluation approach tested Strengths and weaknesses of the indicator Recommended application Method fact sheets: Definition / description of the method, including the environmental public good, type of method, micro or macro level application General requirements Including data requirements and skill requirements Consideration of counterfactuals Context of the case study testing, including case study area, policy context, used data and evaluation approach tested Strengths and weaknesses of the method Recommended application The indicator fact sheets focus on additional non-CMES indicator tested in the ENVIEVAL project for their contributions to address indicator gaps in environmental evaluations of RDPs. The method fact sheets focus on advanced modelling approaches tested at micro and macro level for dealing with the complexity of public goods, considering other intervening factors and providing solutions for situations without (or very limited) non-participants. The fact sheets were reviewed by the stakeholder reference group and their comments and feedback integrated in the final version of the fact sheets. In addition, a selection of fact sheets was presented and discussed at the final project conference in Brussels on the 19th of November 2015.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.