Search

Your search keyword '"Burgess, P.J."' showing total 101 results
Start Over Author "Burgess, P.J."
101 results on '"Burgess, P.J."'

1. Characterising current agroecological and regenerative farming research capability and infrastructure, and examining the case for a Living Lab network [Final report]

Author

Staley, J.T., McCracken, M.E., Redhead, J.R., Hurley, P.D., Rose, D.C., Burgess, P.J., Staley, J.T., McCracken, M.E., Redhead, J.R., Hurley, P.D., Rose, D.C., and Burgess, P.J.

Abstract

Agriculture is a major cause of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, biodiversity loss, and pollution. Agroecological and regenerative farming have been advocated as alternative approaches that may have fewer negative (or even net positive) environmental impacts than conventional agriculture at farm- and landscape-scales, leading to considerable interest in these approaches (Newton et al. 2020; Bohan et al. 2022; Prost et al. 2023). This report forms the third part of a Defra-funded project Evaluating the productivity, environmental sustainability and wider impacts of agroecological and regenerative farming systems compared to conventional systems. The first part of this project was a rapid evidence review of agroecological and regenerative farming systems and their impacts (Burgess et al. 2023), and the second reported interview findings to examine farmer and stakeholder perspectives on barriers and enablers in agroecological and regenerative farming (Hurley et al. 2023). This third part of the project characterised the current research capability in agroecology and regenerative farming, and explored the potential role of a new ‘living lab’ trial network. Three objectives are addressed in this report: 1) Characterise the existing agroecological and regenerative farming research capability and infrastructure in the UK. 2) Explore lessons from recent research initiatives and identify key research gaps, to inform a potential UK living labs trials network in agroecology/regenerative farming. 3) Develop recommendations for a new living lab trial or research network in agroecology/regenerative farming. Objective 1 was addressed through an online survey to gather quantitative and qualitative data on current research initiatives and networks in regenerative farming and agroecology. There were 22 respondents from 20 organisations (Section 2.2). Key findings from the survey: • The size and the timescales of research initiatives varied substantially from single sites to networks o

Published
2024

4. Evaluating the productivity, environmental sustainability and wider impacts of agroecological compared to conventional farming systems [Evidence project final report]

Author

Burgess, P.J., Staley, J., Hurley, P.D., Rose, D.C., Redhead, J., McCracken, M.E., Girkin, N., Deeks, L., Harris, J.A., Burgess, P.J., Staley, J., Hurley, P.D., Rose, D.C., Redhead, J., McCracken, M.E., Girkin, N., Deeks, L., and Harris, J.A.

Abstract

•Context, aim and objectives: Existing agriculture systems in the UK are effective at producing safe and relatively cheap food, but they are a cause of greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, and soil degradation. It has been proposed that greater use of agroecological and regenerative farming would lead to more positive effects. The aim of this project was to evaluate the productivity, environmental sustainability and wider impacts of agroecological compared to conventional farming, by addressing three objectives: 1. to undertake an evidence review of regenerative/agroecological farming systems, 2. to assess the risks, barriers and opportunities, and identifying gaps in the knowledge, and 3. to characterise agroecological farming research capability in the UK, explore gaps and priorities, and explore the potential role of a new “living lab” trial network. •The research has been presented in three separate reports (Burgess et al. 2023, Hurley et al. 2023, and Staley et al. 2023), which are attached as appendices. The main results are summarised here. •Method: Objective 1 was addressed using a desk-based rapid evidence review, and the level of confidence in the analysis was determined using the IPBES four-box model (IPBES 2017, 2018). Objective 2 was addressed by in-depth semi-structured interviews with 23 respondents including farmers in late 2022. The interviews were used to explore definitions of agroecological and regenerative farming, barriers to the adoption, and views towards the concept of ‘living labs’. Objective 3 was addressed through an online survey with 22 respondents from 20 organisations in January and February 2023, an online workshop with 34 participants in January 2023, and informed by the findings of work to address Objectives 1 and 2. •Results and discussion: 1.1 Defining and characterising agroecological farming systems. A review of definitions highlighted, in brief, that organic farming places strong restrictions on inputs, agroecological

Published
2024

14. Whole system valuation of arable, agroforestry and tree-only systems at three case study sites in Europe

Author

Giannitsopoulos, M.L., Graves, A.R., Burgess, P.J., Crous-Duran, J., Moreno, G., Herzog, F., Palma, J.H.N., Kay, S., García de Jalón, S., Giannitsopoulos, M.L., Graves, A.R., Burgess, P.J., Crous-Duran, J., Moreno, G., Herzog, F., Palma, J.H.N., Kay, S., and García de Jalón, S.

Abstract

There is an increasing demand to study the long-term effects of land use from both local farm and wider societal and environmental perspectives. This study applied an approach to evaluate both the financial profitability of arable, agroforestry, and tree-only systems and the wider societal benefits over a period of 30-60 years. The biophysical inputs and yields from the three systems were modelled for three case study sites in the United Kingdom, Spain, and Switzerland, using a tree and crop simulation model called Yield-SAFE. A bio-economic model called Farm-SAFE was then used to compare the financial (EAVF) and economic (or societal) equivalent annual values (EAVE) by including monetary values for five environmental externalities: carbon dioxide emissions, carbon sequestration, soil erosion by water, and nitrogen and phosphorus balances. Across the three case studies, arable farming generated higher farm incomes than the agroforestry or tree-only systems, but the arable systems also created the greatest environmental costs. By comparison the agroforestry and tree-only systems generated lower CO2 emissions and sequestered more carbon. Applying monetary values to the environmental externalities meant that the EAVE of the agroforestry and tree-only systems were greater or similar to that for the arable system in the UK case study. In Spain, the slow predicted growth of the trees meant that, even after including the environmental externalities, the arable system created greater societal benefit than the agroforestry and tree-only systems. In Switzerland, including the environmental externalities increased the attraction of the tree-only system, but the high subsidies for arable and agroforestry systems meant that the EAVE for the agroforestry and arable systems were the most attractive from a farmer’s perspective. A breakeven analysis was used to determine the environmental externality values at which the agroforestry and tree-only systems produced the same societal r

Published
2021

15. Quantifying regulating ecosystem services with increased tree densities on European Farmland

Author

Crous-Duran, J., Graves, A.R., de Jalón, S.G., Kay, S., Burgess, P.J., Giannitsopoulos, M., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Graves, A.R., de Jalón, S.G., Kay, S., Burgess, P.J., Giannitsopoulos, M., and Palma, J.H.N.

Abstract

Agroforestry systems have been compared to agricultural and forestry alternatives, providing a land-use solution for additional environmental benefits while maintaining similar levels of productivity. However, there is scarce research assessing such patterns across a pan-European scale using a common methodology. This study aims to improve our understanding of the role of trees in three different regulating ecosystem services—(1) soil erosion, (2) nitrate leaching and (3) carbon sequestration—in traditional and innovative agroforestry systems in Europe through a consistent modeling approach. The systems’ assessment spans environmentally from the Mediterranean environmental region in Portugal to the Continental environmental region in Switzerland and Germany to the Atlantic environmental region in the United Kingdom. Modeled tree densities were compared in the different land-use alternatives, ranging from zero (agriculture with only crops or pasture) to forestry (only trees). The methodology included the use of a biophysical model (Yield-SAFE) where the quantification of the environmental benefits was integrated. Results show a consistent improvement of regulating ecosystem services can be expected when introducing trees in the farming landscapes in different environmental regions in Europe. For all the systems, the forestry alternatives presented the best results in terms of a decrease in soil erosion of 51% (±29), a decrease of nearly all the nitrate leaching (98% ± 1) and an increase in the carbon sequestration of up to 238 Mg C ha−1 (±140). However, these alternatives are limited in the variety of food, energy and/or materials provided. On the other hand, from an arable or pure-pasture alternative starting point, an increase in agroforestry tree density could also be associated with a decrease in soil erosion of up to 25% (±17), a decrease in nitrates leached of up to 52% (±34) and an increase in the carbon sequestered of 163 Mg C ha−1 (±128) while at the same ti

Published
2020

16. Dry deposition of air pollutants on trees at regional scale: A case study in the Basque Country

Author

García de Jalón, S., Burgess, P.J, Curiel Yuste, J., Moreno, G., Graves, A., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Kay, S., Chiabai, A., García de Jalón, S., Burgess, P.J, Curiel Yuste, J., Moreno, G., Graves, A., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Kay, S., and Chiabai, A.

Abstract

There is increased interest in the role of trees to reduce air pollution and thereby improve human health and well-being. This study determined the removal of air pollutants by dry deposition of trees across the Basque Country and estimated its annual economic value. A model that calculates the hourly dry deposition of NO2, O3, SO2, CO and PM10 on trees at a 1 km x 1 km resolution at a regional scale was developed. The calculated mean annual rates of removal of air pollution across various land uses were 12.9 kg O3 ha-1, 12.7 kg PM10 ha-1, 3.0 kg NO2 ha-1, 0.8 kg SO2 ha-1 and 0.2 kg CO ha-1. The results were then categorised according to land use in order to determine how much each land use category contributed to reducing air pollution and to determine to what extent trees provided pollution reduction benefits to society. Despite not being located in the areas of highest pollutions, coniferous forests, which cover 25% of the land, were calculated to absorb 21% of the air pollution. Compared to other land uses, coniferous forests were particularly effective in removing air pollution because of their high tree cover density and the duration of leaf life-span. The total economic value provided by the trees in reducing these pollutants in terms of health benefits was estimated to be 60 million yr-1 which represented around 0.09% of the Gross Domestic Product of the Basque Country in 2016. Whilst most health impacts from air pollution are in urban areas the results indicate that most air pollution is removed in rural areas. © 2019 Elsevier B.V.

Published
2020

22. UK food and nutrition security during and after the COVID‐19 pandemic

Author

Rivington, M., primary, King, R., additional, Duckett, D., additional, Iannetta, P., additional, Benton, T. G., additional, Burgess, P.J., additional, Hawes, C., additional, Wellesley, L., additional, Polhill, J. G., additional, Aitkenhead, M., additional, Lozada‐Ellison, L.‐M., additional, Begg, G., additional, Williams, A. G., additional, Newton, A., additional, Lorenzo‐Arribas, A., additional, Neilson, R., additional, Watts, C., additional, Harris, J., additional, Loades, K., additional, Stewart, D., additional, Wardell‐Johnson, D., additional, Gandossi, G., additional, Udugbezi, E., additional, Hannam, J.A., additional, and Keay, C., additional

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

26. Integrating belowground carbon dynamics into Yield-SAFE, a parameter sparse agroforestry model

Author

Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Graves, A.R., de Jalon, S.G., Upson, M., Oliveira, T.S., Paulo, J.A., Ferreiro-Domínguez, N., Moreno, G., Burgess, P.J., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Graves, A.R., de Jalon, S.G., Upson, M., Oliveira, T.S., Paulo, J.A., Ferreiro-Domínguez, N., Moreno, G., and Burgess, P.J.

Abstract

Agroforestry combines perennial woody elements (e.g. trees) with an agricultural understory (e.g. wheat, pasture) which can also potentially be used by a livestock component. In recent decades, modern agroforestry systems have been proposed at European level as land use alternatives for conventional agricultural systems. The potential range of benefits that modern agroforestry systems can provide includes farm product diversification (food and timber), soil and biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration, both in woody biomass and the soil. Whilst typically these include benefits such as food and timber provision, potentially, there are benefits in the form of carbon sequestration, both in woody biomass and in the soil. Quantifying the effect of agroforestry systems on soil carbon is important because it is one means by which atmospheric carbon can be sequestered in order to reduce global warming. However, experimental systems that can combine the different alternative features of agroforestry systems are difficult to implement and long-term. For this reason, models are needed to explore these alternatives, in order to determine what benefits different combinations of trees and understory might provide in agroforestry systems. This paper describes the integration of the widely used soil carbon model RothC, a model simulating soil organic carbon turnover, into Yield-SAFE, a parameter sparse model to estimate aboveground biomass in agroforestry systems. The improvement of the Yield-SAFE model focused on the estimation of input plant material into soil (i.e. leaf fall and root mortality) while maintaining the original aspiration for a simple conceptualization of agroforestry modeling, but allowing to feed inputs to a soil carbon module based on RothC. Validation simulations show that the combined model gives predictions consistent with observed data for both SOC dynamics and tree leaf fall. Two case study systems are examined: a cork oak system in South Portugal

Published
2018

27. Modelled agroforestry outputs at field and farm scale to support biophysical and environmental assessments

Author

Palma, J.H.N., Oliveira, T., Crous-Duran, J., Graves, A.R., Garcia de Jalon, S., Upson, M., Giannitsopoulos, M., Burgess, P.J., Tomé, Margarida, Ferreiro-Dominguez, N., Mosquera-Losada, M.R., Gonzalez-Hernandez, P., Kay, S., Mirk, J., Smith, J., Moreno, G., Pantera, A., Mantovani, D., Rosati, A., Luske, B., and Hermansen, J.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

Submitted by Margarida Galamba (galamba@isa.utl.pt) on 2018-01-29T14:46:13Z No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-4-Deliverable 6.17 Updated October 2017.pdf: 6016263 bytes, checksum: f3d745f09adc8d4c49f13fe302e5f284 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2018-01-29T14:46:13Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-4-Deliverable 6.17 Updated October 2017.pdf: 6016263 bytes, checksum: f3d745f09adc8d4c49f13fe302e5f284 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-10 N/A

Published
2017

28. Modelling the economics of agroforestry at field- and farm-scale

Author

Garcia de Jalon, S., Graves, A.R., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Giannitsopoulos, M., and Burgess, P.J.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

Submitted by Margarida Galamba (galamba@isa.utl.pt) on 2018-01-29T14:55:10Z No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-5Deliverable 6.18 Modelling the economics of agroforestry 2.pdf: 2557105 bytes, checksum: 2e6e29fea34a17984f7e2fbea68fc753 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2018-01-29T14:55:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-5Deliverable 6.18 Modelling the economics of agroforestry 2.pdf: 2557105 bytes, checksum: 2e6e29fea34a17984f7e2fbea68fc753 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-08-31 N/A

Published
2017

29. Forage-SAFE: a tool to assess the management and economics of wood pasture systems

Author

Garcia de Jalon, S., Graves, A., Moreno, G., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., and Burgess, P.J.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, wood pasture systems, Forage-SAFE, agroforestry
Abstract

Forage-SAFE is a spreadsheet model that has been developed within the AGFORWARD project to better understand the interactions between trees, the grass understorey and livestock on the profitability of wood pastures. It can be used to assess the daily balance between the demand for and the production of forage to estimate an annual farm net margin. It is possible to use the model to modify biophysical and financial parameters related to the tree, pasture and livestock components (such as tree cover density, carrying capacity and livestock species) in order to maximise net farm income N/A

Published
2017

30. Forage-SAFE: a tool to assess the management and economics of wood pasture systems

Author

García de Jalón, S.P.J., Graves, A., Moreno, G., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Oliveira, T., and Burgess, P.J.

Subjects
tree cover, Forage-SAFE, bio-economic profitability, wood pasture
Abstract

The Forage-SAFE model has been developed to better understand the impact of trees on the profitability of wood pastures. It assesses the daily balance between the demand for and production of forage to estimate an annual farm net margin. The model allows the modification of selected biophysical and financial parameters related to the tree, pasture and livestock components (such as tree cover density, carrying capacity and livestock species) which can be optimised to maximise net farm income. A case study in a dehesa wood pasture in South-western Spain was used to show the applicability of the model. The case study results showed that net margin was maximised at around 27% tree cover for a carrying capacity of 0.4 livestock unit per hectare from which 61% were ruminants and 39% Iberian pigs. The analysis also showed that high carrying capacities were positively correlated with tree cover profitability. This was accentuated as the proportion of Iberian pigs increased info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Published
2017

31. Initial modelled outputs at field scale

Author

Gosme, M., Blitz-Frayret, C., Burgess, P.J., Crous-Duran, J., Dupraz, C., Dux, D., Garcia de Jalon, S., Graves, A.R., Herzog, F., Lecomte, I., Moreno, G., Oliveira, T., Palma, J.H.N., Paulo, Joana Amaral, Sereke, F., and Tomé, Margarida

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

This report comprises Deliverable 6.16 in the project, which contributes to the third objective as it presents field-scale evaluation of innovations, in order to adapt and evaluate agroforestry designs and practices for locations where agroforestry is currently not-widely practised or declining. The modelling of outputs at field scale to support best agroforestry practices is an ongoing activity during the AGFORWARD project. This report highlights some of the outputs which has been produced in the form of three papers (either submitted or about to be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal) or in four presentations at the Third European Agroforestry Conference in May 2016 N/A

Published
2016

33. Agroforestry systems of high natural and cultural value in Europe: structure, management, goods and services

Author

Moreno, G., Aviron, S., Berg, S., Burgess, P.J., Caceres, Y., Crous-Duran, J., Faias, Sónia, Firmino, P.N., Fotiadis, G., Franca, A., Garcia de Jalon, S., Hartel, T., Lind, T., Lopez Bernal, A., Mantzanas, K., Mirck, J., Palma, J.H.N., Pantera, A., and Paulo, Joana Amaral

Subjects
Europe, value, agroforestry systems
Abstract

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Published
2016

34. Current extent of agroforestry in Europe

Author

Herder, M. den, Moreno, G., Mosquera-Losada, M.R., Palma, J.H.N., Sidiropoulou, A., Santiago Freijanes, J.J., Crous-Duran, J., Paulo, Joana Amaral, Tomé, Margarida, Pantera, A., Papanastasis, V., Mantzanas, K., Pachana, P., Plieninger, T., and Burgess, P.J.

Subjects
Europe, agroforestry
Abstract

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Published
2016

35. AGFORWARD: achievments during the first two years

Author

Burgess, P.J., den Herder, M., Garnet, K., Graves, A.R., Hermansen, J., Liagre, F., Moreno, G., Mosquera-Losada, M.R., Palma, J.H.N., Pantera, A., Plieninger, T., and Mirck, J.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Published
2016

36. Current extent and trends of agroforestry in the EU27

Author

Herder, Michael den, Moreno, Gerardo, Mosquera-Losada, Rosa, Palma, J.H.N., Sidopoulou, Anna, Santiago Freijanes, Jose Javier, Crous-Duran, Josep, Paulo, Joana Amaral, Tomé, Margarida, Pantera, Anastasia, Papanastasis, Vasileios, Mantzanas, Konstantinos, Pachana, Przemko, and Burgess, P.J.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

Submitted by Margarida Galamba (galamba@isa.utl.pt) on 2016-02-03T16:27:31Z No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-AGFORWARD.pdf: 7821260 bytes, checksum: 00a0ac3619a9b910f14210a6f2581c6d (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2016-02-03T16:27:31Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-AGFORWARD.pdf: 7821260 bytes, checksum: 00a0ac3619a9b910f14210a6f2581c6d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-12-04

Published
2015

37. Database of agroforestry system descriptions. Milestone Report 28 (6.3) for EU FP7 Research Project

Author

Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, J., Graves, A.R., and Burgess, P.J.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, database, agroforestry
Abstract

Research Project This report collates information regarding the systems to be addressed during the modelling tasks of the AGFORWARD project. The data focuses on systems description, site characteristics, management and technical options to create the scenario umbrella for the forthcoming modelling activities in work-package 6. The report includes a wide variety of traditional and innovative agroforestry systems across Europe. The number of innovative systems highlights the potential for agroforestry and the role of modelling to predict the outputs of products and services. For some systems, data is missing and this this is being addressed through the on-going work of the stakeholder groups. In the first year of the AGFORWARD project, a total of 54 agroforestry systems were described (11 from WP2, 15 from WP3, 13 from WP4, and 15 from WP5). In this report, 27 of the systems are described in detail in the form of factsheets (five from WP2, eight from WP3, eight from WP4, and six from WP5). The inclusion of a ‘’Hypothetical modelling combinations’’ section on the factsheets helps to define, together with the results from Milestone 27 (Palma et al. 2015), the modelling scenarios that are going to be explored. These scenarios include current management practices, innovative techniques, and new tree/crop/animals combinations N/A

Published
2015

38. Financial and economic benefits of integrated crop-livestock-tree systems in Europe

Author

Burgess, P.J., Graves, Anil R., Palma, J.H.N., Crous-Duran, Josep, and Upson, Matt

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

•Agricultural monocultures have societal costs •Role for agroforestry •Introducing AGFORWARD •Two case studies on the financial and economic benefits of agroforestry in Europe European Union’s Seventh Framework Program for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 613520

Published
2015

39. AGFORWARD Project Periodic Report: January to December 2014

Author

Burgess, P.J., Crous-Duran, J., den Herder, M., Dupraz, C., Fagerholm, N., Freese, D., Garnett, K., Graves, A.R., Hermansen, J.E., Liagre, F., Mirck, J., Moreno, G., Mosquera-Losada, M.R., Palma, J.H.N., Pantera, A., Plieninger, T., and Upson, M.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

Submitted by Margarida Galamba (galamba@isa.utl.pt) on 2015-09-09T15:24:37Z No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-3-AGFORWARD 613520 First Year Report 27 Feb 2015.pdf: 3329372 bytes, checksum: c2952e247a91e50d2f66c42d33b80387 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-09T15:24:37Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-3-AGFORWARD 613520 First Year Report 27 Feb 2015.pdf: 3329372 bytes, checksum: c2952e247a91e50d2f66c42d33b80387 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-02

Published
2015

40. Innovations to be examined for high nature and cultural value agroforestry. Milestone 2.2 (MS3)

Author

Moreno, G., Staffan, B., Burgess, P.J., Camilli, F., Crous-Duran, J., Franca, A., Hongtao, H., Hartel, T., Lind, T., Mirck, J., Palma, J.H.N., Paulo, Joana Amaral, Pisanelli, A., Seddaiu, G., Thenail, C., Tsonkova, P., Upson, M., Valinger, E., Varga, A., Viaud, V., and Vityi, A.

Subjects
AGFORWARD, agroforestry
Abstract

Submitted by Margarida Galamba (galamba@isa.utl.pt) on 2015-09-09T15:34:59Z No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-4-Milestone2_2_Innovations.pdf: 860388 bytes, checksum: db3260b3fff30a6a34ec9309c682990a (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-09T15:34:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-CEF-4-Milestone2_2_Innovations.pdf: 860388 bytes, checksum: db3260b3fff30a6a34ec9309c682990a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-01-20

Published
2015

41. Past, present, and future of agroforestry systems in Europe in agroforestry: the future of global land use

Author

Mosquera Losada, María Rosa, Moreno, G., Pardini, A., McAdam, J.H., Papanastasis, V., Burgess, P.J., Lamersdorf, M., Castro, Marina, Liagre, F., and Rigueiro-Rodríguez, Antonio

Subjects
Policy, Silvoarable, Environmental services, Silvopasture
Abstract

Many traditional land-use systems in Europe involved agroforestry in the pre-industrial era, but, over the years, increased mechanization led to the development of increasingly specialized crop, animal and wood production systems. As a consequence, the area under agroforestry declined in many regions of Europe, and agroforestry systems became confined to situations where understorey primary production is restricted due to cold temperatures (Boreal and Alpine areas) or drought (Mediterranean areas) and to plots that are hard to reach or too small for cultivation with modern machinery, as in Spain, Italy and the lower altitude mountain regions in southern and central Germany. On the whole, agroforestry continued to be practised only where it enabled farmers to obtain economic returns from lands that were otherwise relatively unproductive and mostly limited to silvopastoral practices. Since the mid-1990s, however, European policies have encouraged land management systems that combine production, environmental services (biodiversity, carbon sequestration, nutrient cycling and water quality) and social benefits, and this has created a new interest in agroforestry systems. Today, the major agroforestry practices in Europe include silvopasture and silvoarable. However, the benefits and opportunities offered by agroforestry can only be realized with substantial investments and coordinated efforts in research, education, knowledge transfer and appropriate national policies across Europe.

Published
2012

42. Farm-SAFE: the process of developing a plot- and farm- scale model of arable, forestry, and silvoarable economics

Author

Graves, A.R., Burgess, P.J., Liagre, Fabien, Terreaux, Jean-Philippe, Borrel, T., Dupraz, Christian, Palma, J., Herzog, F., Cranfield University, APCA FRA, Partenaires IRSTEA, Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies pour l'environnement et l'agriculture (IRSTEA)-Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies pour l'environnement et l'agriculture (IRSTEA), Aménités et dynamiques des espaces ruraux (UR ADBX), Centre national du machinisme agricole, du génie rural, des eaux et forêts (CEMAGREF), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF LISBON PRT, Agroscope, and Irstea Publications, Migration

Subjects
[SDE] Environmental Sciences, EUROPE, [SDE]Environmental Sciences
Abstract

International audience; Financial feasibility and financial return are two key issues that farmers and land owners consider when deciding between alternative land uses such as arable farming, forestry and agroforestry. Moreover regional variations in yields, prices and government grants mean that the relative revenue and cost of such systems can vary substantially within Europe. To aid our understanding of these variations, the European Commission sponsored a research project called Silvoarable Agroforestry For Europe' (SAFE). This paper describes the process of developing a new economic model within that project. The initial stages included establishing criteria for the model with end-users and reviewing the literature and existing models. This indicated that the economic model needed to allow comparison of arable farming, forestry and agroforestry systems at a plot- and a farm-scale. The form of comparisons included net margins, net present values, infinite net present values, equivalent annual values, and labour requirements. It was decided that the model would operate in a spreadsheet format, and the effect of phased planting patterns would be included at a farm-scale. Following initial development, additional user feedback led to a final choice on a model name, a final method of collating input data, and the inclusion of field-based operations such as varying the cropped area, replacing dead trees, and pruning. In addition options in terms of improved graphical outputs and the ability to undertake sensitivity analysis were developed. Some of the key lessons learnt include the need to establish clear model criteria and the benefits of developing a working prototype at an early stage to gain user-feedback.

Published
2011

44. Development and application of bio-economic modelling to compare silvoarable, arable and forestry systems in three European countries

Author

Palma, J.H.N., Graves, A.R., Burgess, P.J., Herzog, F., Moreno, G., Bertomeu, M., and Dupraz, C.

Subjects
modelling, poplar, Yield-SAFE, arable, walnut, forestry, silvoarable, farm-SAFE, biophysical, agroforestry
Abstract

Silvoarable agroforestry could promote use of trees on farms in Europe, but its likely effect on production, farm profitability, and environmental services is poorly understood. Hence, from 2001 to 2005, the Silvoarable Agroforestry for Europe project developed a systematic process to evaluate the biophysical and economic performance of arable, forestry, and silvoarable systems in Spain, France, and The Netherlands. A biophysical model called “Yield-SAFE” was developed to predict long-term yields for the different systems and local statistics and expert opinion were used to derive their revenue, costs, and pre- and post-2005 grant regimes. These data were then used in an economic model called “Farm-SAFE” to predict plot- and farm-scale profitability. Land equivalent ratios were greater than one, showing Yield-SAFE predicted that growing trees and crops in silvoarable systems was more productive than growing them separately. Pre-2005 grants in Spain and The Netherlands penalised silvoarable systems, but post-2005 grantswere more equitable. In France,walnut and poplar silvoarable systems were consistently the most profitable system under both grant regimes. In Spain, holm oak and stone pine silvoarable systemswere the least profitable system under pre-2005 grants, but only marginally less profitable than arable systems under post-2005 grants. In The Netherlands, low timber values and the opportunity cost of losing arable land for slurry manure application made silvoarable and forestry systems uncompetitive with arable systems under both grant regimes.

Published
2007

45. Modelling environmental benefits of silvoarable agroforestry in Europe

Author

Palma, J.H.N., Graves, A.R., Bunce, R.G.H., Burgess, P.J., de Filippi, R., Keesman, K.J., van Keulen, H., Liagre, F., Mayus, M., Moreno, G., Reisner, Y., and Herzog, F.

Subjects
erosion control, Alterra - Centrum Landschap, Leerstoelgroep Meet-, regel- en systeemtechniek, PRI Agrosysteemkunde, Systems and Control Group, Landscape Centre, pollution control, erosiebestrijding, verontreinigingsbeheersing, Plant Production Systems, Laboratory of Geo-information Science and Remote Sensing, agrosilvicultural systems, Plantaardige Productiesystemen, Agrosystems, Laboratorium voor Geo-informatiekunde en Remote Sensing, Wageningen Environmental Research, agrosilviculturele systemen
Abstract

Increased adoption of silvoarable agroforestry (SAF) systems in Europe, by integrating trees and arable crops on the same land, could offer environmental benefits compared with conventional agricultural systems. Soil erosion, nitrogen leaching, carbon sequestration and landscape biodiversity were assessed for a stratified random sample of 19 lanscape test sites in Mediterraean and Atlantic regions in Europe. Computer simulations showed that SAF couls reduce erosion when combined with contouring practices (crops as wheat, sunflower, oilseed, maize)

Published
2006

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results