Search

The database of the EJPSOIL CarboSeq WP2 with (meta)data of long term agricultural field experiments for Tier2 (SOC) and where available Tier 3 (carbon input) from Europe

Die Agrarpolitik des Bundes hat unter anderem zum Ziel, Agrarökosystemleistungen bereitzustellen, Umweltbelastungen zu reduzieren und die Resilienz der Landwirtschaft zu erhöhen. Die Kombination von Bäumen mit landwirtschaftlichen Unterkulturen, genannt Agroforst, kann dazu beitragen, diese Ziele zu erreichen, ohne die landwirtschaftliche Produktion wesentlich einzuschränken. Wir haben diejenigen Regionen identifiziert, in denen gemäss den Umweltzielen Landwirtschaft Umweltbelastungen auftreten, und in denen Agroforstsysteme einen Beitrag zur Minderung dieser Belastungen leisten können. Unsere Resultate basieren auf elf nationalen Defizitkarten der Umweltbereiche Biodiversität, Landschaft, Klima, Luft, Wasser und Boden. Demnach finden sich auf 13,3 % der landwirtschaftlichen Nutzfläche (LN) drei oder mehr Defizite gleichzeitig. Würden diese 13,3 % der LN zu Agroforstsystemen wie Baumreihen in Ackerkulturen, Futterbäumen und Schattenspendern für Tiere usw. umgewandelt, so könnten bis zu 13 % der Treibhausgasemissionen des Sektors Landwirtschaft kompensiert werden. Mit Hilfe der vorliegenden Karten und dem grossen Potenzial von Agroforstsystemen lassen sich in Zukunft Massnahmen entwickeln, die auf die lokalen Voraussetzungen und Umweltziele abgestimmt sind.

Agroforstsysteme, die Kombination von Gehölzen und landwirtschaftlicher Nutzung auf der gleichen Fläche, haben als Hochstamm-Feldobst (= Streuobst), Waldweiden und Kastanienselven eine lange Tradition in der Schweiz. In den letzten Jahren wurden die Systeme in moderner Form reaktiviert, d.h. ihr Pflanzdesign wurde an die Mechanisierung angepasst und ihr Management optimiert. Neben der Diversifizierung der Produktion durch zusätzliche Obst- oder Wertholzproduktion, profitiert die Landwirtschaft bei standortangepasster Strauch- und Baumarten-Wahl ebenfalls durch erhöhte Resilienz sowie Beiträgen zum Umwelt- und Ressourcenschutz.

Agroforestry, relative to conventional agriculture, contributes significantly to carbon sequestration, increases a range of regulating ecosystem services, and enhances biodiversity. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we combined scientific and technical knowledge to evaluate nine environmental pressures in terms of ecosystem services in European farmland and assessed the carbon storage potential of suitable agroforestry systems, proposed by regional experts. First, regions with potential environmental pressures were identified with respect to soil health (soil erosion by water and wind, low soil organic carbon), water quality (water pollution by nitrates, salinization by irrigation), areas affected by climate change (rising temperature), and by underprovision in biodiversity (pollination and pest control pressures, loss of soil biodiversity). The maps were overlaid to identify areas where several pressures accumulate. In total, 94.4% of farmlands suffer from at least one environmental pressure, pastures being less affected than arable lands. Regional hotspots were located in north-western France, Denmark, Central Spain, north and south-western Italy, Greece, and eastern Romania. The 10% of the area with the highest number of accumulated pressures were defined as Priority Areas, where the implementation of agroforestry could be particularly effective. In a second step, European agroforestry experts were asked to propose agroforestry practices suitable for the Priority Areas they were familiar with, and identified 64 different systems covering a wide range of practices. These ranged from hedgerows on field boundaries to fast growing coppices or scattered single tree systems. Third, for each proposed system, the carbon storage potential was assessed based on data from the literature and the results were scaled-up to the Priority Areas. As expected, given the wide range of agroforestry practices identified, the carbon sequestration potentials ranged between 0.09 and 7.

Context Agroforestry systems in temperate Europe are known to provide both, provisioning and regulating ecosystem services (ES). Yet, it is poorly understood how these systems affect ES provision at a landscape scale in contrast to agricultural practises. Objectives This study aimed at developing a novel, spatially explicit model to assess and quantify bundles of provisioning and regulating ES provided by landscapes with and without agroforestry systems and to test the hypothesis that agroforestry landscapes provide higher amounts of regulating ES than landscapes dominated by monocropping. Methods Focussing on ES that are relevant for agroforestry and agricultural practices, we selected six provisioning and regulating ES—“biomass production”, “groundwater recharge”, “nutrient retention”, “soil preservation”, “carbon storage”, “habitat and gene pool protection”. Algorithms for quantifying these services were identified, tested, adapted, and applied in a traditional cherry orchard landscape in Switzerland, as a case study. Eight landscape test sites of 1 km × 1 km, four dominated by agroforestry and four dominated by agriculture, were mapped and used as baseline for the model. Results We found that the provisioning ES, namely the annual biomass yield, was higher in landscape test sites with agriculture, while the regulating ES were better represented in landscape test sites with agroforestry. The differences were found to be statistically significant for the indicators annual biomass yield, groundwater recharge rate, nitrate leaching, annual carbon sequestration, flowering resources, and share of semi-natural habitats. Conclusions This approach provides an example for spatially explicit quantification of provisioning and regulating ES and is suitable for comparing different land use scenarii at landscape scale.

Agroforestry systems are known to provide ecosystem services which differ in quantity and quality from conventional agricultural practices and could enhance rural landscapes. In this study we compared ecosystem services provision of agroforestry and non-agroforestry landscapes in case study regions from three European biogeographical regions: Mediterranean (montado and dehesa), Continental (orchards and wooded pasture) and Atlantic agroforestry systems (chestnut soutos and hedgerows systems). Seven ecosystem service indicators (two provisioning and five regulating services) were mapped, modelled and assessed. Clear variations in amount and provision of ecosystem services were found between different types of agroforestry systems. Nonetheless regulating ecosystems services were improved in all agroforestry landscapes, with reduced nitrate losses, higher carbon sequestration, reduced soil losses, higher functional biodiversity focussed on pollination and greater habitat diversity reflected in a high proportion of semi-natural habitats. The results for provisioning services were inconsistent. While the annual biomass yield and the groundwater recharge rate tended to be higher in agricultural landscapes without agroforestry systems, the total biomass stock was reduced. These broad relationships were observed within and across the case study regions regardless of the agroforestry type or biogeographical region. Overall our study underlines the positive influence of agroforestry systems on the supply of regulating services and their role to enhance landscape structure

Das Forschungsprojekt untersucht, ob und wie die stoffliche Nutzung von Biomasse in Kaskaden zur Steigerung der Ressourceneffizienz beitragen kann. Es entwickelt eine klare Definition des Begriffs der Kaskadennutzung und analysiert existierende Konzepte der Kaskadennutzung. Als relevante Felder der Kaskadennutzung werden der Holzsektor, der Papiersektor, der Textilsektor und der Kunststoffsektor identifiziert und Ökobilanzen jeweils in diesen vier Sektoren durchgeführt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen deutliche Umweltvorteile für die Mehrzahl der untersuchten Kaskadenoptionen, es bedarf jedoch der Einzelfallbetrachtung. Ein Bewertungskonzept zur ersten Einschätzung möglicher Kaskadenansätze für Anwender wird entwickelt. Das Projekt empfiehlt, die Kaskadennutzung von Biomasse als "Prinzip" unterstützend in übergreifende Politikziele und Strategien einzubinden.

Background: Biodiversity loss, due in part to intensification of agriculture, has become a global issue. In this context, fruit producers are looking for nature-friendly production methods. Their aim is to reduce intensive pesticide use and to enhance orchard management in terms of optimising habitats for beneficial organisms. However, fruit production, especially in low-stem orchards, requires several interventions over the course of the year (tillage, thinning, mowing, disking, spraying, fertilisation, etc.), each of them representing a disturbance. Surprisingly, international journals seem to contain few publications on the impact of most of these practices (except pesticides) on biodiversity in general and beneficial organisms in particular, even though the benefits of predators to control pests have been known for decades. However, an increasing number of studies have been published in the past 10 years, corroborating the importance that biodiversity has gained as a topic in life cycle assessment. In this context, an expert system that considers the impact of individual farming activities on a set of biodiversity indicators (flora of crops and grasslands, birds, mammals, amphibians, slugs and snails, spiders, carabids, butterflies, wild bees, and grasshoppers) is to be extended to practices in low-stem and high-stem orchards. We therefore intend to conduct a systematic map to assess what evidence exists on the impact of agricultural practices in fruit orchards on biodiversity indicator species groups. Methods and output: By gathering this information, we aim (a) to assess the state of research on discrete indicators and/or practices, (b) to identify literature relevant for assessing production impact and habitat suitability and (c) to provide a wide-ranging overview of existing evidence and its transfer to extension services and public perception. A literature search in scientific journals, agronomy magazines and the internet will therefore be performed in Engl