Search

Your search keyword '"Norma Choisis"' showing total 7 results
Start Over Author "Norma Choisis"
7 results on '"Norma Choisis"'

1. Farmland biodiversity and agricultural management on 237 farms in 13 European and 2 African regions

Author

Gisela, Lüscher, Youssef, Ammari, Aljona, Andriets, Siyka, Angelova, Michaela, Arndorfer, Debra, Bailey, Katalin, Balázs, Marion, Bogers, Bunce, Robert G. H., Jean Philippe Choisis, Peter, Dennis, Mario, Díaz, Tetyana, Dyman, Sebastian, Eiter, Wendy, Fjellstad, Mariecia, Fraser, Friedel, Jürgen K., Salah, Garchi, Geijzendorffer, Ilse R., Tiziano, Gomiero, Guillermo González Bornay, Yana, Guteva, Philippe, Jeanneret, Jongman, Rob H. G., Max, Kainz, Norman, Kwikiriza, María Lourdes López Díaz, Gerardo, Moreno, Pip Nicholas Davies, Charles, Nkwiine, Julius, Opio, Paoletti, Maurizio G., László, Podmaniczky, Philippe, Pointereau, Fernando, Pulido, Jean Pierre Sarthou, Schneider, Manuel K., Tahar, Sghaier, Norman, Siebrecht, Siyka, Stoyanova, Sebastian, Wolfrum, Sergiy, Yashchenko, Harald, Albrecht, András, Báldi, Márta, Belényesi, Jacinto Benhadi Marin, Theo, Blick, Serge, Buholzer, Csaba, Centeri, Norma, Choisis, Gérard, Cuendet, De Lange, Hendrika J., Sylvain, Déjean, Christo, Deltshev, Díaz Cosín, Darío J., Wenche, Dramstad, Zoltán, Elek, Gunnar, Engan, Konstantin, Evtushenko, Eszter, Falusi, Finch, Oliver D., Thomas, Frank, Federico, Gavinelli, David, Genoud, Gillingham, Phillipa K., Viktor, Grónás, Mónica, Gutiérrez, Werner, Häusler, Xaver, Heer, Thomas, Hübner, Isaia, Marco, Gergely, Jerkovich, Jesus, Juan B., Esezah, Kakudidi, Eszter, Kelemen, Nóra, Koncz, Eszter, Kovacs, Anikó Kovács Hostyánszki, Luisa, Last, Toshko, Ljubomirov, Klaus, Mandery, Josef, Mayr, Atle, Mjelde, Christoph, Muster, Juri, Nascimbene, Johann, Neumayer, Frode, Ødegaard, Francisco Javier Ortiz Sánchez, Marie Louise Oschatz, Susanne Papaja Hülsbergen, Paschetta, Mauro, Mark, Pavett, Céline, Pelosi, Károly, Penksza, Reidun, Pommeresche, Victor, Popov, Volodymyr, Radchenko, Nina, Richner, Susanne, Riedel, John, Scullion, Daniele, Sommaggio, Ottó, Szalkovszki, Erich, Szerencsits, Dolores, Trigo, Jim, Vale, Ruud van Kats, Angel, Vasilev, Whittington, Andrew E., Jerylee Wilkes Allemann, and Tommaso, Zanetti

Subjects
permanent crop, habitat diversity, Tunisia, arable crop, agricultural management, Earthworm, agricultural management, arable crop, bee, BioBio, Earthworm, Grassland, habitat diversity, permanent crop, spider, Tunisia, Uganda, vascular plant, vascular plant, Uganda, BioBio, bee, Grassland, spider
Published
2016

2. Farmland biodiversity and agricultural management on 237 farms in 13 European and two African regions

Author

Gisela Lüscher, Youssef Ammari, Aljona Andriets, Siyka Angelova, Michaela Arndorfer, Debra Bailey, Katalin Balázs, Marion Bogers, Robert G. H. Bunce, Jean-Philippe Choisis, Peter Dennis, Mario Díaz, Tetyana Dyman, Sebastian Eiter, Wendy Fjellstad, Mariecia Fraser, Jürgen K. Friedel, Salah Garchi, Ilse R. Geijzendorffer, Tiziano Gomiero, Guillermo González-Bornay, Yana Guteva, Felix Herzog, Philippe Jeanneret, Rob H. G. Jongman, Max Kainz, Norman Kwikiriza, María Lourdes López Díaz, Gerardo Moreno, Pip Nicholas-Davies, Charles Nkwiine, Julius Opio, Maurizio G. Paoletti, László Podmaniczky, Philippe Pointereau, Fernando Pulido, Jean-Pierre Sarthou, Manuel K. Schneider, Tahar Sghaier, Norman Siebrecht, Siyka Stoyanova, Sebastian Wolfrum, Sergiy Yashchenko, Harald Albrecht, András Báldi, Márta Belényesi, Jacinto Benhadi-Marin, Theo Blick, Serge Buholzer, Csaba Centeri, Norma Choisis, Gérard Cuendet, Hendrika J. De Lange, Sylvain Déjean, Christo Deltshev, Darío J. Díaz Cosín, Wenche Dramstad, Zoltán Elek, Gunnar Engan, Konstantin Evtushenko, Eszter Falusi, Oliver-D. Finch, Thomas Frank, Federico Gavinelli, David Genoud, Phillipa K. Gillingham, Viktor Grónás, Mónica Gutiérrez, Werner Häusler, Xaver Heer, Thomas Hübner, Marco Isaia, Gergely Jerkovich, Juan B. Jesus, Esezah Kakudidi, Eszter Kelemen, Nóra Koncz, Eszter Kovacs, Anikó Kovács-Hostyánszki, Luisa Last, Toshko Ljubomirov, Klaus Mandery, Josef Mayr, Atle Mjelde, Christoph Muster, Juri Nascimbene, Johann Neumayer, Frode Ødegaard, Francisco Javier Ortiz Sánchez, Marie-Louise Oschatz, Susanne Papaja-Hülsbergen, Mauro Paschetta, Mark Pavett, Céline Pelosi, Károly Penksza, Reidun Pommeresche, Victor Popov, Volodymyr Radchenko, Nina Richner, Susanne Riedel, John Scullion, Daniele Sommaggio, Ottó Szalkovszki, Erich Szerencsits, Dolores Trigo, Jim Vale, Ruud van Kats, Angel Vasilev, Andrew E. Whittington, Jerylee Wilkes-Allemann, Tommaso Zanetti, Institute for Sustainability Sciences ISS, Agroscope, Institute of Evolutionary Biology & Environmental Sciences, University of Zurich, Institut National de Recherche en Génie Rural, Eaux et Forêts de Tunisie (INRGREF), Bila Tserkva National Agrarian University, Institute of Plant Genetic Resources K.Malkov, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien [Vienne, Autriche] (BOKU), Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management, Szent István University, Wageningen University and Research Center (WUR), Dynamiques Forestières dans l'Espace Rural (DYNAFOR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées-Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées, Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), Aberystwyth University, Department of Chemical Engineering and Environmental Technology, Universidad de Oviedo, Norwegian Forest and Landscape Institute, Independent, Institut méditerranéen de biodiversité et d'écologie marine et continentale (IMBE), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Institut de recherche pour le développement [IRD] : UMR237-Aix Marseille Université (AMU)-Avignon Université (AU), University of Padova, Alterra, Wageningen University and Research Centre [Wageningen] (WUR), Technische Universitat Munchen, Makerere University Kampala (MUK), University of Extremadura, Department of Soil Science, Department of Biology, University of Washington [Seattle], Institute of Environmental & Landscape Management, Szent Istvan University, SOLAGRO, UMR : AGroécologie, Innovations, TeRritoires, Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse, MTA Centre for Ecological Research, Senckenberg Research Institute, Chercheur indépendant, Institut de Génie de l'environnement EPFL, Université de Lausanne, Conservatoire Régional des Espaces Naturels Midi-Pyrénées (CREN Midi-Pyrénées), Universidad Complutense de Madrid [Madrid] (UCM), Alterra Green World Research (ALTERRA), nstitute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Science, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Ecologie fonctionnelle et écotoxicologie des agroécosystèmes (ECOSYS), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, Tänikon Research Station ART, UE, Universität Zürich [Zürich] = University of Zurich (UZH), Institut National de Recherche en Génie Rural Eaux et Forêts (INRGREF), Ecole Nationale du Génie Rural, des Eaux et des Forêts (ENGREF)-Institution de la Recherche et de l'Enseignement Supérieur Agricoles [Tunis] (IRESA), Universität für Bodenkultur Wien = University of Natural Resources and Life [Vienne, Autriche] (BOKU), Wageningen University and Research [Wageningen] (WUR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-École nationale supérieure agronomique de Toulouse (ENSAT), Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université de Toulouse (UT)-Université de Toulouse (UT)-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université de Toulouse (UT)-Université de Toulouse (UT), Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC)-Aberystwyth University, Universidad de Oviedo [Oviedo], Avignon Université (AU)-Aix Marseille Université (AMU)-Institut de recherche pour le développement [IRD] : UMR237-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Università degli Studi di Padova = University of Padua (Unipd), Technische Universität Munchen - Université Technique de Munich [Munich, Allemagne] (TUM), Association Solagro (Solagro), AGroécologie, Innovations, teRritoires (AGIR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université de Lausanne = University of Lausanne (UNIL), Universidad Complutense de Madrid = Complutense University of Madrid [Madrid] (UCM), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-École nationale supérieure agronomique de Toulouse [ENSAT]-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Lüscher, Gisela, Ammari, Youssef, Andriets, Aljona, Angelova, Siyka, Arndorfer, Michaela, Bailey, Debra, Balázs, Katalin, Bogers, Marion, Bunce, Robert G H, Choisis, Jean-Philippe, Dennis, Peter, Díaz, Mario, Dyman, Tetyana, Eiter, Sebastian, Fjellstad, Wendy, Fraser, Mariecia, Friedel, Jürgen K, Garchi, Salah, Geijzendorffer, Ilse R, Gomiero, Tiziano, González-Bornay, Guillermo, Guteva, Yana, Herzog, Felix, Jeanneret, Philippe, Jongman, Rob H G, Kainz, Max, Kwikiriza, Norman, López Díaz, María Lourde, Moreno, Gerardo, Nicholas-Davies, Pip, Nkwiine, Charle, Opio, Juliu, Paoletti, Maurizio G, Podmaniczky, László, Pointereau, Philippe, Pulido, Fernando, Sarthou, Jean-Pierre, Schneider, Manuel K, Sghaier, Tahar, Siebrecht, Norman, Stoyanova, Siyka, Wolfrum, Sebastian, Yashchenko, Sergiy, Albrecht, Harald, Báldi, Andrá, Belényesi, Márta, Benhadi-Marin, Jacinto, Blick, Theo, Buholzer, Serge, Centeri, Csaba, Choisis, Norma, Cuendet, Gérard, De Lange, Hendrika J, Déjean, Sylvain, Deltshev, Christo, Díaz Cosín, Darío J, Dramstad, Wenche, Elek, Zoltán, Engan, Gunnar, Evtushenko, Konstantin, Falusi, Eszter, Finch, Oliver-D, Frank, Thoma, Gavinelli, Federico, Genoud, David, Gillingham, Phillipa K, Grónás, Viktor, Gutiérrez, Mónica, Häusler, Werner, Heer, Xaver, Hübner, Thoma, Isaia, Marco, Jerkovich, Gergely, Jesus, Juan B, Kakudidi, Esezah, Kelemen, Eszter, Koncz, Nóra, Kovacs, Eszter, Kovács-Hostyánszki, Anikó, Last, Luisa, Ljubomirov, Toshko, Mandery, Klau, Mayr, Josef, Mjelde, Atle, Muster, Christoph, Nascimbene, Juri, Neumayer, Johann, Ødegaard, Frode, Ortiz Sánchez, Francisco Javier, Oschatz, Marie-Louise, Papaja-Hülsbergen, Susanne, Paschetta, Mauro, Pavett, Mark, Pelosi, Céline, Penksza, Károly, Pommeresche, Reidun, Popov, Victor, Radchenko, Volodymyr, Richner, Nina, Riedel, Susanne, Scullion, John, Sommaggio, Daniele, Szalkovszki, Ottó, Szerencsits, Erich, Trigo, Dolore, Vale, Jim, van Kats, Ruud, Vasilev, Angel, Whittington, Andrew E, Wilkes-Allemann, Jerylee, and Zanetti, Tommaso

Subjects
0106 biological sciences, Vascular plant, habitat diversity, 010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences, biobio, [SDV]Life Sciences [q-bio], Biodiversity, 01 natural sciences, Permanent crop, Biodiversiteit en Beleid, Uganda, earthworm, spider, 2. Zero hunger, Agroforestry, Ecology, vascular plant, Agriculture, Bees, Habitat diversity, Grassland, Europe, Geography, Dierecologie, Animal Ecology, Arable land, BioBio, Environmental Monitoring, Crops, Agricultural, Farms, Tunisia, arable crop, agricultural management, education, Tunesia, Biodiversity and Policy, 010603 evolutionary biology, Agricultural management, uganda, bee, grassland, permanent crop, Animals, Spider, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Ecosystem, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences, Farm enterprise, WIMEK, business.industry, Species diversity, 15. Life on land, tunisia, Animal ecology, Earthworm, Arable crop, Africa, Agricultural biodiversity, business
Abstract

Farmland is a major land cover type in Europe and Africa and provides habitat for numerous species. The severe decline in farmland biodiversity of the last decades has been attributed to changes in farming practices, and organic and low-input farming are assumed to mitigate detrimental effects of agricultural intensification on biodiversity. Since the farm enterprise is the primary unit of agricultural decision making, management-related effects at the field scale need to be assessed at the farm level. Therefore, in this study, data were collected on habitat characteristics, vascular plant, earthworm, spider, and bee communities and on the corresponding agricultural management in 237 farms in 13 European and two African regions. In 15 environmental and agricultural homogeneous regions, 6-20 farms with the same farm type (e.g., arable crops, grassland, or specific permanent crops) were selected. If available, an equal number of organic and non-organic farms were randomly selected. Alternatively, farms were sampled along a gradient of management intensity. For all selected farms, the entire farmed area was mapped, which resulted in total in the mapping of 11 338 units attributed to 194 standardized habitat types, provided together with additional descriptors. On each farm, one site per available habitat type was randomly selected for species diversity investigations. Species were sampled on 2115 sites and identified to the species level by expert taxonomists. Species lists and abundance estimates are provided for each site and sampling date (one date for plants and earthworms, three dates for spiders and bees). In addition, farmers provided information about their management practices in face-to-face interviews following a standardized questionnaire. Farm management indicators for each farm are available (e.g., nitrogen input, pesticide applications, or energy input). Analyses revealed a positive effect of unproductive areas and a negative effect of intensive management on biodiversity. Communities of the four taxonomic groups strongly differed in their response to habitat characteristics, agricultural management, and regional circumstances. The data has potential for further insights into interactions of farmland biodiversity and agricultural management at site, farm, and regional scale.

Published
2016

3. Quelles stratégies pour un maintien de la polyculture-élevage ? Une étude des trajectoires passées d’exploitations dans les coteaux de Gascogne

Author

Julie Ryschawy, Norma Choisis, Jean-Philippe Choisis, Alexandre Joannon, Annick Gibon, Agrosystèmes Cultivés et Herbagers (ARCHE), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-École nationale supérieure agronomique de Toulouse [ENSAT]-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées-Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées, Dynamiques Forestières dans l'Espace Rural (DYNAFOR), AGroécologie, Innovations, teRritoires (AGIR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Adresse personnelle, SAD Paysage (SAD Paysage), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-AGROCAMPUS OUEST, Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro)-Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro), P. Gasselin, J.-P. Choisis, S. Petit, F. Purseigle, S. Zasser, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - INRA (FRANCE), Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse - INPT (FRANCE), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), UMR : AGrosystèmes et développement terrItoRial, Auzeville, Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse, and Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse - Toulouse INP (FRANCE)

Subjects
2. Zero hunger, Ecologie, Environnement, 010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences, Sciences et techniques de l'agriculture, [SDV]Life Sciences [q-bio], polyculture-élevage, coteaux de gascogne, exploitation, stratégie adaptative, 0207 environmental engineering, Stratégie adaptative, 02 engineering and technology, Exploitation, 01 natural sciences, Polyculture-élevage, Coteaux de Gascogne, 020701 environmental engineering, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences
Abstract

La polyculture-élevage est de plus en plus reconnue au plan international comme un moyen de limiter les problèmes environnementaux tout en permettant une agriculture productive et économiquement viable

Published
2014

4. Paths to last in mixed crop-livestock farming: lessons from an assessment of farm trajectories of change

Author

Annick Gibon, Norma Choisis, Julie Ryschawy, Jean-Philippe Choisis, Dynamiques Forestières dans l'Espace Rural (DYNAFOR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-École nationale supérieure agronomique de Toulouse [ENSAT]-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées-Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées, Agriculture and Sustainable Development programme (ADD), project 'MOUVE', Midi-Pyrenees Region, under the INRA-Region research programme 'CHAPAY', and Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP)

Subjects
Crops, Agricultural, Livestock, 010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences, Cash crop, Population, Farm trajectories, [SDV.SA.ZOO]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Agricultural sciences/Zootechny, Diversification (marketing strategy), 01 natural sciences, SF1-1100, Agricultural economics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Economies of scope, Animals, Agricultural policy, Animal Husbandry, education, Retrospective Studies, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences, 2. Zero hunger, education.field_of_study, business.industry, Mixed crop-livestock farming, Agriculture, 04 agricultural and veterinary sciences, 15. Life on land, Animal culture, Geography, mixed crop–livestock farming, Farming systems research, 040103 agronomy & agriculture, 0401 agriculture, forestry, and fisheries, Animal Science and Zoology, France, Farmer participatory research, Mixed farming, business, Common Agricultural Policy
Abstract

International audience; Mixed crop-livestock systems, combining livestock and cash crops at farm level, are considered to be suitable for sustainable intensification of agriculture. Ensuring the survival of mixed crop-livestock systems is a challenge for European agriculture: the number of European mixed crop-livestock farms has been decreasing since 1970. Analysis of farming system dynamics may elucidate past changes and the forces driving this decline. The objectives of this study were (i) to identify the diversity of paths that allowed the survival of mixed crop-livestock farming and (ii) to elucidate the driving forces behind such survival. We analysed the variety of farm trajectories from 1950 to 2005. We studied the entire farm population of a case study site, located in the 'Coteaux de Gascogne' region. In this less favoured area of south-western France, farmers have limited specialisation. Currently, half of the farms use mixed crop-livestock systems. The data set of 20 variables for 50 farms on the basis of six 10-year time steps was collected through retrospective surveys. We used a two-step analysis including (i) a visual assessment of the whole population of individual farm trajectories and (ii) a computer-based typology of farm trajectories on the basis of a series of multivariate analyses followed by automatic clustering. The European Common Agricultural Policy, market globalisation and decreasing workforce availability were identified as drivers of change that favoured the specialisation process. Nevertheless, farmers' choices and values have opposed against these driving forces, ensuring the survival of some mixed crop-livestock farming systems. The trajectories were clustered into five types, four of which were compatible with mixed crop-livestock systems. The first type was the maximisation of autonomy by combining crops and livestock. The second type was diversification of production to exploit economies of scope and protect the farm against market fluctuations. The other two types involved enlargement and progressive adaptation of the farm to the familial workforce. The survival of mixed crop-livestock systems in these two types is largely dependent on workforce availability. Only one type of trajectory, on the basis of enlargement and economies of scale, did not lead to mixed crop-livestock systems. In view of the current evolution of the driving forces, maximising autonomy and diversification appear to be suitable paths to deal with current challenges and maintain mixed crop-livestock systems in Europe.

Published
2013

6. Farmers' perceptions of biodiversity: Lessons from a discourse-based deliberative valuation study

Author

Jean-Philippe Choisis, Felix Herzog, Tiziano Gomiero, Peter Dennis, Maurizio G. Paoletti, Julie Ryschawy, László Podmaniczky, Geneviève Nguyen, Eszter Kovács, Norma Choisis, Jean-Pierre Sarthou, Katalin Balázs, Eszter Kelemen, Institute of Environmental & Landscape Management, Szent Istvan University, Agrosystèmes Cultivés et Herbagers (ARCHE), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-École nationale supérieure agronomique de Toulouse [ENSAT]-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées-Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées, Dynamiques Forestières dans l'Espace Rural (DYNAFOR), Department of Biology, Universita degli Studi di Padova, Sciences pour l'Action et le Développement : Activités, Produits, Territoires (SADAPT), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-AgroParisTech, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Institute of Biological Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, and Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP)

Subjects
[SDV.SA]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Agricultural sciences, Natural resource economics, media_common.quotation_subject, Geography, Planning and Development, 0211 other engineering and technologies, Biodiversity, 02 engineering and technology, 010501 environmental sciences, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Social value orientations, Ecological systems theory, 01 natural sciences, 12. Responsible consumption, conventional farming, organic farming, Measurement of biodiversity, Biodiversity Discourse-based deliberative valuation Focus group Organic farming Conventional farming, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Valuation (finance), media_common, biodiversity, 2. Zero hunger, Land use, business.industry, discourse-based deliberative valuation, Environmental resource management, 021107 urban & regional planning, Forestry, 15. Life on land, Deliberation, 13. Climate action, Agriculture, focus group, business
Abstract

In agricultural landscapes farmers have a large impact on biodiversity through the management decisions they apply to their land. Farmers' perceptions of biodiversity and its different values influence their willingness to apply biodiversity friendly farming practices. The results of a discourse-based, deliberative biodiversity valuation are presented in this paper. Organic and conventional farmers' perceptions of the different values of biodiversity were analyzed across three European countries. Focus group methodology was used to explore how farmers perceive biodiversity and how they assess its values. Our results suggest that farmers' perceptions of biodiversity are strongly embedded in their everyday lives and linked to farming practices. Besides recognizing the importance of species and habitat diversity, farmers also acknowledge wider landscape processes and attach value to the complexity of ecological systems. Organic farmers tended to have a more complex and philosophical approach to biodiversity and they were relatively homogeneous in this aspect, while conventional farmers showed larger heterogeneity. Ethical and social values were important for all farmers. Economic value was more dominant in the conventional focus groups. The discourse based deliberative valuation method is worth applying in relation to biodiversity for two reasons. First, this method is able to reflect the heterogeneity of non-scientist participants and the context in which they are embedded, which both have a great impact on the results of the valuation. Second, deliberation upon the importance of biodiversity makes possible to understand the competing perceptions of biodiversity and to include different value aspects in the valuation process. The policy oriented consequence of the research can be drawn from the observation that farmers have a strong acknowledgement of ethical and social biodiversity values. This suggests that soft policy tools could also foster biodiversity sensitive farming methods, complementary to mainstream monetary incentives.

Published
2013

7. Mixed crop-livestock systems: an economic and environmental-friendly way of farming?

Author

Julie Ryschawy, Jean-Philippe Choisis, Alexandre Joannon, Annick Gibon, Norma Choisis, Dynamiques Forestières dans l'Espace Rural (DYNAFOR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées-Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées, SAD Paysage (SAD Paysage), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-AGROCAMPUS OUEST, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-École nationale supérieure agronomique de Toulouse [ENSAT]-Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) (Toulouse INP), Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro)-Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro), AGROCAMPUS OUEST, and Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro)-Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro)-Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)

Subjects
Crops, Agricultural, practices, Cash crop, Population, 010501 environmental sciences, SF1-1100, 01 natural sciences, comparative assessment, Gross margin, Agricultural science, Sustainable agriculture, Animals, Animal Husbandry, education, Productivity, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences, 2. Zero hunger, education.field_of_study, Agroforestry, business.industry, mixed crop-livestock farming, Agriculture, 04 agricultural and veterinary sciences, Models, Theoretical, Nitrogen Cycle, 15. Life on land, [SDE.ES]Environmental Sciences/Environmental and Society, practice, Animal culture, Dairying, 13. Climate action, 040103 agronomy & agriculture, 0401 agriculture, forestry, and fisheries, Cattle, Animal Science and Zoology, Livestock, France, Business, [SDE.BE]Environmental Sciences/Biodiversity and Ecology, Mixed farming, economic viability, environment
Abstract

Intensification and specialisation of agriculture in developed countries enabled productivity to be improved but had detrimental impacts on the environment and threatened the economic viability of a huge number of farms. The combination of livestock and crops, which was very common in the past, is assumed to be a viable alternative to specialised livestock or cropping systems. Mixed crop-livestock systems can improve nutrient cycling while reducing chemical inputs and generate economies of scope at farm level. Most assumptions underlying these views are based on theoretical and experimental evidence. Very few assessments of their environmental and economic advantages have nevertheless been undertaken in real-world farming conditions. In this paper, we present a comparative assessment of the environmental and economic performances of mixed crop-livestock farms v. specialised farms among the farm population of the French 'Coteaux de Gascogne'. In this hilly region, half of the farms currently use a mixed crop-livestock system including beef cattle and cash crops, the remaining farms being specialised in either crops or cattle. Data were collected through an exhaustive survey of farms located in our study area. The economic performances of farming systems were assessed on 48 farms on the basis of (i) overall gross margin, (ii) production costs and (iii) analysis of the sensitivity of gross margins to fluctuations in the price of inputs and outputs. The environmental dimension was analysed through (i) characterisation of farmers' crop management practices, (ii) analysis of farm land use diversity and (iii) nitrogen farm-gate balance. Local mixed crop-livestock farms did not have significantly higher overall gross margins than specialised farms but were less sensitive than dairy and crop farms to fluctuations in the price of inputs and outputs considered. Mixed crop-livestock farms had lower costs than crop farms, while beef farms had the lowest costs as they are grass-based systems. Concerning crop management practices, our results revealed an intensification gradient from low to high input farming systems. Beyond some general trends, a wide range of management practices and levels of intensification were observed among farms with a similar production system. Mixed crop-livestock farms were very heterogeneous with respect to the use of inputs. Nevertheless, our study revealed a lower potential for nitrogen pollution in mixed crop-livestock and beef production systems than in dairy and crop farming systems. Even if a wide variability exists within system, mixed crop-livestock systems appear to be a way for an environmental and economical sustainable agriculture.

Published
2012

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results