IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i17p12819-d1224293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Impact of Farm-Management Practices on Ecosystem Services in European Agricultural Systems: A Rapid Evidence Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Kato Van Ruymbeke

    (Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Katholieke Universiteit (KU) Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Joana G. Ferreira

    (Department of Rural Economy, Environment and Society, Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC), Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK)

  • Vasileios D. Gkisakis

    (Hellenic Agricultural Organization (ELGO-DIMITRA), 11528 Athens, Greece)

  • Jochen Kantelhardt

    (Institute of Agriculture and Forestry Economics, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien (BOKU), 1180 Wien, Austria)

  • Gordana Manevska-Tasevska

    (Department of Economics, Agrifood Economic Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Peter Matthews

    (School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NZ, UK)

  • Andreas Niedermayr

    (Institute of Agriculture and Forestry Economics, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien (BOKU), 1180 Wien, Austria)

  • Lena Schaller

    (Institute of Agriculture and Forestry Economics, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien (BOKU), 1180 Wien, Austria)

  • Katarzyna Bańkowska

    (Department of Economic Modelling, Institute of Rural and Agricultural Development, Polish Academy of Sciences, PL-02-668 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Kewan Mertens

    (Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Katholieke Universiteit (KU) Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
    CSI i3—Center for Sociology of Innovation i3, National School of Mines of Paris (Mines Paris-PSL), 75006 Paris, France)

  • Liesbet Vranken

    (Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Katholieke Universiteit (KU) Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

Abstract

Many farm-management practices focus on maximizing production, while others better reconcile production with the regulation of ecological processes and sociocultural identity through the provisioning of ecosystem services (ESs). Though many studies have evaluated the performance of management practices against ES supply, these studies often focused on only a few practices simultaneously. Here, we incorporate 23 distinct management practices in a rapid evidence assessment to draw more comprehensive conclusions on their supply potential across 14 ESs in European agriculture. The results are visualized using performance indicators that quantify the ES-supply potential of a given management practice. In total, 172 indicators are calculated, among which cover crops are found to have the strongest positive impact on pollination-supply potential, while extensive livestock management is found to have the strongest negative impact for the supply potential for habitat creation/protection. The indicators also provide insight into the state of the peer-reviewed literature. At both the farm and territorial levels, the literature noticeably fails to evaluate cultural services. Further, disparities between the number of indicators composed at the farm and territorial levels indicate a systematic bias in the literature toward the assessment of smaller spatial levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Kato Van Ruymbeke & Joana G. Ferreira & Vasileios D. Gkisakis & Jochen Kantelhardt & Gordana Manevska-Tasevska & Peter Matthews & Andreas Niedermayr & Lena Schaller & Katarzyna Bańkowska & Kewan Merte, 2023. "Assessing the Impact of Farm-Management Practices on Ecosystem Services in European Agricultural Systems: A Rapid Evidence Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-24, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:12819-:d:1224293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/12819/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/12819/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank & Robertson, G. Philip & Hamilton, Stephen K., 2007. "Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 245-252, December.
    2. Zhang, Wei & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Kremen, Claire & Carney, Karen & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 253-260, December.
    3. Scott M. Swinton & Frank Lupi & G. Philip Robertson & Douglas A. Landis, 2006. "Ecosystem Services from Agriculture: Looking Beyond the Usual Suspects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1160-1166.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dominati, Estelle & Patterson, Murray & Mackay, Alec, 2010. "A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1858-1868, July.
    2. Kragt, Marit E. & Robertson, Michael J., 2014. "Quantifying ecosystem services trade-offs from agricultural practices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 147-157.
    3. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    4. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    5. Shah, Syed Mahboob & Liu, Gengyuan & Yang, Qing & Casazza, Marco & Agostinho, Feni & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2021. "Sustainability assessment of agriculture production systems in Pakistan: A provincial-scale energy-based evaluation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).
    6. Schleyer, Christian & Plieninger, Tobias, 2011. "Identifying obstacles to the design and implementation of payment schemes for ecosystem services provided through farm trees," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115992, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Jones, Sarah K. & Boundaogo, Mansour & DeClerck, Fabrice A. & Estrada-Carmona, Natalia & Mirumachi, Naho & Mulligan, Mark, 2019. "Insights into the importance of ecosystem services to human well-being in reservoir landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    8. Posthumus, H. & Rouquette, J.R. & Morris, J. & Gowing, D.J.G. & Hess, T.M., 2010. "A framework for the assessment of ecosystem goods and services; a case study on lowland floodplains in England," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1510-1523, May.
    9. Elisa Oteros-Rozas & Federica Ravera & Marina García-Llorente, 2019. "How Does Agroecology Contribute to the Transitions towards Social-Ecological Sustainability?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-13, August.
    10. Fan, Fan & Henriksen, Christian Bugge & Porter, John, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services in organic cereal crop production systems with different management practices in relation to organic matter input," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 117-127.
    11. Tanaka, K., 2018. "Do Bonus Payments Enhance Agri-environmental Payments? Empirical Findings from Rice Farming in Japan," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277343, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Huber, Lisa & Schirpke, Uta & Marsoner, Thomas & Tasser, Erich & Leitinger, Georg, 2020. "Does socioeconomic diversification enhance multifunctionality of mountain landscapes?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    13. Trautman, Dawn & Jeffrey, Scott R. & Unterschultz, James R., 2012. "Beneficial Management Practice (BMP) Adoption -- Direct Farm Cost/Benefit Tradeoffs," Project Report Series 139638, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    14. Vaz, Ana S. & Kueffer, Christoph & Kull, Christian A. & Richardson, David M. & Vicente, Joana R. & Kühn, Ingolf & Schröter, Matthias & Hauck, Jennifer & Bonn, Aletta & Honrado, João P., 2017. "Integrating ecosystem services and disservices: insights from plant invasions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 94-107.
    15. Dennis Junior Choruma & Oghenekaro Nelson Odume, 2019. "Exploring Farmers’ Management Practices and Values of Ecosystem Services in an Agroecosystem Context—A Case Study from the Eastern Cape, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    16. Calvet-Mir, Laura & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Reyes-García, Victoria, 2012. "Beyond food production: Ecosystem services provided by home gardens. A case study in Vall Fosca, Catalan Pyrenees, Northeastern Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 153-160.
    17. Sébastien Foudi, 2012. "Exploitation of soil biota ecosystem services in agriculture: a bioeconomic approach," Working Papers 2012-02, BC3.
    18. Joël Houdet & Charlotte Pavageau & Michel Trommetter & Jacques Weber, 2009. "Accounting for changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services from a business perspective," Working Papers hal-00434450, HAL.
    19. Ando Fahda Aulia & Harpinder Sandhu & Andrew C. Millington, 2020. "Quantifying the Economic Value of Ecosystem Services in Oil Palm Dominated Landscapes in Riau Province in Sumatra, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, June.
    20. Baba, S.H. & Wani, S.A., 2018. "Ecosystem Management Approach for Agricultural Growth in Mountains: Farmers Perception of Ecosystem Services and Dis-Services in Kashmir-India," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277556, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:12819-:d:1224293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.