Suchergebnisse

Agri-environmental schemes (AES) of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) aims at reversing the negative effects of agricultural intensification on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Landscape context may modulate, and even constraint, AES effectiveness. We evaluate AES effectiveness on ant abundance, diversity and community composition. Ants are an ecologically dominant group whose response to conservation efforts in farmland has been rarely evaluated, despite its role in weed control, particularly in Mediterranean farmland. Ants were sampled in the edge and in the centre of paired cereal fields, managed with and without AES in three study areas along a landscape complexity gradient. AES application had no significant effects on ant species richness or ant community composition. Richness increased in fields and landscapes with higher amounts of complex edges and decreased towards the centre of the fields. Specialist granivorous ants (harvester ants, Messor spp.) were the most abundant. Abundance of foraging ants increased with the amount of complex edges around fields and in the landscape. AES application increased ant abundance close to field edges but not in field centers. AES fields had less specialist granivorous foraging in their centers than in control field centers. Ant communities in Mediterranean cereal cropland were mostly constrained by the availability of complex edges, needed for nest building. AES increased the abundance of foraging ants, mostly specialist harvester ants, and its potential service of weed control, but close to field edges mainly. Measures promoting the abundance of stable edges rather than of ephemeral headlands in the landscape are essential to enhance the potential of AES for increasing ant-mediated ecosystem services of weed control ; This paper is a contribution to the EU Project QLK5-CT-2002–1495 'Evaluating current European Agri-environment Schemes to quantify and improve Nature Conservation efforts in agricultural landscapes (EASY)'

19 Pags.- 5 Figs.- 5 Tabls. © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Under a Creative Commons license Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). ; National accounting either ignores or fails to give due values to the ecosystem services, products, incomes and environmental assets of a country. To overcome these shortcomings, we apply spatially-explicit extended accounts that incorporate a novel environmental income indicator, which we test in the forests of Andalusia (Spain). Extended accounts incorporate nine farmer activities (timber, cork, firewood, nuts, livestock grazing, conservation forestry, hunting, residential services and private amenity) and seven government activities (fire services, free access recreation, free access mushroom, carbon, landscape conservation, threatened biodiversity and water yield). To make sure the valuation remains consistent with standard accounts, we simulate exchange values for non-market final forest product consumption in order to measure individual ecosystem services and environmental income indicators. Manufactured capital and environmental assets are also integrated. When comparing extended to standard accounts, our results are 3.6 times higher for gross value added. These differences are explained primarily by the omission in the standard accounts of carbon activities and undervaluation of private amenity, free access recreation, landscape and threatened biodiversity ecosystem services. Extended accounts measure a value of Andalusian forest ecosystem services 5.4 times higher than that measured using the valuation criteria of standard accounts. ; This RECAMAN project research has received financial support from Agency of Environment and Water (AMAYA); Department of Environment and Territory Planning (CMAYOT) (contract No NET165602). ; Peer reviewed

[EN] The next reform ofthe EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the period 2021-2027 (currently extended to 2023-2030) requires the approval by the European Commission of a Strategic Plan with environmental objectives for each Member State. Here we use the best available scientific evidence on the relationships between agricultural practices and biodiversity to delineate specific recommendations for the development of the Spanish Strategic Plan. Scientific evidence shows that Spain should (1) identify clear regional biodiversity targets and the landscape-level measures needed to achieve them; (2) define ambitious and complementary criteria across the three environmental instruments (enhanced conditionality, eco-schemes, and agri-environmental and climate measures) of the CAP's Green Architecture, especially in simple and complex landscapes; (3) ensure that other CAP instruments (areas of nature constraints, organic farming and protection of endangered livestock breeds and crop varieties) really support biodiversity; (4) improve farmers' knowledge and adjust measures to real world constraints; and (5) invest in biodiversity and ecosystem service monitoring in order to evaluate how the Plan achieves regional and national targets andto improve measures if targets are not met. We conclude that direct assessments of environmental objectives are technically and economi- cally feasible, can be attractive to farmers, and are socially fair and of great interest for improving the environmental effectiveness of CAP measures. The explicit and rigorous association of assessments and monitoring, relating specific environmental indicators to regional objectives, should be the main criterion for the approval of the Strategic Plan in an environmentally-focused CAP2023-2030. ; [ES] La reforma de la Política Agraria Común (PAC) para el periodo 2021-2027 (extendido en la actualidad a 2023-2030) exige que la Comisión Europea apruebe un Plan Estratégico por cada Estado Miembro con claros objetivos ambientales. En este trabajo desarrollamos recomendaciones específicas para la elaboración del Plan Estratégico para los sistemas agrícolas españoles, basadas en la mejor evidencia científica disponible sobre las relaciones entre la gestión agrícola y los componentes de la biodiversidad. La evidencia científica muestra que España debe 1) identificar objetivos regionales claros relativos a la biodiversidad de los medios agrarios y las medidas a nivel paisajístico necesarias para alcanzarlas; 2) definir criterios ambiciosos y complementarios para los tres instrumentos ambientales (condicionalidad extendida, eco-esquemas y medidas agroambientales y climáticas) de la Arquitectura Verde de la PAC, especialmente en paisajes sencillos y complejos; 3) garantizar que otros instrumentos de la PAC (zonas desfavorecidas, agricultura ecológica y protección de razas ganaderas y variedades de cultivos en peligro de extinción) favorecen realmente la diversidad biológica; 4) mejorar el conocimiento de los agricultores y ajustar las medidas a las limitaciones del mundo real; y 5) invertir en seguimiento de la biodiversidad y sus servicios ecosistémicos asociados con el fin de evaluar si el Plan alcanza los objetivos regionales y nacionales y mejorarlos adaptativamente si no lo consigue. Concluimos que la evaluación directa de los objetivos ambientales es técnica y económicamente viable, puede ser atractiva para los agricultores, es socialmente justa y de gran utilidad en la mejora de la efectividad de las medidas de la PAC. Una combinación rigurosa de seguimiento y evaluación de medidas y objetivos adaptados regionalmente mediante indicadores ambientales directos y claros debería ser el criterio que guíe la aprobación del Plan Estratégico para una PAC 2023-2030 centrada en el medio ambiente y orientada a la conservación de la biodiversidad. ; Peer reviewed