Suchergebnisse

High Nature Value Farmland (HNVF) is commonly associated with low intensity agricultural systems. HNVFs cover ~32% of the agricultural land in Europe and are of strategic importance for the European Union policy since they are reservoirs of biodiversity and provide several ecosystem services. Carbon sequestration is an important service that can be supplied by HNVFs as addressed in this study. Considering soil carbon content as a proxy for soil carbon storage, we compare HNVFs with soils that undergo more conventional land management (nHNVFs) and study the consequences of diverse land uses and geographic regions as additional explanatory variables. The results of our research show that, at the European level, organic carbon content is higher in HNVF than in nHNVF. However, this difference is strongly affected by the type of land use and the geographic region. Rather than seeing HNVF and nHNVF as two sharply distinct categories, as for carbon storage potential, we provide indications that the interplay between soil type (HNVF or nHNVF), land use, and geographic region determines carbon content in soils.

peer-reviewed ; Agricultural ecosystems provide a range of benefits that are vital to human well-being. These benefits are dependent on several soil functions that are affected in different ways by legislation from the European Union, national, and regional levels. We evaluated current European Union soil-related legislation and examples of regional legislation with regard to direct and indirect impacts on five soil functions: the production of food, fiber, and fuel; water purification and regulation; carbon sequestration and climate regulation; habitat for biodiversity provisioning; and the recycling of nutrients/agro-chemicals. Our results illustrate the diversity of existing policies and the complex interactions present between different spatial and temporal scales. The impact of most policies, positive or negative, on a soil function is usually not established, but depends on how the policy is implemented by local authorities and the farmers. This makes it difficult to estimate the overall state and trends of the different soil functions in agricultural ecosystems. To implement functional management and sustainable use of the different soil functions in agricultural ecosystems, more knowledge is needed on the policy interactions as well as on the impact of management options on the different soil functions.

Following a request from the European Commission (EC), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) initiated a procedure for the evaluation of data supporting the necessity of the application of insecticide active substances to control a serious danger to plant health within the context of Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. EFSA established an ad hoc working group (WG) who proposed a methodology for conducting this type of evaluation. The draft protocol was circulated among European Union Member States (MS) for commenting. The aim of this protocol is to enable a consistent and transparent evaluation of submissions made by applicants in accordance with the derogation detailed in Article 4(7) of Regulation (EU) No 1107/2009 to confirm the lack of other available means capable of controlling an identified serious danger to plant health. All the evaluations are made for each specific crop/pest combination separately for which a derogation is requested. Usually, derogation for the use of an insecticide active substance is not scientifically supported if an alternative control programme not requiring the application of an insecticide can manage the specific crop/pest combination under consideration, or if another active substance with the same mode of action (IRAC) as the active substance under consideration is available. If these conditions are not verified, the process moves to the evaluation of: 1) the risk of resistance associated to the different mode of action of all active substances that are authorised in the MS; 2) the risk of resistance associated to the different pests; 3) the availability of non-insecticide alternatives.

The challenges of achieving both food security and environmental sustainability have resulted in a confluence of demands on land within the European Union (EU): we expect our land to provide food, fiber and fuel, to purify water, to sequester carbon, and provide a home to biodiversity as well as external nutrients in the form of waste from humans and intensive livestock enterprises. All soils can perform all of these five functions, but some soils are better at supplying selective functions. Functional Land Management is a framework for policy-making aimed at meeting these demands by incentivizing land use and soil management practices that selectively augment specific soil functions, where required. Here, we explore how the demands for contrasting soil functions, as framed by EU policies, may apply to very different spatial scales, from local to continental scales. At the same time, using Ireland as a national case study, we show that the supply of each soil function is largely determined by local soil and land use conditions, with large variations at both local and regional scales. These discrepancies between the scales at which the demands and supply of soil functions are manifested, have implications for soil and land management: while some soil functions must be managed at local (e.g., farm or field) scale, others may be offset between regions with a view to solely meeting national or continental demands. In order to facilitate the optimization of the delivery of soil functions at national level, to meet the demands that are framed at continental scale, we identify and categorize 14 policy and market instruments that are available in the EU. The results from this inventory imply that there may be no need for the introduction of new specific instruments to aid the governance of Functional Land Management. We conclude that there may be more merit in adapting existing governance instruments by facilitating differentiation between soils and landscapes.

The challenges of achieving both food security and environmental sustainability have resulted in a confluence of demands on land within the European Union (EU): we expect our land to provide food, fiber and fuel, to purify water, to sequester carbon, and provide a home to biodiversity as well as external nutrients in the form of waste from humans and intensive livestock enterprises. All soils can perform all of these five functions, but some soils are better at supplying selective functions. Functional Land Management is a framework for policy-making aimed at meeting these demands by incentivizing land use and soil management practices that selectively augment specific soil functions, where required. Here, we explore how the demands for contrasting soil functions, as framed by EU policies, may apply to very different spatial scales, from local to continental scales. At the same time, using Ireland as a national case study, we show that the supply of each soil function is largely determined by local soil and land use conditions, with large variations at both local and regional scales. These discrepancies between the scales at which the demands and supply of soil functions are manifested, have implications for soil and land management: while some soil functions must be managed at local (e.g., farm or field) scale, others may be offset between regions with a view to solely meeting national or continental demands. In order to facilitate the optimization of the delivery of soil functions at national level, to meet the demands that are framed at continental scale, we identify and categorize 14 policy and market instruments that are available in the EU. The results from this inventory imply that there may be no need for the introduction of new specific instruments to aid the governance of Functional Land Management. We conclude that there may be more merit in adapting existing governance instruments by facilitating differentiation between soils and landscapes.

The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of the citrus snow scale, Unaspis citri (Comstock) (Hemiptera: Diaspididae), for the European Union (EU). This is a well-de fi ned and distinguishable species, native to south-eastern Asia, which has spread to many tropical and subtropical regions. U. citri can be a pest of citrus and has been cited on over 28 different species in 16 plant families. In the EU, U. citri occurs in the Azores. There is uncertainty as to whether it occurs in continental Portugal. Reports of it occurring in Greece and Spain are likely to be invalid and based on interception records from these countries. An old Italian record is a misidenti fi cation. U. citri is listed in Annex IIAI of 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism. The international trade of hosts, as either plants for planting, fruit or cut fl owers, provide potential pathways into the EU. However, current EU legislation prohibits the import of citrus plants for planting from third countries. U. citri is mostly con fi ned to coastal humid tropical areas and does not occur in semi-arid areas that are irrigated. Nevertheless, given that it occurs in the Azores and that there are regional climatic similarities between places where U. citri occurs and climates within the EU, and taking EU host distribution into account, U. citri has the potential to establish in the EU, especially in citrus-growing regions around the Mediterranean where losses in quality and yield of citrus could occur. Phytosanitary measures are available to inhibit the likelihood of introduction of U. citri . Considering the criteria within the remit of EFSA to assess the status as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP), or as a potential regulated non-quarantine pest (RNQP), U. citri meets the criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union QP.

The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of the weevil Anthonomus quadrigibbus Say, (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), for the EU. A. quadrigibbus is a well-de fi ned and distinguishable species, recognised as an occasional pest of apples, pears and sour cherries in North America where it also feeds on a range of wild rosaceous plants such as Crataegus and Amelanchier . Adults feed on leaves, fl owers and fruit. Feeding damage to fruit reduces quality. Females oviposit into young fruit, causing surface blemishes and resulting in distortion as the fruit develops. Marketability is subsequently reduced. Larvae and pupae develop within host fruit. Most infested fruit fall prematurely, reducing yield. A. quadrigibbus was regarded as a more serious pest in the early 20th century. A. quadrigibbus is not known to occur in the EU and is listed in Annex IIAI of Council Directive 2000/29/EC under the synonym Tachypterellus quadrigibbus . Host plants for planting and infested fruit could potentially provide a pathway into the EU. Considering the climatic similarities between North America and Europe, and that wild and commercial hosts occur widely within the EU, A. quadrigibbus has the potential to establish within the EU. There would be one generation per year, as in North America. Impacts could be expected in apple, pear and perhaps sour cherry orchards. The level of impacts would be uncertain. There is also uncertainty regarding whether A. quadrigibbus would extend its host range to include other Rosaceae within the EU. Phytosanitary measures are available to reduce the likelihood of introduction of A. quadrigibbus . All criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union quarantine pest are met. As A. quadrigibbus is not known to occur in the EU, this criterion assessed by EFSA to consider it as a Union regulated non-quarantine pest is not met.