Suchergebnisse

Die Landwirtschaft besitzt eine bedeutende Rolle für die Erhaltung und Förderung der Biodiversität, denn rund 50 % der Fläche in Deutschland werden landwirtschaftlich genutzt. Die Zielvorstellungen verschiedenster Akteure, wie Biodiversität in Agrarlandschaften erhalten und gefördert werden kann, weichen zum Teil erheblich voneinander ab. Ein vertiefendes Verständnis von Landwirt-schaft und Biodiversität kann helfen, gemeinsame Zielbilder für die langfristige Entwicklung von Agrarräumen zu entwerfen und auf diese Art und Weise Biodi-versitätsmaßnahmen wirksamer zu gestalten und Transformationsprozesse von Agrarsystemen anzustoßen. ; About 50 % of the area of Germany is used for agricultural purposes. Consequently, agriculture is of utmost importance for maintaining and promoting biodiversity. This responsibility is also formulated by nature conservation and environmental protection as well as by a society that is committed to sustainability. However, the objectives of the respective players sometimes differ widely with regard how biodiversity should be protected, maintained and used in agriculture. A differentiated view of land use and a deeper understanding of biodiversity could help to develop targets for so-called agricultural units to protect and maintain biodiversity in agricultural landscapes while respecting regional and local particularities. Through the participation of society, strategies can thus be devel-oped for implementing concrete measures and transformation processes of agricultural systems. By designing meaningful biodiversity indicators that fit the characteristics of the agricultural units, it is possible to evaluate the measures and transformation processes, and to adapt their design to meet political strategies and objectives.

Deutschland verfügt derzeit über keine national umfassende Datengrundlage zum Zustand und zur Entwicklung der Biodiversität in Agrarlandschaften. Eine wissenschaftlich belastbare Bestandsaufnahme und differenzierte Bewertung der Trends sowie der Ursachen für die Trendentwicklungen für Agrarräume sind daher nur sehr eingeschränkt möglich. Entsprechend fehlt die wissenschaftliche Datenbasis mittels derer die Wirksamkeit von agrarumweltpolitischen Maßnahmen auf die Biodiversität bewertet werden könnte. Daraus ergibt sich die Notwendigkeit, dass als Grundlage für wissensbasierte politische Entscheidungen, im Hinblick auf die zukünftige Ausgestaltung der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik (GAP) der EU und weiterer umweltrelevanter Politiken, dringend Daten aus einem auf die Agrarräume Deutschlands angepassten Biodiversitätsmonitoring (BM)-Landwirtschaft benötigt werden. [.] ; There is no comprehensive national database on the state and development of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes of Germany. Therefore, the prospects for an evidence based assessment of the biodiversity trends and the factors causing these trends across different types of agricultural landscapes are limited. Accordingly, our possibilities to inform policy about success or failure of agri-environmental measures with the aim to provide feedback for future improvement of agri-environmental policy are limited as well. A programme for biodiversity monitoring designed to meet the characteristics of agricultural landscapes of Germany is therefore urgently needed. [.]

The maintenance of High Nature Value (HNV) farming is a priority for reaching the target of halting biodiversity loss in the European Union by 2020. Nevertheless, since the introduction of the HNV farming concept in the early 1990s and the first call for HNV farmland indicators in 2000, farmland biodiversity has continued to decline in many parts of Europe. The main processes behind this decline are agricultural intensification and abandonment. Past and current agricultural subsidies and conservation measures have mainly failed to safeguard HNV farmland and the respective farming systems. In this paper, we revise current approaches for localizing and characterizing HNV farming, identify shortcomings and describe the next generation of HNV farming indicators; show how HNV farming is related to existing concepts aimed at biodiversity conservation; and provide an overview of EU policy instruments that could help preserve HNV farming. We finish by outlining which steps should be taken so that HNV farming remains a part of our modern agricultural landscape.

Worldwide, the role of farmlands for biodiversity conservation and the delivery of multiple ecosystem services has been widely acknowledged. In the European Union (EU), societal demands to include environmental conservation concerns within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) have resulted in the recognition of the importance of maintaining High Nature Value farmlands (HNVf). HNVf constitute complex social-ecological systems, which owe their nature conservation value to the maintenance of specific, mostly low-intensity farming systems, supporting high levels of species and habitats dependent on agricultural practices. Even though HNVf assessment in space and time is essential to evaluate the effectiveness of Rural Development Programmes, the diversity of rural landscapes across EU, the scarcity of data on farming systems, and the lack of common methodological guidelines has hampered the implementation of HNVf mapping and monitoring across Europe. Thus, there is a pressing need to develop and test methodological approaches that may support HNVf assessment across the EU.The Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) which is mandatory for all EU Member States constitutes a system for the management and control of CAP payments to farmers. Essentially, IACS comprises high-resolution, spatially explicit information on the type and intensity of agricultural land-use. Even though such data exhibits high thematic, spatial and temporal resolution, IACS has seldom been used, due to significant access restrictions. Here, the potential to use IACS data to support the assessment of HNVf was evaluated within the German Federal State of Lower Saxony by implementing a recently developed methodological framework. Sets of indicators known to be essential for identifying potential HNVf and underlying farming systems (expressing landscape structure and composition, farming systems, and crop diversity), were derived from IACS. Spatial patterns of indicators were analyzed at two different scales to delineate the potential distribution of HNVf across Lower Saxony. Results highlighted that most regions in Lower Saxony were characterized by intensive farming practices including high livestock density, high share of intensive crops and low density of linear elements.Only 3% of the Utilized Agricultural Area (UAA) of Lower Saxony potentially constituted HNVf, with the majority of HNVf coinciding with mosaics of arable and/or permanent crops and semi-natural features under less intensive farming practices. Semi-natural grasslands, partially under agri-environment scheme management contracts, covered roughly 1% of the UAA and were mostly intermingled with other farmland habitats in extensively managed agricultural landscapes.

In der vorliegenden Stellungnahme werden die GAP-Beschlüsse zum Greening der Direktzahlungen in Bezug auf die nationalen Gestaltungsspielräume für die drei Greening-Komponenten Anbaudiversifizierung, Erhaltung von Dauergrünland und ökologische Vorrangflächen (ÖVF)2 bewertet und Handlungsoptionen vorgeschlagen. Dabei wird der Frage nachgegangen, inwiefern die einzelnen nationalen Umsetzungsoptionen sich auf die Biodiversität auswirken und welche Kosten mit einzelnen ÖVF-Maßnahmen verbunden sind. Weiterhin wird der administrative Aufwand bewertet.

In der vorliegenden Stellungnahme werden die GAP-Beschlüsse zum Greening der Direktzahlungen in Bezug auf die nationalen Gestaltungsspielräume für die drei Greening-Komponenten Anbaudiversifizierung, Erhaltung von Dauergrünland und ökologische Vorrangflächen (ÖVF)2 bewertet und Handlungsoptionen vorgeschlagen. Dabei wird der Frage nachgegangen, inwiefern die einzelnen nationalen Umsetzungsoptionen sich auf die Biodiversität auswirken und welche Kosten mit einzelnen ÖVF-Maßnahmen verbunden sind. Weiterhin wird der administrative Aufwand bewertet.

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now.

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now.

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now. ; Peer reviewed

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now. ; peerReviewed