Suchergebnisse

Natural disasters can affect individuals' views about the environment, especially when these events are extreme and experienced by people directly (locally). In one of the first comprehensive and systematic attempts, we explore whether a similar relationship exists transnationally – a cross-border effect stemming from environmental disasters abroad on public opinion 'at home'. Spatial analyses present robust evidence that people's environmental salience attitudes are substantially driven by disaster-related deaths in nearby countries. It follows that environmental disasters cannot be treated as isolated incidents within state borders, but they rather have far-reaching, transnational consequences on public opinion and, potentially, policy. Accordingly, this research adds to our understanding of environmental politics, public opinion, natural disasters and diffusion effects.

AbstractNatural disasters can affect individuals' views about the environment, especially when these events are extreme and experienced by people directly (locally). In one of the first comprehensive and systematic attempts, we explore whether a similar relationship exists transnationally – a cross‐border effect stemming from environmental disasters abroad on public opinion 'at home'. Spatial analyses present robust evidence that people's environmental salience attitudes are substantially driven by disaster‐related deaths in nearby countries. It follows that environmental disasters cannot be treated as isolated incidents within state borders, but they rather have far‐reaching, transnational consequences on public opinion and, potentially, policy. Accordingly, this research adds to our understanding of environmental politics, public opinion, natural disasters and diffusion effects.

Preservation and promotion of agroforestry systems entails the ideology for more ecosystem services, additional biodiversity benefits and climate change mitigation. Furthermore, farmland and forest landscapes and the consequent benefits to the environment from their combination, enhance the importance of agroforestry systems towards sustainable environmental policies. Nevertheless, traditional agroforestry systems face significant adaptation problems, especially in the EU, due to continuous economic reforms and strict agri-environmental measures. In this context our main goal is to assess the current managerial framework of two agroforestry systems and more specifically the olive agroforestry practices in Northern Greece. The economic and environmental implications of four different production plans are highlighted following the Life Cycle Costing and the Life Cycle Assessment protocols. The production plans include the simultaneous cultivation of annual crops, such as vetch and barley, along with olive groves. Potential environmental impacts are depicted in CO2 equivalents, while the economic allocation of costs is divided in targeted categories (e.g., raw materials, labor, land rent, etc.). The results indicate significant deviations among the four production plans, with the combination of olive trees and barley being heavily dependent on fertilization. Furthermore, the open-spaced olive trees intercropped with a mixture of barley and commonly depicted the lowest CO2 eq. emissions, though the economic cost was significantly higher than the other agroforestry system intercropped with barley only. The authors suggest that the formulation of a decision support system for agroforestry systems should be taken into account in order to preserve current agroforestry systems.

This paper reports the results of a study conducted in Italy, within the AGFORWARD (2014–2017) project, aimed at promoting innovative agroforestry practices in Europe. Agroforestry offers a means for maintaining food production whilst addressing some of the negative environmental effects of intensive agriculture. This study aims to elicit the positive and negative points of view and perceptions of local stakeholders in Italy in relation to three types of agroforestry systems. The Participatory Research and Network Development was implemented in three workshops conducted in Sardinia, Umbria, and Veneto regions, and applied adopting a common methodological protocol. Qualitative data were obtained using open discussions with stakeholders on key issues, challenges and innovations. Quantitative data were obtained from stakeholders completing questionnaires during the workshops. A statistical analysis was applied to elicit the differences in stakeholders' positive and negative perceptions in relation to production, management, environment and socio-economy aspects. Although the participants in the study came from different geographical and socioeconomic contexts with varied educational and cultural backgrounds, the different professional groups (farmers, policy-makers and researchers) and the three workshops generally shared similar perceptions of the benefits and constraints. The effects of agroforestry on production and the environment were generally perceived as positive, whilst those related to management were generally negative. The process of bringing the groups together seemed to be an effective means for identifying the key research gaps that need to be addressed in order to promote the uptake and maintenance of agroforestry.

Agroforestry is one of the most prominent tools to make easy the transition of European agricultural and forestry farms to more sustainable land use systems such as agroforestry. The extent of agroforestry in Europe is 19.5 million of hectares, of which 85% is allocated to silvopastoralism mainly associated to European Southern countries but also present in some Eastern countries. Silvopasture is associated to the improvement of livestock farming systems providing feed in a more sustainable way while increasing the multiple ouputs production from the same unit of land, therefore improving rural development. The current share of silvopastoralism in the EU is the 10% of the permanent grasslands which shows the huge potential that this land use has. The second most important agroforestry systems are the homegardens which represents the 8.3% of agroforestry lands and occupy around 8.65% of the land allocated to homegardens. Forest farming is not inventoried at all, while silvoarable only occupies almost half a million hectares and less than 1% of the arable land. Europe fosters agroforestry mostly through the Rural Development programs with more than 383 and 467 measures fostering agroforestry in one way or another in the previous CAP (2007-2013) and current CAP (2014-2020). Future measures should be fostered through the CAP Strategic plans developed at country level

Agroforestry is the practice of deliberately integrating woody vegetation (trees or shrubs) with crops and/or animal systems to benefit from the resulting ecological and economic interactions. Existing research indicates that appropriate application of agroforestry principles and practices is a key means by which the European Union might achieve more sustainable methods of food and fibre production whilst producing both profits for farmers and environmental benefits for society.

Project context The European Union has targets to improve the competitiveness of European agriculture and forestry, whilst improving the environment and the quality of rural life. At the same time there is a need to improve our resilience to climate change and to enhance biodiversity. During the twentieth century, large productivity advances were made by managing agriculture and forestry as separate practices, but often at a high environmental cost. In order to address landscape-scale issues such as biodiversity and water quality, we argue that farmers and society will benefit from considering landuse as a continuum including both agriculture and trees, and that there are significant opportunities for European farmers and society to benefit from a closer integration of trees with agriculture. Agroforestry is the practice of deliberately integrating woody vegetation (trees or shrubs) with crop and/or animal systems to benefit from the resulting ecological and economic interactions. ; AGFORWARD (Grant Agreement N° 613520) is co-funded by the European Commission, Directorate General for Research & Innovation, within the 7th Framework Programme of RTD. The views and opinions expressed in this report are purely those of the writers and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission

An accurate and objective estimate on the extent of agroforestry in Europe is critical for the development of supporting policies. For this reason, a more harmonised and uniform Pan-European estimate is needed. The aim of this study was to quantify and map the distribution of agroforestry in the European Union. We classified agroforestry into three main types of agroforestry systems: arable agroforestry, livestock agroforestry and high value tree agroforestry. These three classes are partly overlapping as high value tree agroforestry can be part of either arable or livestock agroforestry. Agroforestry areas were mapped using LUCAS Land Use and Land Cover data (Eurostat, 2015). By identifying certain combinations of primary and secondary land cover and/or land management it was possible to identify agroforestry points and stratify them in the three different systems. According to our estimate using the LUCAS database the total area under agroforestry in the EU 27 is about 15.4 million ha which is equivalent to about 3.6% of the territorial area and 8.8% of the utilised agricultural area. Of our three studied systems, livestock agroforestry covers about 15.1 million ha which is by far the largest area. High value tree agroforestry and arable agroforestry cover 1.1 and 0.3 million ha respectively. Spain (5.6 million ha), France (1.6 million ha), Greece (1.6 million ha), Italy (1.4 million ha), Portugal (1.2 million ha), Romania (0.9 million ha) and Bulgaria (0.9 million ha) have the largest absolute area of agroforestry. However the extent of agroforestry, expressed as a proportion of the utilised agricultural area (UAA), is greatest in countries like Cyprus (40% of UAA), Portugal (32% of UAA) and Greece (31% of UAA). A cluster analysis revealed that a high abundance of agroforestry areas can be found in the south-west quadrat of the Iberian Peninsula, the south of France, Sardinia, south and central Italy, central and north-east Greece, south and central Bulgaria, and central Romania. Since the data were collected ...

Agroforestry, relative to conventional agriculture, contributes significantly to carbon sequestration, increases a range of regulating ecosystem services, and enhances biodiversity. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we combined scientific and technical knowledge to evaluate nine environmental pressures in terms of ecosystem services in European farmland and assessed the carbon storage potential of suitable agroforestry systems, proposed by regional experts. First, regions with potential environmental pressures were identified with respect to soil health (soil erosion by water and wind, low soil organic carbon), water quality (water pollution by nitrates, salinization by irrigation), areas affected by climate change (rising temperature), and by underprovision in biodiversity (pollination and pest control pressures, loss of soil biodiversity). The maps were overlaid to identify areas where several pressures accumulate. In total, 94.4% of farmlands suffer from at least one environmental pressure, pastures being less affected than arable lands. Regional hotspots were located in north-western France, Denmark, Central Spain, north and south-western Italy, Greece, and eastern Romania. The 10% of the area with the highest number of accumulated pressures were defined as Priority Areas, where the implementation of agroforestry could be particularly effective. In a second step, European agroforestry experts were asked to propose agroforestry practices suitable for the Priority Areas they were familiar with, and identified 64 different systems covering a wide range of practices. These ranged from hedgerows on field boundaries to fast growing coppices or scattered single tree systems. Third, for each proposed system, the carbon storage potential was assessed based on data from the literature and the results were scaled-up to the Priority Areas. As expected, given the wide range of agroforestry practices identified, the carbon sequestration potentials ranged between 0.09 and 7.29 t C ha−1 a−1. Implementing agroforestry on the Priority Areas could lead to a sequestration of 2.1 to 63.9 million t C a−1 (7.78 and 234.85 million t CO2eq a−1) depending on the type of agroforestry. This corresponds to between 1.4 and 43.4% of European agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Moreover, promoting agroforestry in the Priority Areas would contribute to mitigate the environmental pressures identified there. We conclude that the strategic and spatially targeted establishment of agroforestry systems could provide an effective means of meeting EU policy objectives on GHG emissions whilst providing a range of other important benefits. ; peerReviewed