Literature DB >> 31798202

Reconciling biodiversity conservation, food production and farmers' demand in agricultural landscapes.

Daniel Montoya1,2, Sabrina Gaba3,4, Claire de Mazancourt1, Vincent Bretagnolle4,5, Michel Loreau1.   

Abstract

Efficient management of agricultural management should consider multiple services and stakeholders. Yet, it remains unclear how to guarantee ecosystem services for multiple stakeholders' demands, especially considering the observed biodiversity decline following reductions in semi-natural habitat (SNH), and global change. Here, we use an ecosystem service model of intensively-managed agricultural landscapes to derive the best landscape compositions for different stakeholders' demands, and how they vary with stochasticity and the degree of pollination dependence of crops. We analyse three groups of stakeholders assumed to value different ecosystem services most - individual farmers (crop yield per area), agricultural unions (landscape production) and conservationists (biodiversity). Additionally, we consider a social average scenario that aims at maximizing multifunctionality. Trade-offs among stakeholders' demands strongly depend on the degree of pollination dependence of crops, the strength of environmental and demographic stochasticity, and the relative amount of an ecosystem service demanded by each stakeholder. Intermediate amounts of SNH deliver relatively high levels of the three services (social average). Our analysis further suggests that the current levels of SNH protection lie below these intermediate amounts of SNH in intensively-managed agricultural landscapes. Given the worldwide trends in agriculture and global change, current policies should start to consider factors such as crop type and stochasticity, as they can strongly influence best landscape compositions for different stakeholders. Our results suggest ways of managing landscapes to reconcile several actors' demands and ensure for biodiversity conservation and food production.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Agroecology; Biodiversity; Crop pollination; Landscape composition; Stakeholder demands; Trade-Offs

Year:  2019        PMID: 31798202      PMCID: PMC6887556          DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2019.108889

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecol Modell        ISSN: 0304-3800            Impact factor:   2.974


  27 in total

1.  Synergistic interactions of ecosystem services: florivorous pest control boosts crop yield increase through insect pollination.

Authors:  Louis Sutter; Matthias Albrecht
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  How much does agriculture depend on pollinators? Lessons from long-term trends in crop production.

Authors:  Marcelo A Aizen; Lucas A Garibaldi; Saul A Cunningham; Alexandra M Klein
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 4.357

Review 3.  Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services.

Authors:  Elena M Bennett; Garry D Peterson; Line J Gordon
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2009-10-21       Impact factor: 9.492

4.  Combining high biodiversity with high yields in tropical agroforests.

Authors:  Yann Clough; Jan Barkmann; Jana Juhrbandt; Michael Kessler; Thomas Cherico Wanger; Alam Anshary; Damayanti Buchori; Daniele Cicuzza; Kevin Darras; Dadang Dwi Putra; Stefan Erasmi; Ramadhanil Pitopang; Carsten Schmidt; Christian H Schulze; Dominik Seidel; Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter; Kathrin Stenchly; Stefan Vidal; Maria Weist; Arno Christian Wielgoss; Teja Tscharntke
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-05-02       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: ten years of applications and trends.

Authors:  Ivy B Huang; Jeffrey Keisler; Igor Linkov
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 7.963

6.  Emerging perspectives in the restoration of biodiversity-based ecosystem services.

Authors:  Daniel Montoya; Lucy Rogers; Jane Memmott
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 17.712

7.  Stability of pollination services decreases with isolation from natural areas despite honey bee visits.

Authors:  Lucas A Garibaldi; Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter; Claire Kremen; Juan M Morales; Riccardo Bommarco; Saul A Cunningham; Luísa G Carvalheiro; Natacha P Chacoff; Jan H Dudenhöffer; Sarah S Greenleaf; Andrea Holzschuh; Rufus Isaacs; Kristin Krewenka; Yael Mandelik; Margaret M Mayfield; Lora A Morandin; Simon G Potts; Taylor H Ricketts; Hajnalka Szentgyörgyi; Blandina F Viana; Catrin Westphal; Rachael Winfree; Alexandra M Klein
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 9.492

8.  Recent patterns of crop yield growth and stagnation.

Authors:  Deepak K Ray; Navin Ramankutty; Nathaniel D Mueller; Paul C West; Jonathan A Foley
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  The global stock of domesticated honey bees is growing slower than agricultural demand for pollination.

Authors:  Marcelo A Aizen; Lawrence D Harder
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 10.834

10.  Herbicides do not ensure for higher wheat yield, but eliminate rare plant species.

Authors:  Sabrina Gaba; Edith Gabriel; Joël Chadœuf; Florent Bonneu; Vincent Bretagnolle
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 4.379

View more
  1 in total

1.  Protect European green agricultural policies for future food security.

Authors:  Manuel B Morales; Mario Díaz; David Giralt; Francesc Sardà-Palomera; Juan Traba; François Mougeot; David Serrano; Santi Mañosa; Sabrina Gaba; Francisco Moreira; Tomas Pärt; Elena D Concepción; Rocío Tarjuelo; Beatriz Arroyo; Gerard Bota
Journal:  Commun Earth Environ       Date:  2022-09-20
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.