Landscape Agroecology: managing interactions between agriculture, nature and socio-economy

State of the art GIS and database technologies for landscape scale analysis and the modelling of land use and environmental impacts are presented. These methods have been developed at University of Aarhus in multidisciplinary collaboration with other research institutions throughout Europe; for example during the EU research projects www.mea-scope.org and www.sensor-ip.eu. In the years to come, these landscape scale research methods are further developed and integrated with similar frameworks in other EU countries, and used for scenario studies (see for example the landscape components of http://www.nitroeurope.eu/, http://www.darcof.dk/research/darcofiii/refugia.html or http://www.darcof.dk/research/darcofiii/bioconcens.html). Scenario studies, visualised in geographical information systems, are useful to evaluate possible future landscape developments, and to identify potentials and limitations in combining multiple landscape functions. Here we focus on scenario systems that focus on exploring interactions between landscape functions – e.g. the interactions between farm management, economy, nutrient losses, fauna population dynamics, plant community development etc. Among others, scenarios for drinking water protection via increased set-aside grassland or afforestation are presented. It shows that benefits from subsidies targeted to areas with special interests in protection of drinking waters from nitrogen pollution differ from non-targeted subsidies. Experience has shown that working with scenarios and involving potential users at an early stage in development are important ways of focussing the work effort and ensuring that relevant tools are developed. Developments in data collection and collation at the EU level will allow similar systems to be developed elsewhere

Materials and Methods REFUGIA project working paper

The organic farming structure has been analysed for all farms in Denmark 2005-2010. In 2005, the average farm size for organic farms was 50 ha, compared to 40 ha for conventional farms. For organic farms the largest average farm size in on sandy soils and for cattle farms, whereas the for conventional farms, the largest farms are on loamy soils, and cash crop, and pig farms. The farms has been classified into farm types accoring to the EUROSTAT methods. Hobby farms are defined with a number of standard working hours under 1871 timer/år (typically under 10-25 ha). These farms normally are not included in national statistics, but are important to include in the REFUGIA studies, because these farms are important for biodiversity and have a relatively higher number among organic farms. The other farm types are full time farms. If more than 2/3 of the standard gross margin comes from catlle it is a cattle farm, and the same for cash crops. The rest is pig farms and other types of farms (for example poultry and fur animals). Standard rotations are defined for each of these farm types

Visions for organic bioenergy production in Denmark

There is a large potential for organic bioenergy production, which can be combined with the present food production and the provision of multiple other goods and services required by society; i.e. a cleaner aquatic environment, or nature values in cultural landscapes. This paper presents six scenarios for bioenergy production from organic farming in Denmark, with a total energy production potential of around 6.7 PJ/yr. This potential is compared to the present energy use of around 2.5 PJ/yr, and the po-tentials for energy savings equalling 0.1-0.5 PJ/yr

Can organic farming help to reduce N-losses? Experiences from Denmark

This study is in two parts. In the first part, nitrogen N)losses per unit of milk and meat in Danish conventional and organic pig and dairy farming were compared on the basis of farm data. In the second part, organic and conventional dairy farming were compared in detail, using modelling. N-surpluses at different livestock densities, fodder intensities, and soil types were simulated. Finally, simulated N-surpluses were used in national scenarios for conversion to organic dairy farming in Denmark. In Part one, pig farming was found to have a higher N-efficiency than dairy farming. Organic pig production had a lower N-efficiency and a higher N-surplus per kg meat than conventional pig production. The possibilities to reduce N-loss by conversion to organic pig production therefore appear to be poor. Organic dairy farming had a higher N-efficiency and a lower N-surplus per kg milk than conventional dairy farming. Conversion from conventional to organic dairy farming may therefore reduce N-losses. In Part two, a positive correlation between livestock density and N-surplus ha−1 was found for dairy farming. For all simulated livestock densities, fodder feeding intensities and soil types, organic systems showed a lower N-surplus per unit of milk produced than conventional systems. National scenarios for dairy farming showed that the present Danish milk production could be achieved with a 24% lower total N-surplus if converted from intensive conventional farming to extensive organic farming. At the same time, N-surplus ha−1 and N-surplus (tmilk) −1 would be lowered by 50% and 25%respectively. Changing from intensive to extensive conventional dairy farming with a livestock density equal to that in the organic scenario resulted in a reduction in N-surplus ha−1 of 15%. It was concluded that a reduction in total N-loss from agriculture is possible by converting from conventional to organic dairy farming but at the cost of either lower production on the present dairy farm area, or the current production on a substantially larger area

A model for fossil energy use in Danish agriculture used to compare organic and conventional farming

Knowledge about fossil energy use in agricultural systems is needed, because it can improve the understanding of how to reduce the unsustainable use of limited energy resources and the following greenhouse gas emissions. This study describes and validates a model to assess fossil energy use in Danish agriculture; gives an example of how the model can be used to compare organic and conventional farming; and discusses the implications and potentials of using the model to simulate energy use in scenarios of agricultural production. The model is a development of an existing model, which was too coarse to predict measured energy use on Danish farms. The model was validated at the field operational, thecroptype, and the national level, and can supplement the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change manual to quantify fossil energy use and subsequent carbon dioxide emissions from agriculture. The model can be used to model energy use as one indicator in a multi-criteria evaluation of sustainability, also including other agroecological and socio-economicindicators. As an example, energy use for eight conventional and organic crop types on loamy, sandy, and irrigated sandy soil was compared. The energy use was generally lower in the organic than in the conventionalsystem, but yields were also lower. Consequently, conventional crop production had the highest energy production, where as organic crop production had the highest energy efficiency. Generally, grain cereals such as wheat have a lower energy use per area than roughage crops such as beets. However, because of higher roughage crop yields per area, energy use per feed unit was higher in the roughage crops. Energy use for both conventional cattle and pig production was found to be higher than that for organic production. With respect to fossil energy use per produced livestock unit, agro-ecosystems producing pigs were in both cases less energy effective than those producing cattle. Fossil energy use for thre escenarios of conversion to organic farming with increasing fodder import was compared to current conventional farming in Denmark.The scenario with the highest fodder import showed the highest energy use per livestock unit produced. In all scenarios, the energy use per unit produced was lower than in the present situation. However, the total Danish crop production was also lower. In conclusion, the model can be used to simulate scenarios, which can add new information to the discussion of future, sustainable agricultural production

The Physiological Foundations of the Wealth of Nations

Evidence from economics, anthropology and biology testifies to a fundamental trade-off between the number of offspring (quantity) and amount of nutrition per child (quality). This leads to a theory of pre-industrial growth where body size as well as population size is endogenous. But when productive quality investments are undertaken the historical constancy of income per capita seems puzzling. Why didn't episodes of rising income instigate a virtuous circle of rising body size and productivity? To address this question we propose that societies are subject to a “physiological check”: if human body size rises, metabolic needs - our conceptualization of “subsistence requirements” - rise. This mechanism turns out to be instrumental in explaining why income growth does not take hold and societies remain near an endogenously determined subsistence boundary. When we use the theory to shed light on pre-industrial cross-country income differences we find that 60-70% of the income differences in 1500 can plausibly be accounted for by variations in subsistence requirements.Malthusian stagnation; Subsistence; Nutrition; Body size; Population growth

Evaluating Aid Effectiveness in the Aggregate: Methodological Issues

The purpose of the present Evaluation Study is to discuss the methodological problems researchers are facing in gauging the impact of aid on economic growth. The discussion is nontechnical and aimed at an audience without much prior knowledge in the fields of macroeconomics and econometrics. The paper provides insights into the following questions: 1. Why do economists view “aid effectiveness” as synonymous to asking whether aid increases growth in income per capita? 2. Why is it difficult to determine the macroeconomic impact of foreign aid on economic growth? 3. How is it, in principle, possible to solve the difficulties present in evaluating aggregate aid effectiveness?Economic growth; foreign aid; instrumental variable regression

The Return to Foreign Aid

This paper investigates the marginal productivity of investment in the world’s poorest economies. The aim is to estimate the return on investments financed by foreign aid as well as by domestic resource mobilization, using crosscountry aggregate data. In practice the return on both investment categories can be expected to vary considerably across countries and time. As a consequence we develop a correlated random coefficients approach to the issue at hand, which allows us to estimate the average aggregate rate of return on “aid investments” and “domestic investments”. Across a wide array of estimators our principal finding is remarkably robust; the average aggregate gross return on “aid investments” falls in a 20-30 percent range, roughly the same as the return on investments funded by other sources than aid. This finding is well in accord with micro estimates of the economic return to aid.productivity, foreign aid, random coefficients, panel data

Dual Economies and International Total Factor Productivity Differences.

This paper argues that a significant part of measured TFP differences across countries is attributable not to technological factors that affect the entire economy neutrally, but rather, to variations in the structural composition of economies. In particular, the allocation of scarce inputs between agriculture and non-agriculture seems to be important. We provide a theory which links the institutional framework to the long-run composition of the economy, and thereby to measured TFP and income per worker. A decomposition analysis suggests that between 30 and 50 percent of the international variation in TFP can be attributed to the composition of output. Estimation exercises suggest that recent findings of a conducive effect from institutions, and to some extent, geography, on long-run prosperity and TFP, may be thus explained.dual economy; structural change; total factor productivity; institutions; geography