Ode to a Skylark : Agricultural intensification and farmland birds in the Baltic region

Intensification of agricultural land-use has been was shown to be the key reason behind declines in wildlife species associated with farmland. Accession to the European Union is regarded as a potential threat to the farmland biota of its new member states. In my thesis I looked at scenarios of agricultural development across the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and the ways they are seen to affect farmed environments as a habitat of farmland bird species. I looked at the effects of major farmed habitats across the region, and assessed the role of spatial organisation of farmed habitats. I also evaluated the direction and magnitude of changes in bird communities following progression of farmland land-use from a relatively less intensive to the most intensive type within each country. Different aspects of the structural complexity of farmland were critical for supporting farmland birds. There was a clear indication that the more intensively farmed areas across the region provided habitat for fewer bird species and individuals, and intensification of field management was reflected in a tangible decrease in farmland bird abundance. The second part of the thesis, based on interviews in Estonia and Finland, is devoted to farmers interest in and knowledge of farmland wildlife, their understanding of the concept of biodiversity, and awareness of causes behind species declines. I examined the relationship between farmers interest and their willingness to undertake practices favouring farmland wildlife. Many farmers viewed biodiversity from a narrow perspective. In Finland farmers expressed higher concern about the decline in common farmland species than in Estonia. In both countries farmers rated intensification of agriculture as the major driving force behind declines. The expressed interest in wildlife positively correlated with willingness to undertake wildlife-friendly measures. Only farmers with agri-environment contracts targeted specifically at biodiversity were more knowledgeable about practical on-farm activities favouring wildlife, and were more willing to employ them that the rest. The results suggest that, by contributing to simplification of the farmland structure, homogenisation of crops, and increase in intensity of field use, EU agricultural policies will have a detrimental effect on farmland bird populations in Eastern Europe. Farmers are on the whole positive to the idea of supporting wildlife on their farms, and are concerned about declines, but they require payments to offset their income loss and extra work. I propose ways of further improving and better targeting of the agri-environment schemes in the region. I argue that with a foreseen tripling of cereal yields across the region, the EU Council s target of halting biodiversity decline in the EU by 2010 may not be realistic unless considerable improvements are made in conservation safeguards within the EU agricultural policy for the region.Maatalouden tehostumista pidetään kaikkien tärkeimpänä syynä peltoeläimistön vähentymiseen. EU:hun liittymisen ja investointien sekä tukien kasvun seurauksena Itä-Euroopan maiden rikas peltojen varassa elävä luonto on vaarassa romahtaa. Räätälöidyt ympäristönhoidosta maksettavat korvaukset viljelijöille ovat tulevaisuudessa todennäköisesti ainoa keino ylläpitää monipuolista peltolajistoa. Väitöskirjassani tutkin Baltian maiden, eli Viron, Latvian ja Liettuan, maatalousympäristön todennäköisiä muutoksia eri kehitysskenaariossa, sekä miten nämä muutokset vaikuttavat peltolintuihin. Erityisesti kiinnitin huomiota peltoelinympäristöjen muutostekijöihin, kuten peltojen säilyvyyteen, rakenteeseen sekä viljelyn tehokkuuteen. Tulokset osoittivat rakenteellisesti rikkaan peltoalueen ratkaisevan merkityksen lajistolle, maisematasolta viljatasolle. Tutkin myös eroja perinteisten, niin kutsun ekstensiivisen maatalouden sekä suhteellisen tehokkaasti viljeltyjen alueiden välillä. Tutkimukseni toinen näkökulma on viljelijän. Haastattelimme suomalaisia ja virolaisia viljelijöitä maaseudun luonnon monimuotoisuudesta. Kävi ilmi, että viljelijät eivät aina ymmärrä monimuotoisuuden käsitettä sen tieteellisessä mielessä, mutta ovat hyvin kiinnostuneita ympärillään elävistä lajeista. He ovat myös halukkaita oppimaan lisää sekä turvaamaan eliölajiston tulevaisuuden. Suomalaiset maanviljelijät pitivät maatalouden tehostumista suurimpana uhkana maatalouden luonnolle ja monien lajien taantumisen vakavana syynä. Suomessa viljelijät näkevät jo selvemmin maatalouden tehostumisen seurauksia. Kenties kaikkein suurin ero ilmeni vastauksissa kysymykseen minkä lajien katoamista tilaltanne pitäisitte henkilökohtaisena menetyksenä? . Enemmistölle virolaisia kysymystä oli vaikea ymmärtää: miten sellaiset otukset kuin pääskyt ja kiurut voisivat minnekään kadota, kun niitä on kaikkialla? Ja vaikka monet sanoivat, että lajien katoaminen on sinänsä huono asia, vain muutamat osasivat ehdottaa esimerkkejä kuten siili tai hirvi. Suomalaiset maanviljelijät kuitenkin osasivat helposti tarjota esimerkkejä. Useimmin mainittuja olivat lajeja, jotka ovat vähentyneet tai monin paikoin jo hävinneet suomalaisesta viljely-ympäristöstä. Lopuksi katsoin, miten maatalouden ympäristöohjelmaa Baltian maissa sekä Suomessa voisi kehittää ja täsmentää niin, että se olisi sekä tehokas peltolintujen suojelija että miellyttävä viljelijöiden toteuttaa. Maksettaessa ympäristötukia yhteisö ei kannusta viljelijää vain ruoan tuotantoon vaan myös ainutlaatuisen ympäristönsä ylläpitämiseen - luonnon monimuotoisuuden viljelyyn, "kiurujen viljelyyn

Horse Welfare and Natural Values on Semi-Natural and Extensive Pastures in Finland: Synergies and Trade-Offs

In several regions in Europe, the horse is becoming a common grazer on semi-natural and cultivated grasslands, though the pasturing benefits for animals and biodiversity alike are not universally appreciated. The composition of ground vegetation on pastures determines the value of both the forage for grazing animals as well as the biodiversity values for species associated with the pastoral ecosystems. We studied three pastures, each representing one of the management types in southern Finland (latitudes 60–61): semi-natural, permanent and cultivated grassland. All have been grazed exclusively by horses for several decades. We aimed to evaluate feeding values and horses’ welfare, on the one hand, and impacts of horses on biodiversity in boreal conditions, on the other. Though there were differences among the pastures, the nutritional value of the vegetation in all three pastures met the energy and protein needs of most horse categories through the whole grazing season. Some mineral concentrations were low compared to the requirements, and supplementation of Cu, Zn and Na is needed to balance the mineral intake. Only minor injuries or health problems were observed. All metrics of biological values, as well as number of species eaten by horses, were particularly high in a semi-natural pasture compared to other pasture types. The highest ratio of species cover preferred by horses to the total cover was found in the permanent pasture, while at the regularly re-seeded pasture, there was a particularly high cover of species, indicating low biodiversity values on grassland. There was, therefore, a trade-off between the quantity of forage and biological values in pastures, but not in quality. The results provide clear indication both for the suitability of the studied pasture types to horses and for grazing of horses for biodiversity management. In each pasture type, specific management is needed to simultaneously achieve objectives of adequate pasturing and biodiversity. The short duration (only one grazing season) must be considered when applying the results.Peer reviewe

Contribution of High Nature Value farming systems to sustainable livestock production : A case from Finland

Sustainability of livestock production is a highly contested issue in agricultural sustainability discourse. This study aimed to assess the environmental impact of farms using semi-natural grasslands in Finland, or so-called High Nature Value (HNV) farms. We estimated the environmental impact of 11 such farms, including greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), nitrogen (N) balance, land occupation, and carbon storage. We also accounted for unique biodiversity, defined in this study as communities that are dependent on semi-natural grasslands. We compared these to the alternative states of the farms, specifically a hypothetical farm with the same production output but without access to semi natural grasslands. GHG emissions at the farm level (tCO(2eq)/ha) in HNV farms were 64% lower than on the alternative farms; GHG emissions at the product level (tCO(2eq)/t LW) and N balance (N kg/ha) were 31% and 235% lower, respectively. The carbon stocks were 163% higher at farm level. Biodiversity values, indicated by the share of semi-natural grassland in management, ranged from 23% to 83% on HNV farms. Six out of eleven farms would need to increase their arable land occupation by an average of 39% of arable land to fulfil their needs for animal feed if they did not utilize semi-natural grassland. This study contributes to growing evidence that HNV farming systems can support sustainable production by minimising arable land occupation, reducing nutrient loses, and increasing carbon storage while maintaining unique biodiversity.Peer reviewe

Probing the grounds: Developing a payment-by-results agri-environment scheme in Finland

Results-oriented approaches are widely regarded as an effective means to improving cost-effectiveness of agri-climate-environment schemes. We designed a hypothetical payment-by-results scheme for biodiversity conservation on environmental grasslands in Finland. The scheme would pay farmers a premium if the site contains a set number of indicator species, which were selected based on vascular plant surveys of the target habitat type. We presented the hypothetical scheme to 20 farmers and six experts (researchers, officials and advisors) in agricultural policy for their opinions on the payment-by-result approach generally and the hypothetical scheme specifically. The indicator species list proved suitable for identifying sites with high total species richness of vascular plants and also appeared feasible in the eyes of the farmers. Farmers were mostly positive about the approach and, mainly, thought their peers and society at large would receive it positively. The main concerns were about implementation, especially verifying the biodiversity results. People working for the national control body were the most critical and could not see how the hypothetical scheme could fit into the current institutionalised programme. Experience in other countries may provide solutions for overcoming such obstacles. The results are highly relevant for a discourse on social experimentation and cost-efficient delivery of public goods for public money.Peer reviewe

Holistic environmental assessment of High Nature Value farming systems in Europe

Many life cycle assessment (LCA) studies comparing environmental impacts of different beef production systems are incomplete as they exclude biodiversity impacts and soil carbon stock changes. This study aims to assess the environmental impact of ruminant production on semi-natural grasslands or so-called high nature value (HNV) farms at the European level. We collected data for 24 HNV farms in Europe (in Finland, Estonia and France). The studied farms are extensive beef, sheep and goat production systems. We used LCA to assess the potential environmental impact of HNV farms according to global warming potential (GWP100), eutrophication, fossil fuels and water use, by using the Solagro carbon calculator and OpenLCA software. Results showed that HNV farming systems have the potential to maintain unique biodiversity, act as carbon sinks, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce nutrient losses and water use while producing animal-derived food. There were significant differences between HNV farms among countries in their greenhouse gas emissions at the farm level (tCO2eq ha-1) and N inputs (kg N ha-1). Better regional understanding of the environmental impact performance of HNV farming systems in relation to sustainable ruminant production will be achieved as the undergoing study progresses.Peer reviewe

Voluntary non-monetary approaches for implementing conservation

The voluntary non-monetary approach to conservation refers to actions that citizens or organizations could voluntarily implement in their area of influence without the incentive of monetary compensations. To be effectively implemented by untrained actors, actions should be clearly defined, straightforward to implement and not require specific scientific knowledge. The costs of actions should also be sufficiently affordable to be widely applied without monetary incentives. A voluntary non-monetary approach has so far not been clearly described as a distinct group of tools for nature conservation. Here we review the scarce scientific literature on the topic. To illustrate the applicability of a voluntary non-monetary approach to conservation, we then investigate its potential for farmland conservation. We considered a list of 119 actions available from “conservation-evidence”, a source of systematically collected evidence on effectiveness of conservation actions. Among 119 actions, 95 could be scored for feasibility of implementation, costs, and existence of evidence in UK, Spain and Finland. Sixteen to seventeen actions were potentially suitable for implementation by a voluntary non-monetary approach. This implies that the voluntary non-monetary approach could be widely applicable across many countries and environments. It is our hope that this study will represent a clarion call for conservation scientists to clearly recognize the voluntary non-monetary approach, its characteristics, and its potential for addressing conservation issues on private land. Adoption of such voluntary measures may be more dependent on encouragement (‘nudging’) than on the usual coercive or financial emphasis (‘shoving’).Peer reviewe

Luomutuotannon eduista on tutkimustietoa

Mielipide julkaistu Helsingin Sanomissa 5.8.2017. Luomuruoka201

52 Maintaining and Promoting Biodiversity

Ecosystem Health and Sustainable Agricultur

Simplistic understandings of farmer motivations could undermine the environmental potential of the common agricultural policy

The European Union Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has failed to achieve its aim of preserving European farmland biodiversity, despite massive investment in subsidies to incentivise environmentally-beneficial farming practices. This failure calls into question the design of the subsidy schemes, which are intended to either function as a safety net and make farming profitable or compensate farmers for costs and loss of income while undertaking environmental management. In this study, we assess whether the design of environmental payments in the CAP reflects current knowledge about farmers’ decision-making as found in the research literature. We do so on the basis of a comprehensive literature review on farmers’ uptake of agri-environmental management practices over the past 10 years and interviews specifically focused on Ecological Focus Areas with policy-makers, advisors and farmers in seven European countries. We find that economic and structural factors are the most commonly-identified determinants of farmers’ adoption of environmental management practices in the literature and in interviews. However, the literature suggests that these are complemented by – and partially dependent on – a broad range of social, attitudinal and other contextual factors that are not recognised in interview responses or, potentially, in policy design. The relatively simplistic conceptualisation of farmer behaviour that underlies some aspects of policy design may hamper the effectiveness of environmental payments in the CAP by over-emphasising economic considerations, potentially corroding farmer attitudes to policy and environmental objectives. We conclude that an urgent redesign of agricultural subsidies is needed to better align them with the economic, social and environmental factors affecting farmer decision-making in a complex production climate, and therefore to maximise potential environmental benefits