Agricultural influences on carbon emissions and sequestration

This report was presented at the UK Organic Research 2002 Conference. Agricultural systems contribute to carbon emissions through several mechanisms: the direct use of fossil fuels in farm operations, the indirect use of embodied energy in inputs that are energy intensive to manufacture (e.g. fertilizers), and the cultivation of soils resulting in the loss of soil organic matter. However agriculture can also sequester carbon when organic matter accumulates in the soil or above-ground woody biomass acts as a permanent sink or is used as an energy source that substitutes for fossil fuels. The latest empirical data on agricultural carbon emissions and carbon sequestration opportunities in agricultural systems are reviewed and the necessary land use and management practices that will need to be employed to optimise carbon sequestration are considered

The United Kingdom\u27s Experience with Agri-environmental Stewardship Schemes: Lessons and Issues for the United States and Europe

Agricultural policy makers on both sides of the Atlantic are now faced with fundamental pressures and choices about farming and the environment. Member states of the European Union (EU) are attempting to shape new policies in implementation of the Agenda 2000 reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and the US is beginning active debate on a new farm bill. On the European side of the Atlantic, Agenda 2000 reforms are being influenced heavily by the concept of \u27multi-functionality\u27. The Rural Development Regulation, essentially a second CAP pillar, allows EU member states to shift some of their CAP funds to rural development and agri-environmental programs. Consequently, there is likely to be major expansion of environmental stewardship programs in Europe as EU members redirect funds from commodity support programs to programs more directly supportive of environmental and rural development objectives. The United Kingdom (UK) government, for example, plans to shift 2.5% of all direct payments to farmers under CAP commodity regimes to rural development and agri-environment initiatives in 2001 with this proportion to rise gradually to 4.5% in 2005 and 2006 (MAFF, 1999, p. 5). France is being more progressive, with a shift of 20% into its Rural Development Regulation budget. Discussion of such funding shifts to agri-environmental programs is less advanced on the US side of the Atlantic. However, some agricultural policy proposals are beginning to move in this direction. The Conservation Security Program (CSP) advocated by Senator Harkin, of Iowa, and others is perhaps the best recent example of a stewardship payment program-type proposal. That proposed program, consisting of several tiers of payments to farmers for different levels of conservation, would go considerably beyond programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and its predecessors. In this paper, we draw on our recent review of agri-environmental programs in the UK (and comparison to programs in the US) to examine key issues associated with a major expansion of stewardship payment programs on both sides of the Atlantic. First, we briefly describe the concept of multi-functionality that is now driving dialogue in Europe on the next generation of agricultural and environmental policies. Then we briefly describe our proposal for a major new agri-environmental initiative to promote legume-based rotations in arable (crop) areas. The main body of the paper is then devoted to an examination of key issues and challenges associated with a major expansion of stewardship payment programs on both sides of the Atlantic

Future Directions for Joint Agricultural-Environmental Policies: Implications fo the United Kingdom Experience for Europe and the United States

Major agri-environmental programs tried in the United Kingdom (UK.) since the mid- 1980s are examined in this report. Special attention is given to the Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESA) scheme, the Countryside Stewardship Scheme (CSS), and schemes to promote organic agriculture-first the Organic Aid Scheme and, following that, the Organic Farming Scheme. Several major studies and reviews of these and other agri-environmental schemes in England, Scotland, and Wales have been conducted in recent years. These studies and reviews are drawn upon to examine both the successes and shortcomings of various schemes in drawing farmers into more environmentally sound farming practices and systems. In conducting this review and examination, primary attention is given to farmers\u27 income, risk reduction, and stewardship goals. Contextual factors given special attention include the following: prices and access to markets; technologies; the structure of agriculture; and social and human capital. Lessons for future agri-environmental strategies in the UK., elsewhere in Europe, and the United States are derived from this review. The emerging \u27multifunctionality\u27 approach to agricultural policy is emphasized. Among the lessons are ones dealing with: legume-based rotations in arable areas; financial assistance to organic farmers beyond the transition period; continued reform of the European Union\u27s Common Agricultural Policy; possible merging of the ESA scheme and the CSS; extension/technical assistance institutions and strategy; and social and human capital for environmental change. Several issues and challenges in greatly expanding agri-environmental policies and making them more effective in the future are analyzed and explained. Those issues and challenges pertain to: the compatibility of production support and stewardship support policies; balancing stewardship support and \u27environmental compliance\u27; opportunities for programs to contribute jointly to social and stewardship objectives; the compatibility of World Trade Organization rules with stewardship schemes; capitalization of scheme benefits into land values; how to gain from bottom-up planning and subsidiarity; and stewardship payments for farmers already practicing good stewardship

Nature-Based Interventions and Mind–Body Interventions: Saving Public Health Costs Whilst Increasing Life Satisfaction and Happiness

A number of countries have begun to adopt prevention pays policies and practices to reduce pressure on health and social care systems. Most affluent countries have seen substantial increases in the incidence and costs of non-communicable diseases. The interest in social models for health has led to the growth in use of social prescribing and psychological therapies. At the same time, there has been growth in application of a variety of nature-based and mind–body interventions (NBIs and MBIs) aimed at improving health and longevity. We assess four NBI/MBI programmes (woodland therapy, therapeutic horticulture, ecotherapy/green care, and tai chi) on life satisfaction/happiness and costs of use of public services. These interventions produce rises in life satisfaction/happiness of 1.00 pts to 7.29 (n = 644; p 50 h). These increases are greater than many positive life events (e.g., marriage or a new child); few countries or cities see +1 pt increases over a decade. The net present economic benefits per person from reduced public service use are £830–£31,520 (after 1 year) and £6450–£11,980 (after 10 years). We conclude that NBIs and MBIs can play a role in helping to reduce the costs on health systems, while increasing the well-being of participants

Intensification for redesigned and sustainable agricultural systems

Redesign of agricultural systems is essential to deliver optimum outcomes as ecological and economic conditions change. The combination of agricultural processes in which production is maintained or increased, while environmental outcomes are enhanced, is currently known as sustainable intensification (SI). SI aims to avoid the cultivation of more land, and thus avoid the loss of unfarmed habitats, but also aims to increase overall system performance without net environmental cost. For example, large changes are now beginning to occur to maximize biodiversity by means of integrated pest management, pasture and forage management, the incorporation of trees into agriculture, and irrigation management, and with small and patch systems. SI is central to the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations and to wider efforts to improve global food and nutritional security

Social capital and connectedness: Issues and implications for agriculture, rural development and natural resource management in ACP countries

Abstract Social capital is a new term that refers to the value of connectedness and trust between people. It is a pre-requisite for sustainable management and development of natural resources. For as long as people have managed natural resources, they have engaged in forms of collective action. As a result, constructive resource management rules and norms have been embedded in many cultures and societies. But in recent agricultural and rural development, it has been rare for the importance of local groups and institutions to be recognised. Social capital is one of five key assets for sustainable livelihoods. Although some believe that the term ‘capital’ does not add anything to existing social theories and practice, it does nonetheless draw clear attention to the problem of depletion of assets. Sustainability implies maintaining or improving renewable assets for future generations. As it lowers the costs of working together, social capital facilitates cooperation. People have the confidence to invest in collective activities, knowing that others will also do so. They are also less likely to engage in unfettered private actions that result in negative impacts, such as resource degradation

Towards redesign at scale through zero budget natural farming in Andhra Pradesh, India

Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF) is a form of agricultural system redesign being practiced at scale in India, particularly in the state of Andhra Pradesh. ZBNF is an emerging set of agricultural practices designed dramatically to reduce farmers direct costs (hence ‘zero budget’) while boosting yields and farm health through the use of non-synthetic inputs sourced locally (‘natural farming’). Andhra Pradesh has set out the aim of ‘rolling out’ ZBNF to all 6 million of the state’s farmers through a state-led programme of training and extension. We present data showing statistically significant differences between ZBNF and non-ZBNF yields and farmer incomes at multiple locations and with a variety of crops, as well as preliminary results on farmers’ experiences with crop health and household transitions following the adoption of ZBNF. We conclude with reflections on the lessons derived from Andhra Pradesh’s state support for ZBNF

Impact of Organic Agriculture on the Environmental and Economic Performance of Croatia

Within the framework of an FAO technical assistance project for Croatia a study assessing the feasibility of large-scale conversion to organic farming was carried out. It examined the consequences of the conversion of a substantial portion of Croatian agricultural land to organic farming in relation to national agricultural output (food security) and related environmental and economic performance. As farming is closely linked with a range of economic activities, besides farming the assessment also took into account the impact of wide-spread adoption of organic agriculture on farm-upstream linked sectors (FULS). These include energy production and supply, manufacturing of agri-chemical inputs, trade, transport and research, education, advisory, veterinary and administrative services. The agricultural output, environmental and economic performance of the baseline scenario (average of 2001-2003) was compared with fourteen development scenarios involving various shares of utilised agricultural land (UAA) under organic management (10, 25, 50 and 100 per cent) and different yields (100, 75 and 50 per cent of the baseline). In order to enable the same consumer purchasing power as in the baseline situation, organic products were assumed to obtain no premium price in twelve scenarios. In two scenarios approaching the current situation in some European countries (10 and 25 per cent of UAA under organic management with 75 per cent yield) a 10 per cent premium price for organic produce was included. In order to obtain the real value added (RVA) created by farming and FULS, the generated gross value added (GVA) was corrected for the associated environmental costs (damage to air, water and soil) and public investments. The public investments, emissions and environmental degradation of air, water and soil were quantified using data from various official documents and databases, as well as by performing new calculations. A monetary value was assigned to all identified environmental damages throughout farming and FULS using various environmental accounting methods. The difference between the GVA created by the examined economic chain and the sum of environmental costs and public investments resulted in the RVA. The RVA was used as a measurement indicating the economic feasibility of organic farming development scenarios as compared with the baseline scenario. If the entire UAA in Croatia converted to organic farming and if the crops and livestock gave the same yields as in the baseline situation, the farming and FULS would generate a 43 per cent higher annual GVA and 155 per cent higher annual RVA than the baseline scenario. This scenario implies refraining from the use of nearly all agri-chemical inputs. It consumes far less fossil energy (notably in FULS) and causes less environmental damage to soil and water (notably in the farming sector). Consequently, its environmental costs are nearly two times lower than in the baseline. The study results suggest that Croatian farming and FULS in the period 2001-2003 when measured in terms of RVA produced a negative effect on the economy and society in general. Farming is the key sector since it accounts for 90 per cent of the workforce, 61 per cent of GVA, 89 per cent of environmental costs and 77 per cent of public investments of the entire economic chain examined. The scenario involving a 100 per cent organic area, but yielding only 75 per cent of the baseline scenario produces a 17 per cent lower GVA. However, when corrected for public investments and environmental costs it results in 71 per cent higher RVA than the baseline scenario. The 100 per cent organic area scenario achieving only half of the baseline yields results in both lower GVA (75 percent lower) and RVA (6 per cent lower) than the baseline scenario. Of all examined scenarios, this is the least favourable for organic farming as its results exhibit the biggest discrepancies in comparison with the baseline situation. Similar results were obtained in all other scenarios (involving 50, 25 and 10 per cent organic area with 100, 75 and 50 per cent yield levels as compared to the baseline). The organic options, measured against the RVA created are better (7-89 per cent), only in cases where the yield level is 75 or 100 percent of the baseline. If the obtained yields are 50 per cent lower, the organic scenario options create both lower GVA (1, 19 and 37 per cent) and RVA (1, 2 and 3 per cent) than the baseline. The scenarios assuming a 10 per cent premium price (10 and 25 per cent organic area achieving 75 per cent of the baseline yields) create about the same GVA as the baseline, but 10-25 per cent higher RVA. All scenarios involving organic farming decrease environmental costs compared to the baseline. Provided the yield is not 50 per cent lower, all organic scenarios result in a higher RVA than the baseline. The agricultural output (yields) remains the key factor in determining the feasibility of a shift to organic farming. A severe reduction in agricultural output jeopardises national food security. However, since organic farming goes hand in hand with careful management, in the case of Croatia it would not necessarily lead to (much) lower yields. Pioneering efforts in Croatia, as well as evidence from other countries with a similar agricultultural situation also indicate this. Conversion to large-scale organic farming requires high human and social capital. Organic farming is low-input from the point of view of the use of external farming inputs, but is high-input from the point of view of the knowledge and skills needed. In the case of Croatia where farmers and other key stakeholders have a relatively low level of general education and poor agricultural training, this point will certainly be the main obstacle preventing a greater spread of organic farming. Policy efforts should therefore focus primarily on stimulating the formation of social capital and increasing human capacities of all stakeholders involved in the organic food chain

Environmental and macroeconomic impact assessment of different development scenarios to organic and low-input farming in Croatia

This study was commissioned by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) within the framework of an FAO technical assistance project for Croatia. It assessed macroeconomic and environmental impact assessment of large-scale conversion to organic agriculture. It examined the consequences of such a conversion to national agricultural output and related environmental and economic performance. The assessment also took into account the impact of wide-spread adoption of organic agriculture on farm-upstream linked sectors (FULS). These include energy production and supply, manufacturing of agri-chemical inputs, trade, transport and research, education, advisory, veterinary and administrative services. The agricultural output, environmental and economic performance of the baseline scenario (average of 2001-2003) was compared with fourteen development scenarios involving various shares of utilised agricultural land (UAA) under organic management (10, 25, 50 and 100 per cent) and different yields (100, 75 and 50 per cent of the baseline). In order to obtain the real value added (RVA) created by farming and FULS, the generated gross value added (GVA) was corrected for the associated environmental costs (damage to air, water and soil) and public investments. A monetary value was assigned to all identified environmental damages throughout farming and FULS using various environmental accounting methods. If the entire UAA in Croatia converted to organic farming and if the crops and livestock gave the same yields as in the baseline situation, the farming and FULS would generate a 43 per cent higher annual GVA and 155 per cent higher annual RVA than the baseline scenario. This scenario implies refraining from the use of nearly all agri-chemical inputs. It consumes far less fossil energy (notably in FULS) and causes less environmental damage to soil and water (notably in the farming sector). Consequently, its environmental costs are nearly two times lower than in the baseline. The study results suggest that Croatian farming and FULS in the period 2001-2003 when measured in terms of RVA produced a negative effect on the economy and society in general. Farming is the key sector since it accounts for 90 per cent of the workforce, 61 per cent of GVA, 89 per cent of environmental costs and 77 per cent of public investments of the entire economic chain examined. The scenario involving a 100 per cent organic area, but yielding only 75 per cent of the baseline scenario produces a 17 per cent lower GVA. However, when corrected for public investments and environmental costs it results in 71 per cent higher RVA than the baseline scenario. The 100 per cent organic area scenario achieving only half of the baseline yields results in both lower GVA (75 percent lower) and RVA (6 per cent lower) than the baseline scenario. Of all examined scenarios, this is the least favourable for organic farming as its results exhibit the biggest discrepancies in comparison with the baseline situation. Similar results were obtained in all other scenarios (involving 50, 25 and 10 per cent organic area with 100, 75 and 50 per cent yield levels as compared to the baseline). The organic options, measured against the RVA created are better (7-89 per cent), only in cases where the yield level is 75 or 100 percent of the baseline. If the obtained yields are 50 per cent lower, the organic scenario options create both lower GVA (1, 19 and 37 per cent) and RVA (1, 2 and 3 per cent) than the baseline. The scenarios assuming a 10 per cent premium price (10 and 25 per cent organic area achieving 75 per cent of the baseline yields) create about the same GVA as the baseline, but 10-25 per cent higher RVA. All scenarios involving organic farming decrease environmental costs compared to the baseline. Provided the yield is not 50 per cent lower, all organic scenarios result in a higher RVA than the baseline. The agricultural output (yields) remains the key factor in determining the feasibility of a shift to organic farming. A severe reduction in agricultural output jeopardises national food security. However, since organic farming goes hand in hand with careful management, in the case of Croatia it would not necessarily lead to (much) lower yields. Pioneering efforts in Croatia, as well as evidence from other countries with a similar agricultultural situation also indicate this. Conversion to large-scale organic farming requires high human and social capital. Organic farming is low-input from the point of view of the use of external farming inputs, but is high-input from the point of view of the knowledge and skills needed. In the case of Croatia where farmers and other key stakeholders have a relatively low level of general education and poor agricultural training, this point will certainly be the main obstacle preventing a greater spread of organic farming. Policy efforts should therefore focus primarily on stimulating the formation of social capital and increasing human capacities of all stakeholders involved in the organic food chain

Regular Doses of Nature: The Efficacy of Green Exercise Interventions for Mental Wellbeing.

This study investigated the efficacy of medium-term Green Exercise (GE; being physically active within a natural environment) interventions for improving wellbeing, by pooling data collected at the start and end of participants' engagement with a range of GE interventions. Hypotheses were that (i) interventions would show good efficacy for improving wellbeing in the overall sample; (ii) compared to participants reporting 'average to high' wellbeing at the start of their project, participants with 'low' starting wellbeing would report greater improvements post-intervention; and (iii) improvements would significantly differ between age groups. The pooled dataset was categorized in line with UK norms (n = 318) and analyzed using a standardized meta-analysis approach. Effect size was large: g = 0.812 (95% CI [0.599, 1.025]), and differences in wellbeing changes associated with project duration, age or sex were not statistically significant. Compared to those reporting 'average-high' starting wellbeing, participants reporting 'low' starting wellbeing exhibited greater improvements (BCa 95% CI [-31.8, -26.5]), with 60.8% moving into the 'average-high' wellbeing category. GE can play an important role in facilitating wellbeing and can provide alternative pathways for health and social care practice. Public health commissioners should consider integrating such interventions for patients experiencing low wellbeing or associated comorbidities