Can we have it all? The role of grassland conservation in supporting forage production and plant diversity

Context A key global challenge is to meet both the growing demand for food and feed while maintaining biodiversity’s supporting functions. Protected grasslands, such as Natura 2000 sites in Europe, may play an important role in harmonising productivity and biodiversity goals. This work contributes to an understanding of the relationship between forage production and plant diversity in protected and non-protected grasslands. Objectives We aimed to identify differences in plant diversity and forage production between protected and non-protected grasslands by assessing the effects of land-use intensity (i.e. mowing, grazing, fertilising) on these variables. Methods Data were available for 95 managed grassland plots (50 × 50 m) in real-managed landscapes. After controlling for site conditions in the analysis, we tested for significant differences between protected and non-protected grasslands and used a multi-group structural equation modelling (SEM) framework to investigate the linkages between land-use intensity, biomass and plant diversity. Results In protected grasslands, plant diversity was significantly higher while forage production was significantly lower. In non-protected grasslands we found significantly higher land-use intensity, particularly in relation to mowing and fertilisation. Grazing intensity did not significantly differ between protected and non-protected grasslands. In non-protected grasslands we found a significant negative association between forage production and plant diversity. However, this effect was not significant in protected grasslands. We also found a negative association between land-use and plant diversity in both grassland types that was related to mowing and fertilising intensity. These two management aspects also influenced the positive association between land-use intensity and forage production. Furthermore, environmental conditions had a positive effect on forage production and a negative effect on plant diversity in protected grasslands. Conclusions Our results confirm that the protection of grassland sites is successful in achieving higher plant diversity compared to non-protected grasslands and that protected grasslands do not necessarily trade-off with forage production. This is possible under moderate grazing intensities as higher land-use intensity has a negative effect on plant diversity, particularly on rare species. However, forage production is lower in protected sites as it is driven by mowing and fertilisation intensity. Future research needs to further investigate if the nature of these relationships depends on the livestock type or other management practices

Mismatches in the ecosystem services-wellbeing nexus: a case study for Chilean Patagonia

The supply of ecosystem services (ES) is commonly assumed to be linked to human wellbeing within socio-ecological systems. However, these linkages are seldom assessed using quantitative approaches at large scales and low spatial resolution. Here, we investigated the complex bidirectional linkages between ES supply and material wellbeing (income) using data from 382,199 rural properties in 178 municipalities from Chilean Patagonia. We assessed two model groups using structural equation modeling (SEM), wherein the first group assumed an impact of ES supply on wellbeing and the second postulated the opposite impact, with wellbeing affecting ES supply. For each group we run a separate SEM per ES category (i.e. provisioning, regulating, and cultural), making a total of six SEM analyzed. We found that neither model group was significantly stronger than the other, as the linkage between ES supply and material wellbeing was not significant in any model. Each model differed notably in their significant path coefficients, with models for cultural and regulating ES showing a better fit than for provisioning ES. We therefore assert that previously assumed links between ES and material wellbeing do not necessarily hold at larger spatial scales and in contexts where rural economies are more diverse and less dependent on natural capital. Understanding ES supply-wellbeing dynamics and how they vary across spatial and temporal scales is important for fostering sustainable socio-ecological systems.This work was funded by the National Agency for Research and Development (ANID) through scholarship program Becas Chile-Doctorado Acuerdo Bilateral DAAD convocatoria 2017 N° 62170002 and by ANID Chile through FONDECYT grant N° 1190207. We gratefully acknowledge the support of iDiv funded by the German Research Foundation [DFG-FZT 118, 202548816].Peer reviewe

Mismatches in the ecosystem services-wellbeing nexus: a case study for Chilean Patagonia

ABSTRACTThe supply of ecosystem services (ES) is commonly assumed to be linked to human wellbeing within socio-ecological systems. However, these linkages are seldom assessed using quantitative approaches at large scales and low spatial resolution. Here, we investigated the complex bidirectional linkages between ES supply and material wellbeing (income) using data from 382,199 rural properties in 178 municipalities from Chilean Patagonia. We assessed two model groups using structural equation modeling (SEM), wherein the first group assumed an impact of ES supply on wellbeing and the second postulated the opposite impact, with wellbeing affecting ES supply. For each group we run a separate SEM per ES category (i.e. provisioning, regulating, and cultural), making a total of six SEM analyzed. We found that neither model group was significantly stronger than the other, as the linkage between ES supply and material wellbeing was not significant in any model. Each model differed notably in their significant path coefficients, with models for cultural and regulating ES showing a better fit than for provisioning ES. We therefore assert that previously assumed links between ES and material wellbeing do not necessarily hold at larger spatial scales and in contexts where rural economies are more diverse and less dependent on natural capital. Understanding ES supply-wellbeing dynamics and how they vary across spatial and temporal scales is important for fostering sustainable socio-ecological systems

Scientists support the EU's Green Deal and reject the unjustified argumentation against the Sustainable Use Regulation and the Nature Restoration Law (V2 15.6.2023)

Non peer reviewe