A Review of Recent Studies on Cost Effectiveness of GHG Mitigation Measures in the European Agro-Forestry Sector

Over the last twenty years, climate change has become an increasing concern for scientists, public opinions and policy makers. Due to the pervasive nature of its impacts for many important aspects of human life, climate change is likely to influence and be influenced by the most diverse policy or management choices. This is particularly true for those interventions affecting agriculture and forestry: they are strongly dependent on climate phenomena, but also contribute to climate evolution being sources of and sinks for greenhouse gases. This paper offers a survey of the existing literature assessing cost, effectiveness and efficiency of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies, or broader economic reforms, targeted to the agricultural and forestry sectors. The specific focus is on European Countries. Different methodological approaches, research questions addressed and results are examined. The main finding is that agriculture and forestry can potentially provide GHG reduction at a competitive cost. Nevertheless this cost is positive; accordingly, mitigation policies should be carefully designed either to balance costs with expected benefits or to avoid excessive penalisation of the sectors involved. Finally needs are highlighted for improving the existing knowledge and research methodologies.Agriculture, Forestry, Climate Change, Greenhouse Gases, Policy Measures, Cost-Effectiveness, Meacap

The Kyoto Protocol and the Effect of Existing and Planned Measures in the Agricultural and Forestry Sector in the EU25

Agricultural and forestry activities cover the majority of the EU territory: in particular agriculture is the main lad use type, accounting for more than 41% of the land use in the EU15, while in the new Member States this share ranges between 30 and 60 %, whereas forestry is the second. The role of agriculture as both a source of and as a sink of greenhouse gases (GHG) varies significantly because of the diversity of production systems adopted by farmers and of the environmental conditions in Europe. The effectiveness of the policy measures adopted so far in the agro-forestry sector to meet the Kyoto target are reported in the National Communications to the UNFCC which now reached its 4th edition. National Communication were used in this reports as the main source of information to develop a country by country survey of policy measure - both from a qualitative and a quantitative perspective - allowing to understand the progresses the Members States are making towards their commitments, also thanks to a comparative assessment of this release with the previous communications to the UNFCC. Although not all members’ states did provide quantitative estimations, the comparison of the third fourth edition of the National Communication showed that almost all the countries have revised their estimations and projections of GHG emissions. It is also worth noting that that even though the measures reported at the country level still respond mainly to Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) requirements or to the improvement of air and water quality standards, the issue of climate change has become increasingly prominent in the design of agro-forestry development strategies.Agriculture, Forestry, Climate Change, Greenhouse Gases, Policy Measures, EU25, Meacap

Assessment of the Common Agricultural Policy 2014–2020 in Supporting Agroecological Transitions: A Comparative Study of 15 Cases across Europe

This article is aimed at analyzing the potential that CAP 2014–2020-related instruments have on supporting agroecological transitions in Europe by focusing on the strengths and weaknesses of key instruments. Through a stepwise participatory research methodology, 105 key stakeholders (farmers, advisors, academics, environment experts, administration representatives, and professionals from food chains) in 15 countries in Europe were engaged in the discussion of the potential of current CAP instruments to solve the barriers that constrain agroecological farming systems in their particular regions. The results of this comparative study show which CAP instruments are valued with a high potential to support transitions to agroecology. The analysis of the stakeholders’ perceptions contributes to an enhanced understanding of why CAP instruments have failed or succeeded to promote agroecological transitions.This research was funded by the European Union from the research and innovation program Horizon 2020 under the Grant Agreement No. 773901 (Call: Sustainable Food Security—Resilient and resource-efficient value chains; Topic SFS-29-2017: Socio-eco-economics—socio-economics in ecological approaches)

Creating Conditions for Harnessing the Potential of Transitions to Agroecology in Europe and Requirements for Policy

Food systems require reorientation to take greater account of interactions with the environment, economy, health and society. Transitions to agroecological farming practices and systems can connect policy areas and realise environmental, economic and social aims. These transitions provide a lens for reviewing policy, practice and behaviours of actors in farming systems and value chains, identification of barriers to uptake, and policy areas to which they contribute or where there are gaps. Developing social and human capital, and governance structures that enable transitions to agroecology are key to their prospects of success. Education and life-long learning are key to developing the knowledge and skills of younger generations of land managers and other actors in value chains, throughout their careers. The outcome sought is for a shared understanding of the benefits of agroecological practices and systems, creating opportunities to rebalance policies towards delivering climate neutrality, reversing biodiversity loss, and enhancing rights of citizens. To realise those opportunities policies and strategies should be coherent across territorial and systems levels, and tailored to place, system, people, and stages of transitions. Overall, they should be designed to ensure all citizens are beneficiaries of transitions to agroecological farming systems, over the long term, and that no-one or place is disadvantaged by the processes of change or the outcome intended.</p

Creating Conditions for Harnessing the Potential of Transitions to Agroecology in Europe and Requirements for Policy

Food systems require reorientation to take greater account of interactions with the environment, economy, health and society. Transitions to agroecological farming practices and systems can connect policy areas and realise environmental, economic and social aims. These transitions provide a lens for reviewing policy, practice and behaviours of actors in farming systems and value chains, identification of barriers to uptake, and policy areas to which they contribute or where there are gaps. Developing social and human capital, and governance structures that enable transitions to agroecology are key to their prospects of success. Education and life-long learning are key to developing the knowledge and skills of younger generations of land managers and other actors in value chains, throughout their careers. The outcome sought is for a shared understanding of the benefits of agroecological practices and systems, creating opportunities to rebalance policies towards delivering climate neutrality, reversing biodiversity loss, and enhancing rights of citizens. To realise those opportunities policies and strategies should be coherent across territorial and systems levels, and tailored to place, system, people, and stages of transitions. Overall, they should be designed to ensure all citizens are beneficiaries of transitions to agroecological farming systems, over the long term, and that no-one or place is disadvantaged by the processes of change or the outcome intended

Assessing agro-ecological practices using a combination of three sustainability assessment tools

This paper is based on results from the research project UNISECO, which is funded by European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 773901.We would like to thank all the farmers, farm organisations and stakeholders of the multi-actor platforms of the UNISECO project who contributed to the data collection. We also like to thank Andreas Basler whose corrections improved the comprehensibility of the paper.Peer reviewedPublisher PD