Policy challenges for agroforestry implementation in Europe

Agroforestry (AF) is a sustainable land use practice and system that increases the ecosystem services delivery from agricultural lands compared with treeless systems. Agroforestry can be considered a practice when linked to plot scale (silvoarable, silvopasture, homegarden, woody linear landscape strips, and forest farming), and a system when associated with the global farm scale. The enhancement of the ecosystem services is associated with the use and promotion of the biodiversity caused by the presence of trees that optimizes the use of the resources if adequate species are mixed. Agroforestry can be implemented at temporal and spatial scales. At the temporal scale, the use of woody perennials to increase soil fertility is a traditional technique that improves soil health and reduces the need of using herbicides (e.g., the legume Ulex sown for 10 years in between crop cultivation). Five agroforestry practices can be implemented at the plot level: silvopasture, silvoarable/alley cropping, homegardens/kitchengardens, woody linear landscape strips, and forest farming. A farm including these practices is considered an agroforestry system working at the landscape level when several farms are mixed. In spite of the acknowledgment that AF has at the European level for being included as part of Pillars I and II, the spread of AF is limited across Europe. Four challenges, linked with technical, economic, educational, and policy development, have been identified by the AFINET thematic network that, if addressed, may foster policy adoption across the EU. This article proposes 15 different policy recommendations to overcome them and the need of developing an AF strategy for the EU.We acknowledge funding through Grant 101086563 from the European Commission (Project AF4EU, HEUROPE). This study was supported by National Funds by the FCT—Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology, under the project UIDB/04033/2020. NF-D was funded by the Pilot Program of the University of Santiago de Compostela (USC) for the hiring of distinguished research staff—call 2021, funded under the collaboration agreement between USC and Banco Santander, for the years 2021–2024. JJS-F was supported by the USC and the Spanish Ministry of Universities through the “Convocatoria de Recualificación del Sistema Universitario Español” on its modality “Margarita Salas”; Ministry of Universities - Recovery Transformation and Resilience Plan (funded by the European Union through the NextGenerationEU).info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Spatial similarities between European agroforestry systems and ecosystem services at the landscape scale

Agroforestry systems are known to provide ecosystem services which differ in quantity and quality from conventional agricultural practices and could enhance rural landscapes. In this study we compared ecosystem services provision of agroforestry and non-agroforestry landscapes in case study regions from three European biogeographical regions: Mediterranean (montado and dehesa), Continental (orchards and wooded pasture) and Atlantic agroforestry systems (chestnut soutos and hedgerows systems). Seven ecosystem service indicators (two provisioning and five regulating services) were mapped, modelled and assessed. Clear variations in amount and provision of ecosystem services were found between different types of agroforestry systems. Nonetheless regulating ecosystems services were improved in all agroforestry landscapes, with reduced nitrate losses, higher carbon sequestration, reduced soil losses, higher functional biodiversity focussed on pollination and greater habitat diversity reflected in a high proportion of semi-natural habitats. The results for provisioning services were inconsistent. While the annual biomass yield and the groundwater recharge rate tended to be higher in agricultural landscapes without agroforestry systems, the total biomass stock was reduced. These broad relationships were observed within and across the case study regions regardless of the agroforestry type or biogeographical region. Overall our study underlines the positive influence of agroforestry systems on the supply of regulating services and their role to enhance landscape structure

Agroforestry is paying off – Economic evaluation of ecosystem services in European landscapes with and without agroforestry systems

The study assessed the economic performance of marketable ecosystem services (ES) (biomass production) and non-marketable ecosystem services and dis-services (groundwater, nutrient loss, soil loss, carbon sequestration, pollination deficit) in 11 contrasting European landscapes dominated by agroforestry land use compared to business as usual agricultural practice. The productivity and profitability of the farming activities and the associated ES were quantified using environmental modelling and economic valuation. After accounting for labour and machinery costs the financial value of the outputs of Mediterranean agroforestry systems tended to be greater than the corresponding agricultural system; but in Atlantic and Continental regions the agricultural system tended to be more profitable. However, when economic values for the associated ES were included, the relative profitability of agroforestry increased. Agroforestry landscapes: (i) were associated to reduced externalities of pollution from nutrient and soil losses, and (ii) generated additional benefits from carbon capture and storage and thus generated an overall higher economic gain. Our findings underline how a market system that includes the values of broader ES would result in land use change favouring multifunctional agroforestry. Imposing penalties for dis-services or payments for services would reflect their real world prices and would make agroforestry a more financially profitable system

Agroforestry as a sustainable land use option to reduce wildfires risk in European Mediterranean areas

Wildfires have always been an integral part of the ecology of many terrestrial ecosystems, but their frequency is increasing in many parts of the world. Wildfires were once a natural phenomenon, but after humans learned to control fire, it has been used as a management tool to increase soil fertility, to regenerate natural vegetation for grazing and to control competing vegetation. However, currently uncontrolled wildfires threaten not only natural vegetation, landscape biodiversity, communities and economies, but they also release large amounts of carbon dioxide, thus contributing to global temperature increase. Higher temperatures and drier summers have increased the risk of wildfires in biodiversity rich areas of European Mediterranean countries and have resulted in human casualties. The aim of this article is to investigate whether agroforestry, the practice of integrating woody vegetation and agricultural crops and/or livestock, could be a management tool to reduce wildfires in European Mediterranean countries. Fire events from 2008 to 2017 and data of land cover and land use were spatially correlated. Results indicated that agroforestry areas had fewer wildfire incidents than forests, shrublands or grasslands, providing evidence of the potential of agroforestry to reduce fire risk and protect ecosystems

Policy challenges for agroforestry implementation in Europe

Agroforestry (AF) is a sustainable land use practice and system that increases the ecosystem services delivery from agricultural lands compared with treeless systems. Agroforestry can be considered a practice when linked to plot scale (silvoarable, silvopasture, homegarden, woody linear landscape strips, and forest farming), and a system when associated with the global farm scale. The enhancement of the ecosystem services is associated with the use and promotion of the biodiversity caused by the presence of trees that optimizes the use of the resources if adequate species are mixed. Agroforestry can be implemented at temporal and spatial scales. At the temporal scale, the use of woody perennials to increase soil fertility is a traditional technique that improves soil health and reduces the need of using herbicides (e.g., the legume Ulex sown for 10 years in between crop cultivation). Five agroforestry practices can be implemented at the plot level: silvopasture, silvoarable/alley cropping, homegardens/kitchengardens, woody linear landscape strips, and forest farming. A farm including these practices is considered an agroforestry system working at the landscape level when several farms are mixed. In spite of the acknowledgment that AF has at the European level for being included as part of Pillars I and II, the spread of AF is limited across Europe. Four challenges, linked with technical, economic, educational, and policy development, have been identified by the AFINET thematic network that, if addressed, may foster policy adoption across the EU. This article proposes 15 different policy recommendations to overcome them and the need of developing an AF strategy for the EU