Browsing by Author "Kay, Sonja"
Now showing 1 - 13 of 13
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Agroforestry as a sustainable land use option to reduce wildfires risk in European Mediterranean areas(Springer, 2020-01-11) Damianidis, Christos; Santiago-Freijanes, Jose Javier; den Herder, Michael; Burgess, Paul; Mosquera-Losada, María Rosa; Graves, Anil; Papadopoulos, Andreas; Pisanelli, Andrea; Camilli, Francesca; Rois-Díaz, Mercedes; Kay, Sonja; Palma, João H. N.; Pantera, AnastasiaWildfires 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.Item Open Access Agroforestry is paying off – Economic evaluation of ecosystem services in European landscapes with and without agroforestry systems(Elsevier, 2019-02-02) Kay, Sonja; Graves, Anil; Palma, João H. N.; Moreno, Gerardo; Roces-Díaz, José V.; Aviron, Stephanie; Chouvardas, Dimitrios; Crous-Duran, Josep; Ferreiro-Domínguez, Nuria; Garcia de Jalon, Silvestre; Macicasan, Vlad; Mosquera-Losada, María Rosa; Pantera, Anastasia; Santiago-Freijanes, Jose Javier; Szerencsits, Erich; Torralba, Mario; Burgess, Paul; Herzog, FelixThe 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.Item Open Access Cross-site analysis of perceived ecosystem service benefits in multifunctional landscapes(Elsevier, 2019-05-06) Fagerholm, Nora; Torralba, Mario; Moreno, Gerardo; Girardello, Marco; Herzog, Felix; Aviron, Stephanie; Burgess, Paul; Crous-Duran, Josep; Ferreiro-Domínguez, Nuria; Graves, Anil; Hartel, Tibor; Măcicăsan, Vlad; Kay, Sonja; Pantera, Anastasia; Varga, Anna; Plieninger, TobiasRural development policies in many Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries promote sustainable landscape management with the intention of providing multiple ecosystem services (ES). Yet, it remains unclear which ES benefits are perceived in different landscapes and by different people. We present an assessment of ES benefits perceived and mapped by residents (n = 2,301) across 13 multifunctional (deep rural to peri-urban) landscapes in Europe. We identify the most intensively perceived ES benefits, their spatial patterns, and the respondent and landscape characteristics that determine ES benefit perception. We find outdoor recreation, aesthetic values and social interactions are the key ES benefits at local scales. Settlement areas are ES benefit hotspots but many benefits are also related to forests, waters and mosaic landscapes. We find some ES benefits (e.g. culture and heritage values) are spatially clustered, while many others (e.g. aesthetic values) are dispersed. ES benefit perception is linked to people’s relationship with and accessibility to a landscape. Our study discusses how a local perspective can contribute to the development of contextualized and socially acceptable policies for sustainable ES management. We also address conceptual confusion in ES framework and present argumentation regarding the links from services to benefits, and from benefits to different types of values.Item Open Access Data underpinning research article "Whole system valuation of arable, agroforestry and tree-only systems at three case study sites in Europe"(Cranfield University, 2020-07-06 08:25) Giannitsopoulos, Michail; Graves, Anil; Burgess, Paul; Crous Duran, Josep; Moreno, Gerardo; Herzog, Felix; HN Palma, Joao; Kay, Sonja; Garcia De Jalon, Silvestre"Interactive Figures A1 and A2, along with their dataset. Figures D1 and D2 dataset"Item Open Access Dry deposition of air pollutants on trees at regional scale: a case study in the Basque Country(Elsevier, 2019-11-15) García de Jalón, Silvestre; Burgess, Paul; Curiel Yuste, Jorge; Moreno, Gerardo; Graves, Anil; Palma, João H. N.; Crous-Duran, Josep; Kay, Sonja; Chiabai, AlineThere is increased interest in the role of trees to reduce air pollution and thereby improve human health and well-being. This study determined the removal of air pollutants by dry deposition of trees across the Basque Country and estimated its annual economic value. A model that calculates the hourly dry deposition of NO2, O3, SO2, CO and PM10 on trees at a 1 km x 1 km resolution at a regional scale was developed. The calculated mean annual rates of removal of air pollution across various land uses were 12.9 kg O3 ha−1, 12.7 kg PM10 ha−1, 3.0 kg NO2 ha−1, 0.8 kg SO2 ha−1 and 0.2 kg CO ha−1. The results were then categorised according to land use in order to determine how much each land use category contributed to reducing air pollution and to determine to what extent trees provided pollution reduction benefits to society. Despite not being located in the areas of highest pollutions, coniferous forests, which cover 25% of the land, were calculated to absorb 21% of the air pollution. Compared to other land uses, coniferous forests were particularly effective in removing air pollution because of their high tree cover density and the duration of leaf life-span. The total economic value provided by the trees in reducing these pollutants in terms of health benefits was estimated to be €60 million yr−1 which represented around 0.09% of the Gross Domestic Product of the Basque Country in 2016. Whilst most health impacts from air pollution are in urban areas the results indicate that most air pollution is removed in rural areas.Item Open Access Exploring agroforestry limiting factors and digitalization perspectives: insights from a european multi-actor appraisal(Springer , 2024-10) Tranchina, Margherita; Burgess, Paul; Cella, Fabrizio Giuseppe; Cumplido-Marin, Laura; Gosme, Marie; den Herder, Michael; Kay, Sonja; Lawson, Gerry; Lojka, Bohdan; Palma, João; Pardon, Paul; Reissig, Linda; Reubens, Bert; Prins, Evert; Vandendriessche, Jari; Mantino, AlbertoDespite its potential for fostering farm sustainability, the adoption of agroforestry faces context-dependent challenges, among which the (perceived) shortage of decision-supporting tools and barriers hindering the assessment of economic, environmental, and social benefits. The process of digitalization offers significant opportunities to enhance sustainability, but it remains crucial to foster a human-centric, fair, and sustainable approach. In the context of the DigitAF Horizon Europe project, we present the results of a multi-stakeholder questionnaire aimed at understanding the perceptions of stakeholders regarding agroforestry and digitalization, as well as the needs of these stakeholders for a successful implementation of this agricultural practice. In the questionnaire, there was a specific focus on the need for and the conditions for the use of digital tools and models, such as generalized digital tools, applications and mapping, climate and weather forecasting and recording, farm management and decision support, and agroforestry and environmental tools. The purpose of this survey was to provide insights to inform agroforestry actors and to foster collaborative initiatives that enhance the potential of digital tools to support the design, implementation, and maintenance of effective and sustainable agroforestry in the European context. Our questionnaire was completed by stakeholders from seven European countries, including farmers, academics, policy actors, farm advisors, and actors in the value chain with an interest in agroforestry. Stakeholders from six living labs, representing Czechia, Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK, were involved in the appraisal, along with a multi-stakeholder group from Belgium. Respondents used data and digital tools for various purposes in farming systems and were interested in their potential to improve agroforestry including animal, tree, and crop performance, management guidance, system design, and tree species selection. Our survey revealed that the perceived usefulness of digital tools for agroforestry was substantially higher than stakeholders' awareness of existing tools, indicating a need for better promotion and development of user-friendly, accessible solutions. Additionally, significant obstacles to agroforestry adoption, such as large up-front investments, administrative burdens, and fear of reduced CAP support, were identified, emphasizing the necessity for targeted support and policy improvements. Moving forward, efforts should focus on developing targeted solutions to promote agroforestry according to stakeholder perception, and user-friendly digital tools tailored to the needs and preferences expressed by stakeholders, while also increasing knowledge sharing and capacity building among practitioners and researchers.Item Open Access How is agroforestry perceived in Europe? An assessment of positive and negative aspects by stakeholders(Springer, 2017-08-24) Garcia de Jalon, Silvestre; Burgess, Paul J.; Graves, Anil; Moreno, Gerardo; McAdam, Jim; Pottier, Eric; Novak, Sandra; Bondesan, Valerio; Mosquera-Losada, Rosa; Crous-Duran, Josep; Palma, João H. N.; Paulo, Joana A.; Oliveira, Tania S.; Cirou, Eric; Hannachi, Yousri; Pantera, Anastasia; Wartelle, Regis; Kay, Sonja; Malignier, Nina; van Lerberghe, Philippe; Tsonkova, Penka; Mirck, Jaconette; Rois, Mercedes; Kongsted, Anne Grete; Thenail, Claudine; Luske, Boki; Berg, Staffan; Gosme, Marie; Vityi, AndreaWhilst the benefits of agroforestry are widely recognised in tropical latitudes few studies have assessed how agroforestry is perceived in temperate latitudes. This study evaluates how stakeholders and key actors including farmers, landowners, agricultural advisors, researchers and environmentalists perceive the implementation and expansion of agroforestry in Europe. Meetings were held with 30 stakeholder groups covering different agroforestry systems in 2014 in eleven EU countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom). In total 344 valid responses were received to a questionnaire where stakeholders were asked to rank the positive and negative aspects of implementing agroforestry in their region. Improved biodiversity and wildlife habitats, animal health and welfare, and landscape aesthetics were seen as the main positive aspects of agroforestry. By contrast, increased labour, complexity of work, management costs and administrative burden were seen as the most important negative aspects. Overall, improving the environmental value of agriculture was seen as the main benefit of agroforestry, whilst management and socio-economic issues were seen as the greatest barriers. The great variability in the opportunities and barriers of the systems suggests enhanced adoption of agroforestry across Europe will be most likely to occur with specific initiatives for each type of system.Item Open Access Landscape-scale modelling of agroforestry ecosystems services in Swiss orchards: a methodological approach(Springer, 2018-08-02) Kay, Sonja; Crous-Duran, Josep; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Graves, Anil; Palma, João H. N.; Roces-Díaz, José V.; Szerencsits, Erich; Weibel, Robert; Herzog, FelixContext Agroforestry systems in temperate Europe are known to provide both, provisioning and regulating ecosystem services (ES). Yet, it is poorly understood how these systems affect ES provision at a landscape scale in contrast to agricultural practises. Objectives This study aimed at developing a novel, spatially explicit model to assess and quantify bundles of provisioning and regulating ES provided by landscapes with and without agroforestry systems and to test the hypothesis that agroforestry landscapes provide higher amounts of regulating ES than landscapes dominated by monocropping. Methods Focussing on ES that are relevant for agroforestry and agricultural practices, we selected six provisioning and regulating ES—“biomass production”, “groundwater recharge”, “nutrient retention”, “soil preservation”, “carbon storage”, “habitat and gene pool protection”. Algorithms for quantifying these services were identified, tested, adapted, and applied in a traditional cherry orchard landscape in Switzerland, as a case study. Eight landscape test sites of 1 km × 1 km, four dominated by agroforestry and four dominated by agriculture, were mapped and used as baseline for the model. Results We found that the provisioning ES, namely the annual biomass yield, was higher in landscape test sites with agriculture, while the regulating ES were better represented in landscape test sites with agroforestry. The differences were found to be statistically significant for the indicators annual biomass yield, groundwater recharge rate, nitrate leaching, annual carbon sequestration, flowering resources, and share of semi-natural habitats. Conclusions This approach provides an example for spatially explicit quantification of provisioning and regulating ES and is suitable for comparing different land use scenarii at landscape scale.Item Open Access Mixtures of forest and agroforestry alleviate trade-offs between ecosystem services in European rural landscapes(Elsevier, 2021-06-17) Rolo, Victor; Roces-Díaz, José V.; Torralba, Mario; Kay, Sonja; Fagerholm, Nora; Aviron, Stephanie; Burgess, Paul; Crous-Duran, Josep; Ferreiro-Domínguez, Nuria; Graves, Anil; Hartel, Tibor; Mantzanas, Konstantinos; Mosquera-Losada, María Rosa; Palma, João H. N.; Sidiropoulou, Anna; Szerencsits, Erich; Viaud, Valérie; Herzog, Felix; Plieninger, Tobias; Moreno, GerardoRural Europe encompasses a variety of landscapes with differing levels of forest, agriculture, and agroforestry that can deliver multiple ecosystem services (ES). Whilst provisioning and regulating ES associated with individual land covers are comparatively well studied, less is known about the associated cultural ES. Only seldom are provisioning, regulating, and cultural ES investigated together to evaluate how they contribute to multifunctionality. In this study we combined biophysical and sociocultural approaches to assess how different landscapes (dominated by forest, agriculture or agroforestry) and landscape characteristics (i.e. remoteness and landscape diversity) drive spatial associations of ES (i.e. synergies, trade-offs and bundles). We analysed data of: i) seven provisioning and regulating ES (spatially modelled), and; ii) six cultural ES (derived from participatory mapping data) in 12 study sites across four different biogeographical regions of Europe. Our results showed highly differentiated ES profiles for landscapes associated to a specific land cover, with agroforestry generally providing higher cultural ES than forest and agriculture. We found a positive relationship between the proportion of forest in a landscape and provisioning and regulating ES, whilst agriculture showed negative relationships. We found four distinct bundles of ES. Three of them were directly related to a dominant land cover and the fourth to a mixture of forest and agroforestry that was associated with high social value. The latter bundle was related to zones close to urban areas and roads and medium to high landscape diversity. These findings suggest that agroforestry should be prioritised over other land covers in such areas as it delivers a suite of multiple ES, provided it is close to urban areas or roads. Our results also illustrate the importance and application of including people’s perception in the assessment of ES associations and highlight the relevance of developing integrated analyses of ES to inform landscape management decisions.Item Open Access Modelling tree density effects on provisioning ecosystem services in Europe(2018-10-20) Crous-Duran, Josep; Graves, Anil R.; Paulo, Joana A.; Mirck, Jaconette; Oliveira, Tania S.; Kay, Sonja; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Palma, João H. N.Agroforestry systems, in which trees are integrated in arable or pasture land, can be used to enable sustainable food, material, and energy production (i.e. provide provisioning ecosystem services) whilst reducing the negative environmental impacts associated with farming. However, one constraint on the uptake of agroforestry in Europe is a lack of knowledge on how specific agroforestry designs affect productivity. A process-based biophysical model, called Yield-SAFE, was used: (1) to quantify the food, material and biomass energy production of four contrasting case study systems in Europe in a common energy unit (MJ ha−1), and (2) to quantify how tree density determined the supply of provisioning ecosystem services. The Yield-SAFE model was calibrated so that simulated tree and crop growth fitted observed growth data for reference monoculture forestry, pasture, and arable systems. The modelled results showed that including trees in pasture or arable systems increased the overall accumulated energy of the system in comparison with monoculture forestry, pasture, and arable systems, but that the accumulated energy per tree was reduced as tree density increased. The greatest accumulated energy occurred in the highest tree density agroforestry system at all the case study sites. This suggests that the capture of environmental resources, such as light and water, for obtaining provisioning services is most effective in high density agroforestry systems. Further modelling should include tree canopy effects on micro-climatic and the impact this has on pasture, crop, and livestock yields, as well as the impact of tree density on the economic value and management of the different systems.Item Open Access Quantifying regulating ecosystem services with increased tree densities on European farmland(MDPI, 2020-08-18) Crous-Duran, Josep; Graves, Anil R.; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Kay, Sonja; Tomé, Margarida; Burgess, Paul J.; Giannitsopoulos, Michail; Palma, João H. N.Agroforestry systems have been compared to agricultural and forestry alternatives, providing a land-use solution for additional environmental benefits while maintaining similar levels of productivity. However, there is scarce research assessing such patterns across a pan-European scale using a common methodology. This study aims to improve our understanding of the role of trees in three different regulating ecosystem services—(1) soil erosion, (2) nitrate leaching and (3) carbon sequestration—in traditional and innovative agroforestry systems in Europe through a consistent modeling approach. The systems’ assessment spans environmentally from the Mediterranean environmental region in Portugal to the Continental environmental region in Switzerland and Germany to the Atlantic environmental region in the United Kingdom. Modeled tree densities were compared in the different land-use alternatives, ranging from zero (agriculture with only crops or pasture) to forestry (only trees). The methodology included the use of a biophysical model (Yield-SAFE) where the quantification of the environmental benefits was integrated. Results show a consistent improvement of regulating ecosystem services can be expected when introducing trees in the farming landscapes in different environmental regions in Europe. For all the systems, the forestry alternatives presented the best results in terms of a decrease in soil erosion of 51% (±29), a decrease of nearly all the nitrate leaching (98% ± 1) and an increase in the carbon sequestration of up to 238 Mg C ha−1 (±140). However, these alternatives are limited in the variety of food, energy and/or materials provided. On the other hand, from an arable or pure-pasture alternative starting point, an increase in agroforestry tree density could also be associated with a decrease in soil erosion of up to 25% (±17), a decrease in nitrates leached of up to 52% (±34) and an increase in the carbon sequestered of 163 Mg C ha−1 (±128) while at the same time ensuring the same levels of biomass growth and an increase in product diversificationItem Open Access Spatial similarities between European agroforestry systems and ecosystem services at the landscape scale(Springer, 2017-10-04) Kay, Sonja; Crous-Duran, Josep; Ferreiro-Domínguez, Nuria; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Graves, Anil; Moreno, Gerardo; Mosquera-Losada, María Rosa; Palma, João H. N.; Roces-Díaz, José V.; Santiago-Freijanes, Jose Javier; Szerencsits, Erich; Weibel, Robert; Herzog, FelixAgroforestry 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.Item Open Access Whole system valuation of arable, agroforestry and tree-only systems at three case study sites in Europe(Elsevier, 2020-05-24) Giannitsopoulos, Michail L.; Graves, Anil R.; Burgess, Paul J.; Crous-Duran, Josep; Moreno, Gerardo; Herzog, Felix; Palma, João H. N.; Kay, Sonja; Garcíade Jalóne, SilvestreThere is an increasing demand to study the long-term effects of land use from both local farm and wider societal and environmental perspectives. This study applied an approach to evaluate both the financial profitability of arable, agroforestry, and tree-only systems and the wider societal benefits over a period of 30-60 years. The biophysical inputs and yields from the three systems were modelled for three case study sites in the United Kingdom, Spain, and Switzerland, using a tree and crop simulation model called Yield-SAFE. A bio-economic model called Farm-SAFE was then used to compare the financial (EAVF) and economic (or societal) equivalent annual values (EAVE) by including monetary values for five environmental externalities: carbon dioxide emissions, carbon sequestration, soil erosion by water, and nitrogen and phosphorus balances. Across the three case studies, arable farming generated higher farm incomes than the agroforestry or tree-only systems, but the arable systems also created the greatest environmental costs. By comparison the agroforestry and tree-only systems generated lower CO2 emissions and sequestered more carbon. Applying monetary values to the environmental externalities meant that the EAVE of the agroforestry and tree-only systems were greater or similar to that for the arable system in the UK case study. In Spain, the slow predicted growth of the trees meant that, even after including the environmental externalities, the arable system created greater societal benefit than the agroforestry and tree-only systems. In Switzerland, including the environmental externalities increased the attraction of the tree-only system, but the high subsidies for arable and agroforestry systems meant that the EAVE for the agroforestry and arable systems were the most attractive from a farmer’s perspective. A breakeven analysis was used to determine the environmental externality values at which the agroforestry and tree-only systems produced the same societal return as the arable system in each case study. In the UK, a carbon price of ₠16 (t CO2)-1 allowed the EAVE of the agroforestry system to attain parity with the arable EAVE. In both the UK and Spain, an environmental nitrogen cost of ₠3-6 (kg N)-1 was sufficient for the EAVE of the agroforestry and tree-only systems to match those of arable farming. Because trees on farms provide ‘‘economies of multifunction’’ for environmental benefits, the breakeven values will be less if environmental benefits are considered together as packages. The described approach provides a method for governments and others to examine the cost effectiveness of new agri-environment measures