Browsing by Author "García de Jalón, Silvestre"
Now showing 1 - 20 of 20
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Agricultural trade publications and the 2012 Midwestern U.S. drought: a missed opportunity for climate risk communication(Elsevier, 2016-11) Church, Sarah P.; Haigh, Tonya; Widhalm, Melissa; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Babin, Nicholas; Carlton, J. Stuart; Dunn, Michael; Fagan, Katie; Knutson, Cody L.; Prokopy, Linda S.The Midwestern United States experienced a devastating drought in 2012, leading to reduced corn and soybean yields and increased instances of pests and disease. Climate change induced weather variability and extremes are expected to increase in the future, and have and will continue to impact the agricultural sector. This study investigated how agricultural trade publications portrayed the 2012 U.S. Midwestern drought, whether climate change was associated with drought, and whether these publications laid out transformative adaptation measures farmers could undertake in order to increase their adaptive capacity for future climate uncertainty. We performed a content analysis of 1000 media reports between April 1, 2012 and March 31, 2014, sampled from ten agricultural trade publications. The results lead us to suggest that trade publications’ 2012 U.S. Midwestern drought discussion lacked information that would allow farmers and agricultural advisors to assess climate change risk and subsequent potential adaptive management strategies. Agricultural risk from climate change is very real, and farmers will need to adapt. The agricultural trade publications studied missed an opportunity to convey risk from climate change and the transformative adaptation practices necessary for a sustainable and resilient agricultural system.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; García de Jalón, 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 Agroforestry systems of high nature and cultural value in Europe: provision of commercial goods and other ecosystem services(2017-09-30) Moreno, G.; Aviron, S.; Berg, S.; Crous-Duran, Josep; Franca, A.; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Hartel, T.; Mirck, J.; Pantera, A.; Palma, João H. N.; Paulo, J. A.; Re, G. A.; Sanna, F.; Thenail, Claudine; Varga, Anna; Viaud, V.; Burgess, Paul J.Land use systems that integrate woody vegetation with livestock and/or crops and are recognised for their biodiversity and cultural importance can be termed high nature and cultural value (HNCV) agroforestry. In this review, based on the literature and stakeholder knowledge, we describe the structure, components and management practices of ten contrasting HNCV agroforestry systems distributed across five European bioclimatic regions. We also compile and categorize the ecosystem services provided by these agroforestry systems, following the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services. HNCV agroforestry in Europe generally enhances biodiversity and regulating ecosystem services relative to conventional agriculture and forestry. These systems can reduce fire risk, compared to conventional forestry, and can increase carbon sequestration, moderate the microclimate, and reduce soil erosion and nutrient leaching compared to conventional agriculture. However, some of the evidence is location specific and a better geographical coverage is needed to generalize patterns at broader scales. Although some traditional practices and products have been abandoned, many of the studied systems continue to provide multiple woody and non-woody plant products and high-quality food from livestock and game. Some of the cultural value of these systems can also be captured through tourism and local events. However there remains a continual challenge for farmers, landowners and society to fully translate the positive social and environmental impacts of HNCV agroforestry into market prices for the products and services.Item Open Access Assessing food sustainable intensification potential of agroforestry using a carbon balance method(Italian Society of Silviculture and Forest Ecology (SISEF), 2019-01-24) Crous-Duran, Josep; Graves, Anil; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Paulo, Joana A.; Tomé, Margarida; Palma, João H. N.Food security, climate change mitigation, and land use challenges are interlinked and need to be considered simultaneously. One possible solution is sustainable intensification, which is the practice of increasing food production per area of land whilst also reducing the environmental impacts associated with this. Agroforestry has been stated to be a practice that meets this definition. In this study, a new methodology is presented to assess the potential of different management options as sustainable intensification practices. The methodology is based on comparing the carbon emissions associated with the production of food and the carbon sequestered for that same activity for a particular quantity of food produced over a specific area and over a specific time. The resulting indicator, the “carbon balance” is the difference between the greenhouse gasses emitted (considered as negative values) and carbon sequestered (positive values) estimated in Mg CO2eq per Mg of food produced on one hectare of land for one year. The carbon balance quantifies the global warming potential associated with sustainable intensification by integrating a process-based model with life cycle analysis and is able to estimate above- and below-ground biomass and soil carbon content. This methodology is tested in Portugal for wheat production under crop monoculture and agroforestry systems. The results show agroforestry to be a suitable practice for sustainable intensification compared to a crop monoculture as it just slightly decreased wheat yields whilst providing a positive carbon balance from year 50 onwards of approximately 1 Mg of CO2eq sequestered per Mg of wheat produced.Item Open Access Assessing the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on economic profitability of arable, forestry, and silvoarable systems(MDPI, 2021-03-25) Kaske, Kristina J.; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Williams, Adrian G.; Graves, Anil R.This study assesses the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sequestration of a silvoarable system with poplar trees and a crop rotation of wheat, barley, and oilseed rape and compares this with a rotation of the same arable crops and a poplar plantation. The Farm-SAFE model, a financial model of arable, forestry, and silvoarable systems, was modified to account for life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from tree and crop management were determined from life-cycle inventories and carbon storage benefits from the Yield-SAFE model, which predicts crop and tree yields in arable, forestry, and silvoarable systems. An experimental site in Silsoe in southern England served as a case study. The results showed that the arable system was the most financially profitable system, followed by the silvoarable and then the forestry systems, with equivalent annual values of EUR 560, 450 and 140 ha−1, respectively. When the positive and negative externalities of GHG sequestration and emissions were converted into carbon equivalents and given an economic value, the profitability of the arable systems was altered relative to the forestry and silvoarable systems, although in the analysis, the exact impact depended on the value given to GHG emissions. Market values for carbon resulted in the arable system remaining the most profitable system, albeit at a reduced level. Time series values for carbon proposed by the UK government resulted in forestry being the most profitable system. Hence, the relative benefit of the three systems was highly sensitive to the value that carbon was given in the analysis. This in turn is dependent on the perspective that is given to the analysis.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; García de Jalón, 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 The environmental costs of water flow regulation: an innovative approach based on the ‘Polluter Pays’ principle(Springer, 2017-04-24) García de Jalón, Silvestre; Gonzalez del Tanago, Marta G.; Alonso, Carlos; García de Jalón, DiegoThe EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) explicitly requires the full cost recovery of water services, including the environmental costs incurred from the damage that water uses inflict on the environment. Although flow regulation by river damming is one of the most prominent human impact on fresh water ecosystems its environmental costs are not properly included in water pricing. This paper presents a novel approach to assessing the environmental costs of flow regulation based on the polluter-pays principle. The methodology includes three steps: (i) assessing the admissible range of regulated flow variability, derived from the natural flow regime variability, (ii) estimating the daily environmental impact of regulated flows according to deviations from the admissible range of flow variability, and (iii) calculating the environmental costs of flow regulation. The procedure is applied to four river case studies in Spain, UK and Norway. The advantages over other water cost valuation methods are discussed. The methodology enlarges the current recognition of environmental costs of water use and represents a practical management tool within the WFD context, encouraging transparency and stakeholder communication.Item Open Access Farmers’ reasoning behind the uptake of agroforestry practices: evidence from multiple case-studies across Europe(Springer, 2017-10-11) Rois-Díaz, M.; Lovric, N.; Lovric, M.; Ferreiro-Domínguez, N.; Mosquera-Losada, M. R.; den Herder, M.; Graves, Anil; Palma, João H. N.; Paulo, J. A.; Pisanelli, A.; Smith, J.; Moreno, G.; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Varga, Anna; Pantera, A.; Mirck, J.Potential benefits and costs of agroforestry practices have been analysed by experts, but few studies have captured farmers’ perspectives on why agroforestry might be adopted on a European scale. This study provides answers to this question, through an analysis of 183 farmer interviews in 14 case study systems in eight European countries. The study systems included high natural and cultural value agroforestry systems, silvoarable systems, high value tree systems, and silvopasture systems, as well as systems where no agroforestry practices were occurring. A mixed method approach combining quantitative and qualitative approaches was taken throughout the interviews. Narrative thematic data analysis was performed. Data collection proceeded until no new themes emerged. Within a given case study, i.e. the different systems in different European regions, this sampling was performed both for farmers who practice agroforestry and farmers who did not. Results point to a great diversity of agroforestry practices, although many of the farmers are not aware of the term or concept of agroforestry, despite implementing the practice in their own farms. While only a few farmers mentioned eligibility for direct payments in the CAP as the main reason to remove trees from their land, to avoid the reduction of the funded area, the tradition in the family or the region, learning from others, and increasing the diversification of products play the most important role in adopting or not agroforestry systems.Item Open Access Forage-SAFE: a tool to assess the management and economics of wood pasture systems(CEST, 2017-12-31) García de Jalón, Silvestre; Graves, Anil; Moreno, G.; Palma, João H. N.; Crous-Duran, Josep; Oliveira, T.; Burgess, Paul J.The Forage-SAFE model has been developed to better understand the impact of trees on the profitability of wood pastures. It assesses the daily balance between the demand for and production of forage to estimate an annual farm net margin. The model allows the modification of selected biophysical and financial parameters related to the tree, pasture and livestock components (such as tree cover density, carrying capacity and livestock species) which can be optimised to maximise net farm income. A case study in a dehesa wood pasture in South-western Spain was used to show the applicability of the model. The case study results showed that net margin was maximised at around 27% tree cover for a carrying capacity of 0.4 livestock unit per hectare from which 61% were ruminants and 39% Iberian pigs. The analysis also showed that high carrying capacities were positively correlated with tree cover profitability. This was accentuated as the proportion of Iberian pigs increased.Item Open Access How is agroforestry perceived in Europe? An assessment of positive and negative aspects by stakeholders(Springer, 2017-08-24) García de Jalón, 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 Integrating belowground carbon dynamics into Yield-SAFE, a parameter sparse agroforestry model(Springer, 2017-09-16) Palma, João H. N.; Crous-Duran, Josep; Graves, Anil; García de Jalón, Silvestre; Upson, Matthew; Oliveira, Tania S.; Paulo, Joana A.; Ferreiro-Domínguez, N.; Moreno, Gerardo; Burgess, PaulAgroforestry combines perennial woody elements (e.g. trees) with an agricultural understory (e.g. wheat, pasture) which can also potentially be used by a livestock component. In recent decades, modern agroforestry systems have been proposed at European level as land use alternatives for conventional agricultural systems. The potential range of benefits that modern agroforestry systems can provide includes farm product diversification (food and timber), soil and biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration, both in woody biomass and the soil. Whilst typically these include benefits such as food and timber provision, potentially, there are benefits in the form of carbon sequestration, both in woody biomass and in the soil. Quantifying the effect of agroforestry systems on soil carbon is important because it is one means by which atmospheric carbon can be sequestered in order to reduce global warming. However, experimental systems that can combine the different alternative features of agroforestry systems are difficult to implement and long-term. For this reason, models are needed to explore these alternatives, in order to determine what benefits different combinations of trees and understory might provide in agroforestry systems. This paper describes the integration of the widely used soil carbon model RothC, a model simulating soil organic carbon turnover, into Yield-SAFE, a parameter sparse model to estimate aboveground biomass in agroforestry systems. The improvement of the Yield-SAFE model focused on the estimation of input plant material into soil (i.e. leaf fall and root mortality) while maintaining the original aspiration for a simple conceptualization of agroforestry modeling, but allowing to feed inputs to a soil carbon module based on RothC. Validation simulations show that the combined model gives predictions consistent with observed data for both SOC dynamics and tree leaf fall. Two case study systems are examined: a cork oak system in South Portugal and a poplar system in the UK, in current and future climate.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 Modelling and valuing the environmental impacts of arable, forestry and agroforestry systems: a case study(2017-10-03) García de Jalón, Silvestre; Graves, Anil; Palma, João H. N.; Williams, Adrian; Upson, Matt; Burgess, Paul J.The use of land for intensive arable production in Europe is associated with a range of externalities that typically impose costs on third parties. The introduction of trees in arable systems can potentially be used to reduce these costs. This paper assesses the profitability and environmental externalities of a silvoarable agroforestry system, and compares this with the profitability and environmental externalities from an arable system and a forestry system. A silvoarable experimental plot of poplar trees planted in 1992 in Bedfordshire, Eastern England, was used as a case study. The Yield-SAFE model was used to simulate the growth and yields of the silvoarable, arable, and forestry land uses along with the associated environmental externalities, including carbon sequestration, greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen and phosphorus surplus, and soil erosion losses by water. The Farm-SAFE model was then used to quantify the monetary value of these effects. The study assesses both the financial profitability from a farmer perspective and the economic benefit from a societal perspective. The arable option was the most financially profitable system followed by the silvoarable system and forestry. However, when the environmental externalities were included, silvoarable agroforestry provided the greatest benefit. This suggests that the appropriate integration of trees in arable land can provide greater well-being benefits to society overall, than arable farming without trees, or forestry systems on their own.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 The potential for adoption of climate smart agricultural practices in Sub-Saharan livestock systems(Springer, 2016-07-20) García de Jalón, Silvestre; Silvestri, Silvia; Barnes, Andrew P.Livestock systems play an important role in the livelihoods of many rural communities in Sub-Saharan Africa while being responsible for an important share of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. This study aimed to evaluate the potential for adoption of climate smart agricultural practices in Sub-Saharan livestock systems, related to the improvement in feed, animal husbandry, and grassland management. These practices present productivity and mitigation benefits and in some cases may also contribute to enhance resilience. In this study, we used a data set of 1538 farm households across nine Sub-Saharan countries. A mixed logit model was used to assess the influence on adoption and to estimate the probability of adoption. Our results show that there seems to be stronger influence of physical and financial capitals on adoption than the other capitals. Different types of capitals influence the uptake of different agricultural practices. Yet the probability of adoption would change across countries. The results of this study could help to refine adoption estimates calculated through global or regional modelling approaches and to inform the design of policies to better target investments in order to foster adoption.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 Water pricing: are 'polluters' paying the environmental costs of flow regulation?(2017-09-02) García de Jalón, Silvestre; González Del Tánago, M.; Alonso, C.; García de Jalón, DiegoRiver ecosystems are severely affected by dams and reservoirs. The Water Framework Directive states that polluters should be financially responsible for the caused environmental damage. Nevertheless, the environmental costs associated to flow regulation often are not fully paid by water users. This study presents an approach to value the environmental costs of flow regulation based on the "polluter pays" principle, i.e., the amount to be paid should be proportional to the caused environmental impact. The procedure includes three major steps: (i) assessing the admissible range of regulated flow variability based on flow data during the pre-dam period, (ii) estimating the daily environmental impact of regulated flows according to the resulting hydrological change in terms of the intensity, duration and frequency of the impact, and (iii) calculating the environmental costs of flow regulation subject to spatiotemporal characteristics. This paper applies the proposed methodology in the Luna River, Spain. The advantages over other water cost valuation methodologies are discussed. The approach enlarges the current recognition of water environmental costs and represents a simple and practical management tool for achieving the objectives of the Water Framework Directive.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; García de Jalón, 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