Citation:
A.R. Graves, P.J. Burgess, J.H.N. Palma, F. Herzog, G. Moreno, M. Bertomeu, C.
Dupraz, F. Liagre, K. Keesman, W. van der Werf, A. Koeffeman de Nooy, J.P. van
den Briel, Development and application of bio-economic modelling to compare
silvoarable, arable, and forestry systems in three European countries,
Ecological Engineering, Volume 29, Issue 4, Carbon sequestration and landscape
ecology in Western Europe, 1 April 2007, Pages 434-449.
Abstract:
Silvoarable agroforestry could promote use of trees on farms in Europe, but its
likely effect on production, farm profitability, and environmental services is
poorly understood. Hence, from 2001 to 2005, the Silvoarable Agroforestry for
Europe project developed a systematic process to evaluate the biophysical and
economic performance of arable, forestry, and silvoarable systems in Spain,
France, and The Netherlands. A biophysical model called “Yield-SAFE” was
developed to predict long-term yields for the different systems and local
statistics and expert opinion were used to derive their revenue, costs, and pre-
and post-2005 grant regimes. These data were then used in an economic model
called “Farm-SAFE” to predict plot- and farm-scale profitability. Land
equivalent ratios were greater than one, showing Yield-SAFE predicted that
growing trees and crops in silvoarable systems was more productive than growing
them separately. Pre-2005 grants in Spain and The Netherlands penalised
silvoarable systems, but post-2005 grants were more equitable. In France, walnut
and poplar silvoarable systems were consistently the most profitable system
under both grant regimes. In Spain, holm oak and stone pine silvoarable systems
were the least profitable system under pre-2005 grants, but only marginally less
profitable than arable systems under post-2005 grants. In The Netherlands, low
timber values and the opportunity cost of losing arable land for slurry manure
application made silvoarable and forestry systems uncompetitive with arable
systems under both grant