4.5 Review

Adding Some Green to the Greening: Improving the EU's Ecological Focus Areas for Biodiversity and Farmers

期刊

CONSERVATION LETTERS
卷 10, 期 5, 页码 517-530

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/conl.12333

关键词

Agriculture; biodiversity; Common Agricultural Policy; Ecological Focus Areas; farmers' choices; greening measures; policy implementation; policy simplification

资金

  1. project EU BON
  2. FarmLand project
  3. ERA-Net BiodivERsA under French National Research Agency [ANR-11-EBID-0004]
  4. German BMBF DFG
  5. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
  6. [FPA EEA/NSV/14/001_ETC/ULS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) are one of the three new greening measures of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). We used an interdisciplinary and European-scale approach to evaluate ecological effectiveness and farmers' perception of the different EFA options. We assessed potential benefits of EFA options for biodiversity using a survey among 88 ecologists from 17 European countries. We further analyzed data on EFA uptake at the EU level and in eight EU Member States, and reviewed socio-economic factors influencing farmers' decisions. We then identified possible ways to improve EFAs. Ecologists scored field margins, buffer strips, fallow land, and landscape features as most beneficial whereas farmers mostly implemented catch crops and green cover,nitrogen-fixing crops, and fallow land. Based on the expert inputs and a review of the factors influencing farmers' decisions, we suggest that EFA implementation could be improved by (a) prioritizing EFA options that promote biodiversity (e.g., reducing the weight or even excluding ineffective options); (b) reducing administrative constraints; (c) setting stricter management requirements (e.g., limiting agrochemical use); and (d) offering further incentives for expanding options like landscape features and buffer strips. We finally propose further improvements at the next CAP reform, to improve ecological effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据