Author:
Nishizawa Takamasa,Schuler Johannes,Bethwell Claudia,Glemnitz Michael,Semm Maaria,Suškevičs Monika,Hämäläinen Laura,Sepp Kalev,Värnik Rando,Uthes Sandra,Aurbacher Joachim,Zander Peter
Abstract
AbstractSemi-natural grasslands (SNGLs) in Estonia are threatened by abandonment. This threat is leading to concerns about the degradation of biodiversity within grassland communities. Despite the high relevance of economic incentives in this context, how such incentives influence land managers’ decision-making regarding the agricultural use of SNGLs has not been investigated. To obtain its socio-ecological implications for policy-making, we developed regionally specific agricultural scenarios (compensation payments, livestock capacity, hey export, and bioenergy production) and an interdisciplinary modelling approach that made it possible to simulate agricultural land use changes through land managers' responses to varied economic conditions. Through this approach, we found that some economic factors hampered the use of SNGLs: the moderate profitability of beef production, labour shortages, and the relatively high profitability of mulching. We observed a positive relationship between SNGLs and habitat suitability for breeding and feeding birds. However, due to the high maintenance costs of SNGLs, the modelling results indicated that increasing the use of SNGLs through public budgets caused crowding-out effects, i.e., the deteriorating market integration of regional agriculture. This study emphasises the need for policy measures aimed at cost-effective, labour-efficient management practices for SNGLs.
Funder
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Eesti Teadusagentuur
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference71 articles.
1. Agroscope, Swiss National Science Foundation, & University of Zürich. (n.d.) FEEDBASE (The Swiss Feed Database). https://www.feedbase.ch/
2. ARC Agricultural Research Centre [Põllumajandusuuringute Keskus] (2021) Kattetulu arvestused taime- ja loomakasvatuses 2021 [Accounting for the margin in crop and livestock production 2021]. https://pmk.agri.ee/sites/default/files/inline-files/2021_kattetulu_220303.pdf
3. Bakker JP, Berendse F (1999) Constraints in the restoration of ecological diversity in grassland and heathland communities. In: Trends in Ecology and Evolution, vol 14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01544-4
4. Bengtsson J, Bullock JM, Egoh B, Everson C, Everson T, O’Connor T, O’Farrell PJ, Smith HG, Lindborg R (2019) Grasslands—more important for ecosystem services than you might think. Ecosphere 10(2) https://doi.org/10.1002/ECS2.2582
5. Benstead P, Jose P, Joyce C, Wade P (1999) European wet grassland: guidelines for management and restoration. Sandy, UK, RSPB