Search

Farmers' pro-environmental action is substantially influenced by various stakeholders from their business and social environment. Recent studies recommend actively involving influential stakeholders in agri-environmental initiatives, information or media campaigns. While it has been argued that farmers' perceptions towards these stakeholders can help inform effective involvement, comprehensive assessments of these perceptions remain scarce, particularly in the context of biodiversity-friendly farming. To understand and compare farmers' perceptions of these stakeholder quantitatively, we developed and applied a perception matrix. In an exploratory survey with 49 farmers across ten European countries, farmers rated twelve groups of stakeholders (e.g. government bodies, farm advisors and input suppliers) against eight perception constructs (e.g. trustworthiness, interest in protecting biodiversity). We found that perceptions differed significantly both between groups of stakeholders and between constructs. Whereas several stakeholders were, on average, perceived positively regarding their general characteristics, such as trustworthiness, reliability, understanding and support for farming, perceptions regarding their biodiversity-related behavior were significantly more negative. Our findings indicate potential to improve policy development and implementation of agri-environmental initiatives through the involvement of multiple, non-governmental, agricultural and non-agricultural stakeholders in biodiversity-friendly farming initiatives across the entire agri-food value chain. Such multi-stakeholder initiatives could help to not only reinforce biodiversity conservation action among the farming community, but across society as a whole as emphasized by the Convention on Biological Diversity. Further research is needed to confirm the observed trends on a larger, representative sample, for which the presented perception matrix is well suited. • In general terms, farmers perceived most stakeholders positively. • Stakeholders were perceived more negatively regarding biodiversity-friendly farming. • Diverging perceptions highlight the need of multi-faceted assessments. •Perception matrices can help to involve stakeholders in biodiversity policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The Agri-Environment Footprint Index (AFI) has been developed as a generic methodology to assess changes in the overall environmental impacts from agriculture at the farm level and to assist in the evaluation of European agri-environmental schemes (AES). The methodology is based on multi-criteria analysis (MCA) and involves stakeholder participation to provide a locally customised evaluation based on weighted environmental indicators. The methodology was subjected to a feasibility assessment in a series of case studies across the EU. The AFI approach was able to measure significant differences in environmental status between farms that participated in an AES and non-participants. Wider environmental concerns, beyond the scheme objectives, were also considered in some case studies and the benefits for identification of unintentional (and often beneficial) impacts of AESs are presented. The participatory approach to AES evaluation proved efficient in different environments and administrative contexts. The approach proved to be appropriate for environmental evaluation of complex agri-environment systems and can complement any evaluation conducted under the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. The applicability of the AFI in routine monitoring of AES impacts and in providing feedback to improve policy design is discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Arthropods that have a direct impact on crop production (i.e. pests, natural enemies and pollinators) can be influenced by both local farm management and the context within which the fields occur in the wider landscape. However, the contributions and spatial scales at which these drivers operate and interact are not fully understood, particularly in the developing world. The impact of both local management and landscape context on insect pollinators and natural enemy communities and on their capacity to deliver related ecosystem services to an economically important tropical crop, pigeonpea was investigated. The study was conducted in nine paired farms across a gradient of increasing distance to semi-native vegetation in Kibwezi, Kenya. Results show that proximity of fields to semi-native habitats negatively affected pollinator and chewing insect abundance. Within fields, pesticide use was a key negative predictor of pollinator, pest and foliar active predator abundance. On the contrary, fertilizer application significantly enhanced pollinator and both chewing and sucking insect pest abundance. At a 1km spatial scale of fields, there were significant negative effects of the number of semi-native habitat patches within fields dominated by mass flowering pigeonpea on pollinators abundance. For service provision, a significant decline in fruit set when insects were excluded from flowers was recorded. This study reveals the interconnections of pollinators, predators and pests with pigeonpea crop. For sustainable yields and to conserve high densities of both pollinators and predators of pests within pigeonpea landscapes, it is crucial to target the adoption of less disruptive farm management practices such as reducing pesticide and fertilizer inputs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]