Speaker
Description
1. Introduction
There is an increasing need to improve soil quality (SQ) to preserve agricultural productivity and environmental benefits. While farmers can improve SQ by changing their production management (PM: set of farming practices), this can affect their farm income and therefore constitutes a challenge that can restrain them from improving SQ. To overcome this challenge, focusing on improving ecosystem services (ESs) rather than SQ itself offers both the potential to improve SQ and generate additional income as ESs can be marketed (e.g., payment for ESs). In this context, it is fundamental to clearly understand the consequences for farmers' income and SQ if farmers attempt to improve their ESs supply through PM. Several studies have approached part of the problem, and the most complete conceptual frameworks addressed the linkage between SQ, PM, and farm economics$^{1,2}$. However, studies that consider ESs at the center of the decision-making process are lacking, and/or poorly address the problem as a whole by considering each concept's complexity, and in particular the large diversity of ESs, SQ indicators, and farming practices. To fill this gap, we developed an ESs-centered conceptual framework that aims at providing a clear holistic qualitative understanding of the problem and a blueprint for further modeling/quantitative analysis. This framework was built with a focus on crop production systems and using an iterative process based on an extensive literature review and expert solicitation.
2. Conceptual framework
In Figure 1, the conceptual framework approach is presented and consists of setting the objective as “Improving ESs” while considering SQ, PM, and farm income as being directly and/or indirectly influenced by this objective. From this approach, it appears that “Improving ESs” results in a sequence of choices/requirements and consequences that create a combined effect on farm income. This sequence can be described with the following four relations: (1) “Improving ESs” requires changing PM, (2) changing PM directly influences SQ, (3) “Improving ESs” indirectly influences SQ through PM, (4) and finally “Improving ESs” (yield, and payments for ESs), PM (costs), and SQ (long term productivity) have a combined effect on farm income. Each relation was explored and described qualitatively (mostly in the form of tables and in terms of “positive”, “negative”, and “unclear/neutral” relations) using the most recent literature (mainly meta-analysis, and reviews). For this purpose, we used 19 ESs (food provisioning/yield, water quality, carbon sequestration, etc.), 50 farming practices (no-tillage, manure, cover crops, etc.), and 19 SQ indicators (incl. bulk density, pH, earthworm abundance, etc.) selected based on literature and expert solicitation. Finally, using this conceptual framework, the paper presents a blueprint for modeling and a semi-quantitative illustration.
3. Discussion and conclusion
Despite limitations including the lack of precise quantification, four major findings could already be drawn using this conceptual framework. First, it becomes obvious that decisions on ESs result in a sequence of choices and consequences that affect together farm income. Second, improving ESs leads to different trade-offs and synergies with SQ, depending on changes in PM required to improve ESs. For instance, while carbon sequestration can be improved by no-tillage and organic amendment, no-tillage tends to increase bulk density (at least in the short term) while organic amendment tends to decrease it. Third, synergies between ESs and SQ offer the potential to reduce the marginal costs of further improving SQ. Fourth, not only soil-related ESs but also non-soil-related ESs offer the potential to increase SQ while preserving income. For instance, pollination (a non-soil-related ES) could provide an additional income to enhance SQ, as pollination can be improved via agroforestry which can also positively influence several SQ indicators (e.g., water infiltration). In conclusion, the conceptual framework provides valuable qualitative insights and a blueprint for quantitative analysis, which will together contribute to the development of sustainable (people: ESs, planet: SQ, profit: farm income) farm business models.
4. References
- Kik, M. C., Claassen, G. D. H., Meuwissen, M. P. M., Smit, A. B. & Saatkamp, H. W. The economic value of sustainable soil management in arable farming systems – A conceptual framework. Eur. J. Agron. 129, 126334 (2021).
- Stevens, A. W. Review: The economics of soil health. Food Policy 80, 1–9 (2018).
| Keywords | Ecosystem services; Farming practices; Soil quality; Farm income; Crop production |
|---|
