Productivity, biodiversity trade-offs, and farm income in an agroforestry versus an arable system
Productivity, biodiversity trade-offs, and farm income in an agroforestry versus an arable system
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107214
复制
发表时间：
2022-01
影响因子：
7
通讯作者：
Tom Staton;T. Breeze;R. Walters;Jo U. Smith;R. D. Girling
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Tom Staton;T. Breeze;R. Walters;Jo U. Smith;R. D. Girling
多样化耕作制度的采用受到有关财务成本、收益和风险的证据不足的制约。在这里，我们评估的生产力和预计的农业收入的农林系统，苹果与可耕地作物相结合，通过结合原始数据与生态系统服务和成本效益模型。我们的生态系统服务评估包括：1）杂草和害虫与耕地产量的关系; 2）苹果结实作为授粉的代理; 3）碳固存。农林复合系统的耕地产量比耕作系统低11%，并且与两种系统的杂草覆盖呈显着负相关。复合农林业的苹果产量与可比果园的典型产量相似。两个品种中有一个在农林复合系统中的结实率显著高于常规果园。在20年的18个生产力假设情景中，有15个情景的预测混合总收入在农林系统中高于耕地系统，这得到了一项案例研究的支持。苹果产量和价格是混合总收入的主要决定因素。预计碳固存费用占农林建设成本的47%至88%。这项研究表明，多样化的农业系统可以提高农场收入，但赠款支持将减少最初的负现金流。
The uptake of diversified farming systems is constrained by a scarcity of evidence regarding financial costs, benefits, and risks. Here, we evaluate the productivity and projected farm income of an agroforestry system, where apples are integrated with arable crops, by combining primary data with ecosystem service and cost-benefit models. Our ecosystem service assessments included: 1) weed and pest associations with arable yields; 2) apple seed set as a proxy for pollination, and; 3) carbon sequestration. Arable yields were up to 11% lower in agroforestry than arable systems, and were significantly negatively associated with weed cover in both systems. Apple yields in agroforestry were similar to typical yields from comparable orchards. Apple seed set was significantly higher in agroforestry than conventional orchards for one of two varieties. Predicted gross mixed income was higher in agroforestry than arable systems in 15 of 18 productivity scenarios over 20 years, which was supported by a case-study. Apple yield and price were the major determinants of gross mixed income. Payments for carbon sequestration were predicted to contribute 47% to 88% of agroforestry establishment costs. This study demonstrates how a diversified farming system can improve farm income, but grant support would reduce the initial negative cash-flow.