What land-use pattern emerges with landscape-scale management? An ecosystem-service perspective

It is argued that landscape-scale management (LSM) of habitat is better than farm-scale management (FSM) when considering the externality of ecosystem services. Given this advantage, how to regulate individual farmers' land-use decisions to achieve the LSM solution is an issue of common concern both for farmers and policymakers. Specifically, it needs to be determined if there exists a dominant land-use pattern that characterizes the LSM solution compared to FSM solution. In addition to the area of habitat, we design a land-use pattern index (LPI) to characterize the configuration of habitat and project itonto the sharing-sparing continuum. We find that the LSM solution is characterized by less intensive farming, and configurations of habitat are closer to land sharing. However, as crop dependency on ecosystem-services declines, the land-use patterns with LSM and FSM converge and the configurations of habitat start to resemble to land sparing. In addition, when habitat quality improves the configurations of habitat on the border farms become important. Finally, the less mobile service-providers are, the more farmers should focus on land-use patterns on their own farms. Our indices of land-use patterns could be integrated into the cross-compliance of CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) to better manage ecosystem-service in the future

Effects of management and landscape structure on biodiversity in boreal agricultural farmland

Intensified agricultural practises introduced after the Second World War are identified as a major cause of global biodiversity declines. In several European countries agri-environment support schemes have been introduced to counteract the ongoing biodiversity declines. Farmers participating in agri-environment schemes are financially compensated for decreasing the intensity of farming practises leading to smaller yields and lower income. The Finnish agri-environment support scheme is composed of a set of measures, such as widened field margins along main ditches (obligatory measure), management of features increasing landscape diversity, management of semi-natural grasslands, and organic farming (special agreement measures). The magnitude of the benefits for biodiversity depends on landscape context and the properties of individual schemes. In this thesis I studied whether one agri-environment scheme, organic farming, is beneficial for species diversity and abundance of diurnal lepidopterans, bumblebees, carabid beetles and arable weeds. I found that organic farming did not enhance species richness of selected insect taxa, although bumblebee species richness tended to be higher in organic farms. Abundance of lepidopterans and bumblebees was not enhanced by organic farming, but carabid beetle abundance was higher in mixed farms with both cereal crop production and animal husbandry. Both species richness and abundance of arable weeds were higher in organic farms. My second objective was to study how landscape structure shapes farmland butterfly communities. I found that the percentage of habitat specialists and species with poor dispersal abilities in butterfly assemblages decreased with increasing arable field cover, leading to a dramatic decrease in butterfly beta diversity. In field boundaries local species richness of butterflies was linearly related to landscape species richness in geographic regions with high arable field cover, indicating that butterfly species richness in field boundaries is more limited by landscape factors than local habitat factors. In study landscapes containing semi-natural grasslands the relationship decelerated at high landscape species richness, suggesting that local species richness of butterflies in field boundaries is limited by habitat factors (demanding habitat specialists that occurred in semi-natural grasslands were absent in field margins). My results suggest that management options in field margins will affect mainly generalists, and species with good dispersal abilities, in landscapes with high arable field cover. Habitat specialists and species with poor dispersal abilities may benefit of management options if these are applied in the vicinity of source populations.Ei saatavill

Land sparing versus land sharing:Moving forward

To address the challenges of biodiversity conservation and commodity production, a framework has been proposed that distinguishes between the integration (land sharing) and separation (land sparing) of conservation and production. Controversy has arisen around this framework partly because many scholars have focused specifically on food production rather than more encompassing notions such as land scarcity or food security. Controversy further surrounds the practical value of partial trade-off analyses, the ways in which biodiversity should be quantified, and a series of scale effects that are not readily accounted for. We see key priorities for the future in (1) addressing these issues when using the existing framework, and (2) developing alternative, holistic ways to conceptualise challenges related to food, biodiversity, and land scarcity

Turnover and nestedness drive plant diversity benefits of organic farming from local to landscape scales

Biodiversity-benefits of organic farming have mostly been documented at the field scale. However, these benefits from organic farming to species diversity may not propagate to larger scales because variation in the management of different crop types and seminatural habitats in conventional farms might allow species to cope with intensive crop management. We studied flowering plant communities using a spatially replicated design in different habitats (cereal, ley and seminatural grasslands) in organic and conventional farms, distributed along a gradient in proportion of seminatural grasslands. We developed a novel method to compare the rates of species turnover within and between habitats, and between the total species pools in the two farming systems. We found that the intrahabitat species turnover did not differ between organic and conventional farms, but that organic farms had a significantly higher interhabitat turnover of flowering plant species compared with conventional ones. This was mainly driven by herbicide-sensitive species in cereal fields in organic farms, as these contained 2.5 times more species exclusive to cereal fields compared with conventional farms. The farm-scale species richness of flowering plants was higher in organic compared with conventional farms, but only in simple landscapes. At the interfarm level, we found that 36% of species were shared between the two farming systems, 37% were specific to organic farms whereas 27% were specific to conventional ones. Therefore, our results suggest that that both community nestedness and species turnover drive changes in species composition between the two farming systems. These large-scale shifts in species composition were driven by both species-specific herbicide and nitrogen sensitivity of plants. Our study demonstrates that organic farming should foster a diversity of flowering plant species from local to landscape scales, by promoting unique sets of arable-adapted species that are scarce in conventional systems. In terms of biodiversity conservation, our results call for promoting organic farming over large spatial extents, especially in simple landscapes, where such transitions would benefit plant diversity most.Peer reviewe

Resourcification : A Non-Essentialist Theory of Resources for Sustainable Development

Overuse of resources is accelerating today’s negative trends in climate change, ecosystem destruction, and biodiversity loss. The ultimate result is contemporary human societies are reaching or exceeding the limits of planetary boundaries. It is therefore imperative to articulate a new theoretical understanding of resources and the ethical, political and environmental conditions of their use. In this article, we introduce a radical departure from existing paradigms, which treat resources as having fixed essential qualities usually ready-to-exploit by anyone who finds them, to a non-essentialist theory of how resources never exist in this fashion as such. Instead, they come into being as the result of social processes. We label this approach resourcification. This shift offers a new theoretical platform for developing a post-sustainability understanding of the relationships of humans to humans, to other living creatures, and to the physical environment, which is more suited to meet the challenges of working with the sustainable development goals in the Anthropocene

Kvalitet + rätt skötsel = en mångfald av urbana pollinatörer

TEMA: URBAN BIODIVERSITET Stadsmiljöns värde för pollinatörer beror av både utformningen av staden och kvaliteten på de gröna miljöerna. I bästa fall kan städer vara ett viktigt komplement till naturen runt om för den regionala mångfalden av bin, särskilt genom villaträdgårdarna. Vi har undersökt bin, blomflugor och fjärilar och hur de trivs i staden jämfört med i den omkringliggande landsbygden. Ett av huvudbudskapen är att skötsel av och kvalitet på grönområden är avgörande

Urbanization causes biotic homogenization of woodland bird communities at multiple spatial scales

Abstract Urbanization is a major contributor to biodiversity declines. However, studies assessing effects of urban landscapes per se (i.e., disentangled from focal habitat effects) on biodiversity across spatial scales are lacking. Understanding such scale-dependent effects is fundamental to preserve habitats along an urbanization gradient in a way that maximizes overall biodiversity. We investigated the impact of landscape urbanization on communities of woodland-breeding bird species in individual (local scale) and across multiple (regional scale) cities, while controlling for the quality of sampled habitats (woodlands). We conducted bird point counts and habitat quality mapping of trees, dead wood and shrubs in 459 woodlands along an urban to rural urbanization gradient in 32 cities in Sweden. Responses to urbanization were measured as local and regional total diversity (?), average site diversity (α) and diversity between sites (?). We also assessed effects on individual species and to what extent dissimilarities in species composition along the urbanization gradient were driven by species nestedness or turnover. We found that landscape urbanization had a negative impact on ?-, α- and ?-diversity irrespective of spatial scale, both regarding all woodland-breeding species and red-listed species. At the regional scale, dissimilarities in species composition between urbanization levels were due to nestedness, i.e., species were lost with increased landscape urbanization without being replaced. In contrast, dissimilarities at the local scale were mostly due to species turnover. Because there was no difference in habitat quality among woodlands across the urbanization gradient, we conclude that landscape urbanization as such systematically causes poorer and more homogeneous bird communities in adjacent natural habitats. However, the high local turnover and the fact that several species benefited from urbanization demonstrates that natural habitats along the entire urbanization gradient are needed to maintain maximally diverse local bird communities.Urbanization is a major contributor to biodiversity declines. However, studies assessing effects of urban landscapes per se (i.e., disentangled from focal habitat effects) on biodiversity across spatial scales are lacking. Understanding such scale-dependent effects is fundamental to preserve habitats along an urbanization gradient in a way that maximizes overall biodiversity. We investigated the impact of landscape urbanization on communities of woodland-breeding bird species in individual (local scale) and across multiple (regional scale) cities, while controlling for the quality of sampled habitats (woodlands). We conducted bird point counts and habitat quality mapping of trees, dead wood, and shrubs in 459 woodlands along an urban to rural urbanization gradient in 32 cities in Sweden. Responses to urbanization were measured as local and regional total diversity (gamma), average site diversity (alpha), and diversity between sites (beta). We also assessed effects on individual species and to what extent dissimilarities in species composition along the urbanization gradient were driven by species nestedness or turnover. We found that landscape urbanization had a negative impact on gamma-, alpha-, and beta-diversity irrespective of spatial scale, both regarding all woodland-breeding species and red-listed species. At the regional scale, dissimilarities in species composition between urbanization levels were due to nestedness, that is, species were lost with increased landscape urbanization without being replaced. In contrast, dissimilarities at the local scale were mostly due to species turnover. Because there was no difference in habitat quality among woodlands across the urbanization gradient, we conclude that landscape urbanization as such systematically causes poorer and more homogeneous bird communities in adjacent natural habitats. However, the high local turnover and the fact that several species benefited from urbanization demonstrates that natural habitats along the entire urbanization gradient are needed to maintain maximally diverse local bird communities.Peer reviewe

Urbanization causes biotic homogenization of woodland bird communities at multiple spatial scales

Urbanization is a major contributor to biodiversity declines. However, studies assessing effects of urban landscapes per se (i.e., disentangled from focal habitat effects) on biodiversity across spatial scales are lacking. Understanding such scale-dependent effects is fundamental to preserve habitats along an urbanization gradient in a way that maximizes overall biodiversity. We investigated the impact of landscape urbanization on communities of woodland-breeding bird species in individual (local scale) and across multiple (regional scale) cities, while controlling for the quality of sampled habitats (woodlands). We conducted bird point counts and habitat quality mapping of trees, dead wood, and shrubs in 459 woodlands along an urban to rural urbanization gradient in 32 cities in Sweden. Responses to urbanization were measured as local and regional total diversity (gamma), average site diversity (alpha), and diversity between sites (beta). We also assessed effects on individual species and to what extent dissimilarities in species composition along the urbanization gradient were driven by species nestedness or turnover. We found that landscape urbanization had a negative impact on gamma-, alpha-, and beta-diversity irrespective of spatial scale, both regarding all woodland-breeding species and red-listed species. At the regional scale, dissimilarities in species composition between urbanization levels were due to nestedness, that is, species were lost with increased landscape urbanization without being replaced. In contrast, dissimilarities at the local scale were mostly due to species turnover. Because there was no difference in habitat quality among woodlands across the urbanization gradient, we conclude that landscape urbanization as such systematically causes poorer and more homogeneous bird communities in adjacent natural habitats. However, the high local turnover and the fact that several species benefited from urbanization demonstrates that natural habitats along the entire urbanization gradient are needed to maintain maximally diverse local bird communities