Reger Birgit, Sheridan Patrick, Simmering Dietmar, Otte Annette, Waldhardt Rainer
Division of Landscape Ecology and Landscape Planning, Justus-Liebig-University of Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 26-32, 35392, Giessen, Germany.
Environ Manage. 2009 Jun;43(6):1026-38. doi: 10.1007/s00267-008-9270-8. Epub 2009 Feb 3.
Farmland habitat diversity in marginal European landscapes changed significantly in the past decades. Further changes toward homogenization are expected, particularly in the course of European agricultural policy. Based on three alternative transfer payment schemes, we modeled spatially explicit potential effects on the farmland habitat diversity in a marginal European landscape. We defined (1) a scenario with direct transfer payments coupled to production, (2) a scenario with direct transfer payments decoupled from production, and (3) a scenario phasing out all direct transfer payments. We characterized habitat diversity with three indices: habitat richness, evenness, and rarity. The habitat pattern in 1995 served as reference for comparison. All scenarios predicted a general trend of homogenization of the farmland habitat pattern, yet to a differing extent. Transfer payments coupled to production (Scenario 1) favored the abandonment of agricultural production, particularly in low-productive areas and arable land use in more productive areas. Habitat richness and habitat evenness had intermediate values in this scenario. Decoupling transfer payments from production (Scenario 2) supported grassland as most profitable farming system. This led to a grassland-dominated landscape with low values of all habitat diversity indices. Phasing out transfer payments (Scenario 3) resulted in complete abandonment or afforestation of agricultural land and extremely low values in all habitat diversity indices. Scenario results indicate that transfer payments may prevent cessation of agricultural production, but may not counteract homogenization in marginal landscapes. Conserving high farmland habitat diversity in such landscapes may require support schemes, e.g., Pillar Two of EU Common Agricultural Policy.
在过去几十年里,欧洲边缘地区的农田栖息地多样性发生了显著变化。预计未来还会朝着同质化方向进一步变化,尤其是在欧洲农业政策实施过程中。基于三种替代性转移支付方案,我们模拟了对欧洲边缘地区农田栖息地多样性的空间明确潜在影响。我们定义了:(1)与生产挂钩的直接转移支付情景;(2)与生产脱钩的直接转移支付情景;(3)逐步取消所有直接转移支付的情景。我们用三个指标来表征栖息地多样性:栖息地丰富度、均匀度和稀有度。1995年的栖息地格局作为比较的参照。所有情景都预测了农田栖息地格局同质化的总体趋势,但程度不同。与生产挂钩的转移支付(情景1)有利于放弃农业生产,特别是在低产区,而在高产区有利于耕地利用。在这种情景下,栖息地丰富度和栖息地均匀度处于中间值。将转移支付与生产脱钩(情景2)支持草地作为最有利可图的农业系统。这导致了以草地为主的景观,所有栖息地多样性指标的值都很低。逐步取消转移支付(情景3)导致农业用地完全被弃耕或造林,所有栖息地多样性指标的值都极低。情景结果表明,转移支付可能会阻止农业生产的停止,但可能无法抵消边缘地区景观的同质化。在这些景观中保护高农田栖息地多样性可能需要支持计划,例如欧盟共同农业政策的第二支柱。