Jørgen Primdahl

Environmental effects of agri-environmental schemes in Western Europe

Agri-environmental schemes (AES) have been introduced as part of European Unions (EU) Common Agricultural Policy and are now an important part of this. A methodological approach to analyse the policy effects of AES is outlined, in which we distinguish between performance effects (on agricultural practices) and outcome effects (environmental impact). The performance effects are further approached including measurement of improvement and protection effects based on 12 indicators on changes/maintenance of land use and agricultural management. Data from personal interviews of participating and non-participating farmers in AES measures in nine EU Member States and Switzerland were used to analyse policy effects, including single indicator effects on agricultural practices as well as combined effects at the agreement level. Significant effects were found for mineral N-fertiliser use, stocking density reduction, maintenance of a minimum livestock density and pesticides. For AES agreements regulating grassland management, fertiliser use and pesticides, clear indications of combined improvement and protection effects were found. In addition clear improvement effects of agreements regulating fertiliser and pesticides use on mainly arable lands were revealed. It is concluded that the approach presented including the 12 selected indicators has proven to be operational.

Agricultural landscapes as places of production and for living in owner's versus producer's decision making and the implications for planning

The farmer as a producer has traditionally been in focus when changes in agricultural landscapes are studied. Decisions on husbandry, rotational systems, machinery, fertilisation and pest management do indeed affect the landscape in crucial ways and landscape dynamics cannot be understood if the farmer’s decision making and the surrounding technology, socio-economics, and organisational structure are ignored. However, normally the farmer is not the only decision maker. Often he farms leased land and the owner may be an equally important actor concerning landscape changes. Even when the farmer and the owner are the same person, the ‘owner’ may take very different types of decisions than the ‘producer’ does. Many of these decisions concern the landscape as a ‘living place’ (in the sense of a place to live in) rather than as a production area. Decisions linked to the landscape as a living place have been overlooked in landscape research, yet are playing a growing role due to occupational changes in the countryside and changes in agricultural subsidies (from production to land-based subsidies), and to the growing interest in environmental protection and enhancement. I argue that the owner is a key person in changes of the structural part of the landscape and should be included in landscape research and also be considered as a key actor by the planning authorities. Empirical data from an extensive interview survey of 700 farmland and woodland owners in Denmark are used to support the argument, and finally some implications for landscape planning and public regulations are discussed.

Land system changes in the context of urbanisation: Examples from the peri-urban area of Greater Copenhagen

Abstract Peri-urban areas are characterised by great heterogeneity and rapid changes of land use. Furthermore, population composition changes as peri-urban areas offer attractive residential alternatives to city centres or more remote locations. The dynamic processes leave peri-urban areas in an in-between situation, neither city nor countryside and home to a range of functions, spanning from agricultural production to residential and recreational areas. The paper investigates the urbanisation of agricultural areas in the Greater Copenhagen region based on quantitative data collected on agricultural properties in nine study areas between 1984 and 2004. The overall conclusion is that agricultural land use has continued largely unaffected by the processes of urbanisation. However, most of the production is concentrated on a few very large full-time farms. In addition, the economic activities have been greatly diversified over the last three decades. The structural components of the areas (land use and landscape elements) thus appear more resilient than the socio-economic system (declining number of full-time farmers and increasing number of owners engaged in other gainful activities). However, at some point this discrepancy will disappear and rapid land use changes may be expected.

Current use of impact models for agri-environment schemes and potential for improvements of policy design and assessment.

Agri-Environment Schemes (AES) to maintain or promote environmentally-friendly farming practices were implemented on about 25% of all agricultural land in the EU by 2002. This article analyses and discusses the actual and potential use of impact models in supporting the design, implementation and evaluation of AES. Impact models identify and establish the causal relationships between policy objectives and policy outcomes. We review and discuss the role of impact models at different stages in the AES policy process, and present results from a survey of impact models underlying 60 agri-environmental schemes in seven EU member states. We distinguished among three categories of impact models (quantitative, qualitative or common sense), depending on the degree of evidence in the formal scheme description, additional documents, or key person interviews. The categories of impact models used mainly depended on whether scheme objectives were related to natural resources, biodiversity or landscape. A higher proportion of schemes dealing with natural resources (primarily water) were based on quantitative impact models, compared to those concerned with biodiversity or landscape. Schemes explicitly targeted either on particular parts of individual farms or specific areas tended to be based more on quantitative impact models compared to whole-farm schemes and broad, horizontal schemes. We conclude that increased and better use of impact models has significant potential to improve efficiency and effectiveness of AES.

Spatial Concepts in Landscape Analysis and Policy: Some Implications of Globalisation

Globalisation accelerates the dynamics of the network society and economy, in which distant relationships become functionally more significant than local landscape relationships. This presents challenges and opportunities for landscape analysis. Using social scientific concepts of global and local space, and ecological concepts of hierarchy, two qualitative case studies are undertaken of urban fringe landscapes in Copenhagen, Denmark, and Christchurch, New Zealand. They reveal a convergence of landscape pattern over time, but this disguises significant differences in underlying socio-economic process and institutional response. There are several implications for landscape analysis and policy. First, there is a need for studies grounded in particular landscapes that acknowledge both local spatial landscape relationships and non spatial ‘global’ processes. Second, the transformation of landscapes through urbanisation provides a useful focus for the connection of landscape ecological understanding of landscape systems with social scientific understanding of human agency and social structure. Third, there is a significant challenge in how to develop local and regional institutions and policies that have the capacity to utilise and apply these diverse analytical perspectives.

Intersecting Dynamics of Agricultural Structural Change and Urbanisation within European Rural Landscapes: Change Patterns and Policy Implications

Abstract European rural landscapes are, with few exceptions, characterised by farming and forestry as key functions. Whilst farming has been dominant historically and is still a significant dynamic in most regions, urbanisation is also a vital factor. This involves rural–urban emigration, urban expansion and migration from cities into the countryside (counter-urbanisation). A conceptual framework for the analysis and understanding of change patterns in European rural landscapes is presented and then applied at two spatial scales. First, the combined effect on local landscapes of agricultural structural changes and counter-urbanisation is analysed using data from two Danish case studies. Second, their expression at a wider European scale is explored using available regional statistics. Research and policy implications of the change patterns are identified and discussed, highlighting data limitations and challenges of managing the organisational and regulatory interface between local landscapes and international market policy institutions.

Agricultural Landscape Sustainability under Pressure: Policy Developments and Landscape Change

Abstract Agricultural landscape sustainability is affected by combinations of agricultural developments and various forms of urbanisation. This paper analyses how public policy, including spatial planning, has responded over time and affected these two drivers which intersect in various ways depending on the regional context and local conditions. Using data from recent Danish studies, the paper shows how a large proportion of farmers perceive their farm more as a living place than as a production place. Most of these farmers are hobby farmers with an urban income who have moved from an urban setting to the rural landscape. As such, these hobby farmers represent a form of urbanisation, usually termed ‘counter-urbanisation’, and they manage the landscape differently to full-time farmers, while they also affect demand for land and thus price levels. Furthermore, long-term and recent developments in public policy as responses to changing agricultural landscapes are analysed and discussed. With a focus on counter-urbanisation, the paper discusses how agricultural policies, environmental policies and spatial planning policies are poorly integrated and—when viewed together—fail to respond to the intersecting dynamics of agricultural developments and urbanisation. The paper proposes a collaborative landscape planning approach to ensure policy integration and to promote agricultural landscape sustainability.

Globalisation and Agricultural Landscapes: Globalisation and the sustainability of agricultural landscapes

The primary agent: two farmers in the same global space When the young Danish dairy farmer, Svend Petersen, completed the last round of his large cowshed on a dark November night in 2007, New Zealand farmer Gordon Grey of the same age had just started his working day by checking the operation of his centre pivot irrigator. The two farmers are, as individuals and as members of two distinct societies, of course different. At this particular point in time their immediate situations were also quite different – Petersen was working indoors with dark, cold and wet weather outside, whereas Grey was enjoying an early spring morning. Despite these practical differences the two farmers shared a number of common conditions. They both had smiles on their faces, as milk prices on the open global market had risen over the previous year and they had each received substantial increases in payments per kilogram of milk. Both farmers deliver their milk to dairy cooperatives which are among the largest multinational dairy corporations in the world. They are part of a global food network driven by corporate marketing strategies and benefit from economies of scale, but neither farmer has any influence on how their milk will be processed. At this moment in time they are also competitors, but it is quite possible that they may become partners, as the two companies are cooperating and may merge in the future.

Introduction: Landscape Change and Rural Development

Abstract European rural landscapes are changing. Flows of capital, people, goods and information affect functions and forms of the rural landscape and change its character and, more or less, coordinated policies for agriculture, landscape and rural development are applied at different levels. Rural landscapes constitute a number of resources which in various ways can be mobilized by the rural actors and the local landscape is a suitable spatial level for studying and analysing rural transitions and their socio-ecological context. Studying landscapes in transition involves a change of symbolic values (cultural heritage, values and identities), productive structures and functions and ecological/environmental aspects of sustainability. Rural research, especially in the context of sustainable rural development, can benefit from such diverse approaches in understanding and analysing the different aspects of rural landscape and its changes. The papers of this special issue demonstrate the interchange of theories, concepts and methodological approaches in defining, describing, analysing, understanding and unravelling the complex realities of the rural landscape today, with a European emphasis, from different disciplines.

Challenges for a shared European countryside of uncertain future. Towards a modern community-based landscape perspective

Abstract This paper addresses current changes in the highly diverse European landscape, and the way these transitions are being treated in policy and landscape management in the fragmented, heterogeneous and dynamic context of today’s Europe. It appears that intersecting driving forces are increasing the complexity of European landscapes and causing polarising developments in agricultural land use, biodiversity conservation and cultural landscape management. On the one hand, multifunctional rural landscapes, especially in peri-urban regions, provide services and functions that serve the citizens in their demand for identity, support their sense of belonging and offer opportunities for recreation and involvement in practical landscape management. On the other hand, industrial agricultural production on increasingly large farms produces food, feed, fibre and energy to serve expanding international markets with rural liveability and accessibility as a minor issue. The intermediate areas of traditionally dominant small and family farms in Europe seem to be gradually declining in profitability. The paper discusses the potential of a governance approach that can cope with the requirement of optimising land-sharing conditions and community-based landscape development, while adapting to global market conditions.