L’Institutional Repository raccoglie le pubblicazioni dei ricercatori di Agroscope. Il PDF può essere scaricato se liberamente accessibile. In caso contrario, la nota di pubblicazione indica dove è avvenuta la pubblicazione.
Inserendo il codice del web si può accedere direttamente una pubblicazione.
Per le pubblicazioni Agroscope, il codice web viene visualizzato in fondo alla pagina di dettaglio di una pubblicazione: ID pubblicazione (codice web): 12345
Inserendo una termine di ricerca è possibile cercare i metadati di una pubblicazione: Titolo, Sottotitolo, Riassunto, Nome della fonte, ISBN, ISSN, DOI, Parole chiave
Rolo V., Roces-Diaz J., Torralba M., Kay S., Fagerholm N., Aviron S., Burgess P., Crous-Duran J., Ferreiro-Dominguez N., Graves A., Hartel T., Mantzanas K., Mosquera-Losada M. R., Palma J. H., Sidiropoulou A., Szerencsits E., Viaud V., Herzog F., Plieninger T., Moreno G.
Mixtures of forest and agroforestry alleviate trade-offs between ecosystem services in European rural landscapes.
Rural Europe encompasses a variety of landscapes with differing levels of forest, agriculture, and agroforestry that can deliver multiple ecosystem services (ES). Whilst provisioning and regulating ES associated with individual land covers are comparatively well studied, less is known about the associated cultural ES. Only seldom are provisioning, regulating, and cultural ES investigated together to evaluate how they contribute to multifunctionality. In this study we combined biophysical and sociocultural approaches to assess how different landscapes (dominated by forest, agriculture or agroforestry) and landscape characteristics (i.e. remoteness and landscape diversity) drive spatial associations of ES (i.e. synergies, trade-offs and bundles). We analysed data of: i) seven provisioning and regulating ES (spatially modelled), and; ii) six cultural ES (derived from participatory mapping data) in 12 study sites across four different biogeographical regions of Europe. Our results showed highly differentiated ES profiles for landscapes associated to a specific land cover, with agroforestry generally providing higher cultural ES than forest and agriculture. We found a positive relationship between the proportion of forest in a landscape and provisioning and regulating ES, whilst agriculture showed negative relationships. We found four distinct bundles of ES. Three of them were directly related to a dominant land cover and the fourth to a mixture of forest and agroforestry that was associated with high social value. The latter bundle was related to zones close to urban areas and roads and medium to high landscape diversity. These findings suggest that agroforestry should be prioritised over other land covers in such areas as it delivers a suite of multiple ES, provided it is close to urban areas or roads. Our results also illustrate the importance and application of including people’s perception in the assessment of ES associations and highlight the relevance of developing integrated analyses of ES to inform landscape management decisions.
