Do agri-environmental schemes contribute to high nature value farmland? A case study in Emilia-Romagna (Italy)

The objective of the paper is to determine whether the agri-environmental schemes included in the rural development programme of Emilia-Romagna (Italy) have played a role in enhancing the nature value of farmland in that region. An indicator is developed for biodiversity friendly farming practices (BFFP) and its level and distribution at the municipality level is measured, using data derived from the two last national agricultural censuses, year 2000 and 2010. Thereafter, the relationship between BFFP and participation in rural development measures is analysed by way of spatial econometric techniques. The main result of the paper are consistent with the expectation that RDPs have an impact on how BFFP changes. However, measures supporting organic farming contribute to the evolution of its distribution in a positive manner, whilst the other measures investigated, such as integrated production, do not. The paper also highlights the fact that these effects have significant spatial correlations.     

The impacts of agricultural payments on groundwater quality: Spatial analysis on the case of Slovenia

The European Common Agricultural Policy still follows its primary goals, i.e. quality food at affordable prices and a decent standard of living for farmers, fifty years after its adoption. Moreover, this policy adapts to the changing needs of society and the new challenges, mostly preservation of the environment, nature and biodiversity in rural areas. Although the Common Agricultural Policy receives the largest share of European budget, the funds are decreasing over time, especially direct payments, which aim to provide basic income support to farmers in the European Union. On the other hand, agri-environmental payments are gaining importance. Policy decision-makers should be interested in the question of impacts of growing eco-conditionality of agricultural spending. New insights would help them to be successful in achieving the goals of sustainable agriculture. The purpose of this paper is to estimate the impacts of production support payments and rural development payments on the quality of groundwater. We use the small EU country Slovenia as an example. The baseline indicators are the level of nitrates and pesticides in groundwater, while the impacts were estimated using spatial error model. The results show that direct payments, coupled subsidies and investment grants raise the level of pesticides in groundwater, but do not have any statistically significant impact on the level of nitrates in groundwater. Furthermore, we did not find any statistically significant effects of agri-environmental payments on decrease of groundwater pollution with nitrates. However, our findings revealed that agri-environmental payments are effective in reducing pesticides in groundwater, although only to a limited extent. These results imply a problem of insufficient targeting of agri-environmental measures on the one hand, and suggest that greening of direct payments is necessary and entirely justified.     

The spatial dimension of Public Payments for Rural Development: Evidence on allocation practices,impact mechanisms,CMEF indicators,and scope for improvement

EU expenditures for Rural Development, having increased from 2.9% of the total Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) budget in the 1990s to 12.3% in the beginning of the 2010s, reflect the growing strategic and societal values attached to this policy in addressing the new global challenges for rural areas in the enlarged EU. The analysis of the recent and ongoing reforms shows that Rural Development Programmes (RDP) made substantial progress towards sectoral integration and thematic broadening, and, at the same time, provided continuity of well-established and important measures. Yet, under growing budget constraints, better targeting of funds becomes even more crucial (European Court of Auditors, 2011). Comparing the design and allocation practices of Regional RDPs, however, reveals significant differences in targeting strategies, all too often based on the implementation history and experience of previous periods. Better availability, coordination and digital connectivity of expenditure data and other data sources across the EU encouraged the adoption of the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF), aimed at more clearly depicting intervention needs and effects at the regional scale (NUTS2–NUTS3) (NUTS (Nomenclature des unités territoriales statistiques) is a EU geocode standard for referencing spatial subunits for statistical purposes). The EU project SPARD (Spatial Analysis of Rural Development Measures) took those data as a starting point to find out more about the causal relationships between RD measure implementation, and their determining factors and impacts with a specific look at their spatial dimension: in which rural development measures is success determined by neighbourhood conditions, and at what scale? SPARD developed and applied new methodological approaches, particularly spatial econometrics, to evaluate selected measures that contribute to improved competitiveness, environmental performance and rural viability. The results are presented in this special issue in four thematic foci:

• •Analysing RDP performance by applying spatial econometric modelling (theory, procedures, key results) on RDP payments at the national and European scale.
• •Effectiveness and efficiency of RDP participation towards impacts at the regional scale: an in-depth view of European case studies, specific measures, indicators and shortcomings of the CMEF.
• •Learning about spatial and non-spatial determinants of participation in RDP.
• •Experiences and requirements related to the CAP 2020 and the improvement of the CMEF.

Overall, the results emphasise the difficulty of evaluating of RDPs, even when using much more sophisticated instruments than those used in the current evaluation practices. While a lack of appropriate information remains an issue, the experience of SPARD also underscores the challenge of matching the quest for generalised approaches and the need to consider ad hoc local determinants, as well as the trade-off between the benefits of higher precision and the costs of implied information burden.     

Assessing German farmers’ attitudes regarding nature conservation set-aside in regions dominated by arable farming

This paper presents an analysis of the attitudes of farmers towards a policy approach that combines the instrument of set-aside of farmland with agri-environmental measures under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for achieving nature goals. One of the stated objectives of current agricultural and environmental policies is to give greater consideration to issues of nature conservation in agricultural landscapes. To fulfil this objective, there is an urgent need to develop approaches that, on the one hand, are capable of delivering tangible improvements in the ecological situation and nature conservation in agriculture and, on the other hand, are structured in such a way that farmers are willing to put them into practice. In addition, such approaches need to be economical and affordable for society. The Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF) has developed the concept of ‘nature-conservation set-aside’, especially for landscapes that are under predominantly arable use. Conservation set-aside refers to parts of arable farmland especially well suited to nature conservation, which are mandatorily withdrawn from agricultural production (for those who claim payment) and on which ecologically valuable habitats are created through specific management activities. To determine what kind of problems might arise for farmers in the course of implementing this concept as an agri-environmental measure, a survey was carried out in four largely arable regions of Germany. The results of this survey show the attitudes of German farmers regarding set-aside farmland for nature conservation in regions dominated by arable farming, and they demonstrate which factors influence the implementation of conservation set-aside.     

Making the best of both worlds: Can high-resolution agricultural administrative data support the assessment of High Nature Value farmlands across Europe?

Worldwide, the role of farmlands for biodiversity conservation and the delivery of multiple ecosystem services has been widely acknowledged. In the European Union (EU), societal demands to include environmental conservation concerns within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) have resulted in the recognition of the importance of maintaining High Nature Value farmlands (HNVf).HNVf constitute complex social-ecological systems, which owe their nature conservation value to the maintenance of specific, mostly low-intensity farming systems, supporting high levels of species and habitats dependent on agricultural practices. Even though HNVf assessment in space and time is essential to evaluate the effectiveness of Rural Development Programmes, the diversity of rural landscapes across EU, the scarcity of data on farming systems, and the lack of common methodological guidelines has hampered the implementation of HNVf mapping and monitoring across Europe. Thus, there is a pressing need to develop and test methodological approaches that may support HNVf assessment across the EU.The Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) which is mandatory for all EU Member States constitutes a system for the management and control of CAP payments to farmers. Essentially, IACS comprises high-resolution, spatially explicit information on the type and intensity of agricultural land-use. Even though such data exhibits high thematic, spatial and temporal resolution, IACS has seldom been used, due to significant access restrictions. Here, the potential to use IACS data to support the assessment of HNVf was evaluated within the German Federal State of Lower Saxony by implementing a recently developed methodological framework. Sets of indicators known to be essential for identifying potential HNVf and underlying farming systems (expressing landscape structure and composition, farming systems, and crop diversity), were derived from IACS. Spatial patterns of indicators were analyzed at two different scales to delineate the potential distribution of HNVf across Lower Saxony.Results highlighted that most regions in Lower Saxony were characterized by intensive farming practices including high livestock density, high share of intensive crops and low density of linear elements. Only 3% of the Utilized Agricultural Area (UAA) of Lower Saxony potentially constituted HNVf, with the majority of HNVf coinciding with mosaics of arable and/or permanent crops and semi-natural features under less intensive farming practices. Semi-natural grasslands, partially under agri-environment scheme management contracts, covered roughly 1% of the UAA and were mostly intermingled with other farmland habitats in extensively managed agricultural landscapes.In the context of the EU-wide HNVf assessment, IACS constitutes an important source of data, characterized by a high spatial, thematic and temporal resolution of data collected annually. Whilst having the potential for use in HNVf assessment, some challenges remain, especially due to significant access restrictions. Nevertheless, IACS constitutes a powerful tool to evaluate the extent and condition of HNVf across the EU countryside. Making use of IACS data in such a way could provide a stepping-stone towards achieving a more effective balance between the management and control of CAP support payments and the growing societal demands related to the maintenance and enhancement of farmland biodiversity and ecosystem services.     

Farming and wildlife in Mediterranean agroecosystems

Mediterranean ecosystems are rich in wildlife species and habitats. In the last decades human pressure is increasing in lowland and coastal areas, while mountainous and island areas are being abandoned. These changes have substantial impacts on biodiversity protected by EU Directives. Recently agri-environmental schemes and wildlife habitat improvement measures have been taken to prevent biodiversity loss, although only a small proportion of their total budget is targeted directly at biodiversity conservation. Measures for wildlife are generally limited to restricted areas for a short-term period and in most cases have not been evaluated or properly applied. This review examines the influence of farming systems, agri-environmental and wildlife management measures on birds and mammals in Mediterranean agroecosystems. The conclusions are that in Mediterranean agroecosystems the most cost efficient and beneficial conservation measures for bird and mammal species are rotation, intercropping, and the selection of appropriate crops and farming practices. The increased biodiversity in the Mediterranean basin requires special management practices at local levels.     

Agricultural land-use and the spatial distribution of granivorous lowland farmland birds

Current agricultural practices are believed to have contributed to the declines of many farmland bird species, especially seed‐eaters, throughout Europe. We investigated associations between the spatial distribution of fourteen granivorous farmland bird species and agricultural land‐use in Britain, using breeding bird atlas data and national agricultural statistics. Analyses were spatially referenced by 10x10 km square and variation due to broad‐scale geography and spatial auto‐correlation was controlled for. Generalized linear modelling analyses were used to select models describing variation in distribution explained by the available land‐use variables. The results show that relationships between distribution and agriculture tend to be species‐specific, but that some general effects can be identified. Features of intensive arable farming including large areas of sugar beet, wheat and oilseed rape tended to be associated with low frequencies of occurrence for 9–11 species, while large areas of younger (re‐seeded) grassland and high sheep stocking densities were associated with low frequencies in pastoral farmland for up to 12 species. One key feature of lower intensity farming, the presence of larger areas of fallow land, was positively related to frequency index for up to 11 species. The proportion of barley sown in spring and agricultural diversity were each associated with a range of complex relationships with frequency index across species, probably reflecting combinations of positive influences and artefacts of scale and geography. A variable describing the heterogeneity of farmland (the extent to which it is a mix of arable and pastoral land‐use) was negatively related to frequency index for eight species, but other results suggested that farming which is mixed at a smaller spatial scale is widely beneficial. The results reveal relationships between agriculture and the occurrence of granivorous farmland bird species which suggest both hypotheses for the causes of population change and directions for management action. However, data on several key features of agricultural practice (such as pesticide use) were unavailable, so their effects could not be tested, and the effects of the variables included could not be separated from those of other factors which are subject to complex geographical variation. Experimental comparisons of the effects of land‐use at the farm scale are needed to investigate such confounded influences on farmland bird occurrence.     

Multi-species spatially-explicit indicators reveal spatially structured trends in bird communities

Multi-species indicators are often used to assess biodiversity trends. By combining population trends across several species they summarise trends across a community. Composite indicators such as these are useful for examining general temporal patterns and may suggest important drivers of biodiversity change. However, they may also mask substantial spatial variation in population trends, particularly when they are calculated over large spatial regions. We produced spatially-explicit indicators for farmland and woodland bird communities in the UK and further separate these into trends for generalist and specialist species within each group. We found considerable spatial variation in the indicators, which is masked by indicators calculated at the national level. The farmland community indicator showed mostly positive trends in western areas and extensive declines in south-east England. The woodland community indicator showed a north–south divide, with increases in Scotland and northern England and stability in the southern regions. For both communities, indicator trends for specialist species were more negative than those for generalists. We found no significant difference in farmland community indicators between arable land and improved grassland. Woodland specialists had significantly more negative trends in broadleaf compared to coniferous woodlands, suggesting habitat-type is one of the drivers of changes in the woodland community. These spatial patterns in bird population trends may be used to highlight regional conservation priorities and identify where those may differ from the national scale. In combination with information about other environmental changes, they may also be used to develop hypotheses about potential drivers of change. We advocate that this approach is adopted for other taxa and geographical areas.     

Large-scale patterns of summer and winter bird distribution in relation to farmland type in England and Wales

Over the last 30 yr, the loss of traditional crop rotations and the polarisation of pastoral and arable farming have led to a marked reduction in mixed agriculture in Britain at both the individual farm and the landscape scale. We assess the potential impact of this change on lowland farmland birds by examining the extent to which distributions (as shown by national atlases of summer and winter birds) of different species are associated with arable, pastoral or mixed‐farming landscape types. Relatively few species appeared as either widespread generalists, equally associated across the three broad farmland types, or specialists associated only with one landscape type. Most were associated with two farmland types but distributions showed seasonal differences. During the breeding season there was an approximate ratio of 2:2:1 of species associated with arable, mixed and pastoral landscapes. However, in winter, most species were at highest abundance in mixed farming landscapes. This coincided with a reduction in the number of species associated with pastoral landscapes relative to the breeding season, whereas the number of species associated with arable landscapes remained relatively stable. These patterns are likely to be related to foraging requirements; granivorous birds tended to be associated with arable habitats, which tend to be more seed‐rich, and invertebrate‐feeding species tended to be associated with mixed or pastoral ones, which may be more invertebrate‐rich. The relative importance of mixed landscapes in winter was attributed to seasonal changes in the distribution of some invertebrate feeders, particularly small insectivores (pipits, chats and wagtails), and some of those species considered to be widespread in summer. The results have two important implications for future research. First, most research on farmland birds has, to date, focused on species associated with arable farming during the breeding season. More research is required on species associated with agricultural grasslands, reflecting its importance for farmland birds in Britain, and on the winter ecology of farmland birds in general. These results also emphasise the importance of mixed habitats for farmland birds, particularly in winter, and suggest that further changes in agricultural practices causing reduction in habitat diversity will be detrimental for the farmland bird community. However, widespread benefits may be derived from small scale measures that increase habitat diversity within farmland, for example field margin management options within agri‐environment schemes and support for traditional farming practices in some Environmentally Sensitive Areas.     

Should conservation strategies consider spatial generality? Farmland birds show regional not national patterns of habitat association

A key assumption underlying any management practice implemented to aid wildlife conservation is that it will have similar effects on target species across the range it is applied. However, this basic assumption is rarely tested. We show that predictors [nearly all associated with agri-environment scheme (AES) options known to affect European birds] had similar effects for 11 bird species on sites with differing farming practice (pastoral vs. mixed farming) or which differed in the density at which the species was found. However, predictors from sites in one geographical region tended to have different effects in other areas suggesting that AES options targeted at a regional scale are more likely to yield beneficial results for farmland birds than options applied uniformly in national schemes. Our study has broad implications for designing conservation strategies at an appropriate scale, which we discuss.     

Organic farming at local and landscape scales benefits plant diversity

Agri‐environment schemes (AES) have been suggested to counter negative effects of agricultural intensification and enhance farmland biodiversity, but evaluations have produced inconsistent results. We suggest that this is partly a consequence of scale‐dependence, i.e. that the consequence of organic farming will differ depending on the scale of uptake in a particular landscape. To test our hypothesis on diversity of forbs, we designed a landscape scale study using spatially explicit information about the Swedish AES for organic farming. The study system consisted of uncultivated field borders along paired fields (organic and conventional) in matched landscapes with either a high or a low proportion of organic faming, allowing separate tests of the effects of farming practice at the local and the landscape scale. The local effect of organic farming was consistently strong, with higher diversity in borders adjoining organic fields, most likely due to the lack of herbicide use on organically managed farmland. Thus, we show that not only the proportion of semi‐natural habitat is important for farmland biodiversity, but that also the management of cropland can influence the diversity in semi‐natural habitats. Furthermore, forb richness was also higher in borders situated in landscapes with a high proportion of organic land, irrespectively of local management, possibly as a result of dispersal of mainly annual plant species from the organically managed fields into the borders (mass effect). Our results demonstrate that farming practice at a local and a landscape scale independently can influence plant species richness, indicating that organic farming can influence diversity also at larger spatial scales and outside the organically managed land. Our study highlight the importance of studying multiple scales, including both local and landscape factors to provide a better understanding of biodiversity patterns.     

基于MODIS数据的中国三种主要土地类型变化的空间特征分析

人类活动使得土地利用和植被覆盖发生了巨大变化,直接影响着全球气候。本研究通过从2000—2013年对中国三种主要土地利用类型的NDVI变化特征进行了分析,结果表明:(1)14年来,中国三种主要土地利用类型NDVI平均值均有增强的趋势。(2)三种主要土地利用类型中除耕地中的水田,林地中的有林地和草地中的高覆盖草地增长速率不显著外,其他土地类型增长速率均显著。(3)三种土地利用类型均以改善面积大于退化面积,耕地中改善面积占总耕地的64.21%,退化的区域占18.50%;林地改善的区域占总林地的54.21%,退化的区域占20.13%;草地改善的区域占55.53%,退化的区域占18.23%。三种土地类型均有所改善且改善明显的区域主要集中在甘肃以南,陕西以北和东北部分地区。     

Development of agri-environmental indicators to assess dairy farm sustainability in Quebec,Eastern Canada

Agri-environmental indicators are commonly used to assess agricultural sustainability. In North America, few are designed to be easily used by dairy farmers. As farmers assume more responsibility for managing natural resources, they play an increasingly important role in assessing sustainable agriculture. This paper describes the development of an indicator-based self-assessment tool for use at the farm level to evaluate dairy farm sustainability from an environmental standpoint. The agri-environmental indicator set was selected by using two participatory processes: the Delphi method and a focus group. The framework for developing the assessment tool consisted of six steps: (1) Defining the concept of environmental sustainability at the farm level; (2) setting up goals and principles for the assessment; (3) identifying potential indicators and selecting candidate indicators; (4) defining reference values, aggregating indicators into components, and establishing relative weights for indicators; (5) testing the candidate indicators on dairy farms, and (6) selecting the final indicator set. Six criteria were used to evaluate either the practicality or usefulness of indicators. Thirteen indicators were chosen, one of which was divided into four sub-indicators. These indicators were aggregated into four components: soil quality, cropping practices, fertilization management, and farmland management. Expert participation was the first validation of the indicator set. A compromise between feasibility, practicality, and relevance of measurement was found among indicators. When applied to 40 farms over two contrasting regions, the indicator set identified scores that differed according to production context. The tool is user-friendly and well-adapted to dairy farming systems.     

The effect of land type diversity and spatial heterogeneity on farmland birds in Norway

The decline in farmland birds observed throughout Europe during recent decades has attracted much attention. Agricultural intensification or land abandonment are commonly forwarded as key drivers. Several countries have established agri-environmental schemes (AES) to counter these negative trends among farmland birds. This paper reports a study of the relationship between land use and bird species in the agricultural landscape of Norway. The main objective was to investigate the effect of spatial heterogeneity and diversity of land use on total richness and abundance of farmland birds at a national level.Monitoring the distribution and abundance of birds is part of the Norwegian monitoring programme for agricultural landscapes. The monitoring programme is based on mapping of 1 × 1 km squares distributed across the entire agricultural landscape. Within these squares permanent observation points are established for bird monitoring. Detailed interpretation of aerial photographs provides the land classification. We tested the relationship between landscape metrics at different levels of land type detail and species richness and abundance of farmland and non-farmland birds.There was a positive relationship between species richness and abundance of farmland birds and agricultural area. For non-farmland birds the relationship was negative. Spatial heterogeneity of land use was a significant positive factor for both farmland and non-farmland species. High land type diversity was positive for farmland bird richness, but negative for abundance. Non-farmland bird richness was not affected by land type diversity, but abundance had a negative response.The results presented in this paper highlight the importance of a spatial heterogeneous landscape. However, we also found that land type diversity could negatively affect the abundance of both farmland and non-farmland birds. Our findings suggest a need for different management approaches depending on whether the aim is increased species richness or abundance. Achieving both aims with the same means might be difficult. We thus suggest a need for land use analyses before proper management strategies can be implemented.     

Does conservation on farmland contribute to halting the biodiversity decline?

Biodiversity continues to decline, despite the implementation of international conservation conventions and measures. To counteract biodiversity loss, it is pivotal to know how conservation actions affect biodiversity trends. Focussing on European farmland species, we review what is known about the impact of conservation initiatives on biodiversity. We argue that the effects of conservation are a function of conservation-induced ecological contrast, agricultural land-use intensity and landscape context. We find that, to date, only a few studies have linked local conservation effects to national biodiversity trends. It is therefore unknown how the extensive European agri-environmental budget for conservation on farmland contributes to the policy objectives to halt biodiversity decline. Based on this review, we identify new research directions addressing this important knowledge gap.     

Rural development funding and agricultural labour productivity: A spatial analysis of the European Union at the NUTS2 level

With more than 50 percent of the European population (EU-24) living in rural areas and a renewed focus on stimulating smart, sustainable and socially inclusive growth, Rural Development Programmes (RDPs) are an important instrument for economic, social and environmental policies. Evaluating the impact of rural development programmes is, however, complicated due to the widely varying policy targets of RDPs as well as their substantial heterogeneity across rural areas. In this paper we use spatial econometric techniques to evaluate RDPs in the European Union, at the NUTS2 level, and focus specifically on labour productivity in the agricultural sector. To address the clear spatial patterns in the distribution of agricultural labour productivity, we employ regression models in which spatial heterogeneity and spatial dependence are explicitly modelled to quantify the impact of RDPs.     

Challenges in the design of indicators for assessing the impact of the Scotland Rural Development Programme 2007–2013 on climate change mitigation

This paper addresses the use of impact indicators with respect to climate change in the 2007–2013 Rural Development Programme (RDP) of the European Union, with particular reference to the Scotland Rural Development Programme (SRDP). It concludes that the policy context has highlighted the need for the rural land use sector to respond to climate change but that the associated Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) did not develop suitable indicators to assess the impact of SDRP measures on GHG emission mitigation. It suggests improved impact indicators based on the relationship between rural land use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: first, an indicator based on net GHG emissions per holding; and a second based on net GHG emissions per unit volume of output. The paper points out the challenges in measuring land-based emissions accurately. It further proposes screening of RDP measures to ensure that climate change mitigation impacts are properly appraised. It is recognised that climate change policy in relation to rural land use is still at an early stage of development but greater sophistication of policy instrument design and evaluation will be required if the RDP is to contribute significantly to climate change policy objectives.     

Effects of vineyard management on biotic homogenization of insect–flower interaction networks in the Cape Floristic Region biodiversity hotspot

Plant and animal communities, as well as their interaction networks in agricultural landscapes, face threats of biotic homogenization due mostly to intensive management and cropland expansion. It is unclear whether agri-environmental schemes that promote environmentally friendly farming approaches can reduce the effects of these threats which cause reduction in regional (beta) diversity. Here, we examined biotic homogenization of insect–flower interactions in vineyards managed under agri-environmental schemes in the Cape Floristic Region (CFR). The interaction networks studied are of significant conservation value in the fragmented CFR agricultural landscape. Assessment was done using permutational distance-based test for homogeneity of multivariate dispersion to determine whether vineyards contributed to loss of diversity across the landscape through homogenization of their insect–flower interaction networks and flower visitor community. Vineyards did not show significant homogenization of interaction networks and flower-visitor community when compared to natural sites. Organic viticulture, integrated vineyard management and on-going protection of natural vegetation close to vineyards, as practiced in the CFR, are possibly contributing to the reduction in biotic homogenization observed here. Further vineyard expansion must however be prevented to avoid future biotic losses. These measures should be supported by all stakeholders in the conservation sector to achieve wine production while at the same time conserving the natural complement of biodiversity.     

Farmers’ perceptions of biodiversity and their willingness to enhance it through agri-environment schemes: A comparative study from Estonia and Finland

This comparative study is based on structured interviews with farmers participating in the agri-environment schemes in Estonia and Finland. It explores farmers’ interest in and knowledge of farmland wildlife, their understanding of the concept of biodiversity, and awareness of the potential causes behind declines of farmland birds. It also examines the relationship between farmers’ interest and willingness to undertake practices favouring farmland wildlife. Estonian and Finnish farmers showed considerable interest in wildlife on their farms, which was only weakly related to the self-assessed knowledge of wildlife. Many farmers viewed biodiversity from a narrow perspective often excluding species directly related to farming. Finnish farmers expressed more concern about the decline in common farmland species than Estonian ones. In both countries farmers rated intensification of agriculture as the major driving force behind farmland bird declines. The expressed interest in wildlife positively correlated with willingness to undertake wildlife-friendly measures. Only farmers with agri-environment contracts targeted specifically at biodiversity enhancement were more knowledgeable about practical on-farm activities favouring wildlife, and were more willing to employ them than the rest. Estonian farmers expressed a high degree of willingness to enhance wildlife though agri-environment management, which is a good sign for better implementation of the recently established national programme towards conservation.     

Mammals,agri‐environment schemes and set‐aside – what are the putative benefits?

• 1 The impacts of agricultural intensification on farmland wildlife have been the subject of increasing concern, particularly over the last two decades. Population declines have occurred for a number of mammalian species, sometimes drastically so, and changes in farming practice are believed to be significant contributory factors.
• 2 The major policy instruments for delivering environmental benefits on farmland are agri‐environment schemes. These encourage farmers to adopt more environmentally sensitive farming practices to promote farmland biodiversity. Additionally, compulsory set‐aside, which reduces agricultural surplus, could also have positive impacts on wildlife. In this paper we consider some of the putative benefits of agri‐environment schemes and set‐aside for mammals.
• 3 We review how establishment and management options within agri‐environment schemes and set‐aside might affect habitat resources for mammals. For example, conservation headlands increase plant and invertebrate resources within the crop edge for mammals such as wood mice. Grassy field margins can support communities of smaller mammals, and hedgerows may act as important commuting and hunting routes. Their potential will depend on factors such as seed mixtures used, timing and severity of cutting, and length of time they have been in place.
• 4 At a farm level, habitat heterogeneity may be increased through organic agriculture, which is supported by some agri‐environment schemes. Studies suggest significant benefits to mammals, including wood mice and bats. However, it is increasingly recognized that effective conservation of farmland mammals must seek solutions at the landscape scale, addressing such issues as habitat connectivity between farms. One approach may be the better targeting of scheme agreements.
• 5 We suggest that agri‐environment schemes and set‐aside can contribute to the conservation of mammals on farmland. Recent policy changes are likely to have further positive impacts on farmland wildlife but appropriate mammal monitoring programmes must be developed rigorously to assess their effects.