How much would it cost to monitor farmland biodiversity in Europe?

Ilse R. Geijzendorffer, Stefano Targetti, Manuel K. Schneider, Dick J. Brus, Robert H.G. Jongman, Martin Knotters, Marion M.B. Bogers, Igor Staritsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To evaluate progress on political biodiversity objectives, biodiversity monitoring provides information on whether intended results are being achieved. Despite scientific proof that monitoring and evaluation increase the (cost) efficiency of policy measures, cost estimates for monitoring schemes are seldom available, hampering their inclusion in policy programme budgets. Empirical data collected from 12 case studies across Europe were used in a power analysis to estimate the number of farms that would need to be sampled per major farm type to detect changes in species richness over time for four taxa (vascular plants, earthworms, spiders and bees). A sampling design was developed to allocate spatially, across Europe, the farms that should be sampled. Cost estimates are provided for nine monitoring scenarios with differing robustness for detecting temporal changes in species numbers. These cost estimates are compared with the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) budget (2014-2020) to determine the budget allocation required for the proposed farmland biodiversity monitoring. Results show that the bee indicator requires the highest number of farms to be sampled and the vascular plant indicator the lowest. The costs for the nine farmland biodiversity monitoring scenarios corresponded to 0·01%-0·74% of the total CAP budget and to 0·04%-2·48% of the CAP budget specifically allocated to environmental targets. Synthesis and applications. The results of the cost scenarios demonstrate that, based on the taxa and methods used in this study, a Europe-wide farmland biodiversity monitoring scheme would require a modest share of the Common Agricultural Policy budget. The monitoring scenarios are flexible and can be adapted or complemented with alternate data collection options (e.g. at national scale or voluntary efforts), data mobilization, data integration or modelling efforts.

LanguageEnglish
Pages140-149
JournalJournal of Applied Ecology
Volume53
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

agricultural land
biodiversity
Common Agricultural Policy
monitoring
cost
farm
vascular plant
bee
Europe
earthworm
spider
mobilization
budget
species richness
sampling
modeling

Keywords

  • Agri-environment schemes
  • Agriculture
  • Biodiversity indicator
  • Common agricultural policy
  • Empirical data
  • Farming system
  • Habitat
  • Power analysis
  • Sampling design
  • Species trend

Cite this

Geijzendorffer, Ilse R. ; Targetti, Stefano ; Schneider, Manuel K. ; Brus, Dick J. ; Jongman, Robert H.G. ; Knotters, Martin ; Bogers, Marion M.B. ; Staritsky, Igor. / How much would it cost to monitor farmland biodiversity in Europe?. In: Journal of Applied Ecology. 2016 ; Vol. 53, No. 1. pp. 140-149.
@article{f917dafc9ea94d429c9d81e389ba6a4c,
title = "How much would it cost to monitor farmland biodiversity in Europe?",
abstract = "To evaluate progress on political biodiversity objectives, biodiversity monitoring provides information on whether intended results are being achieved. Despite scientific proof that monitoring and evaluation increase the (cost) efficiency of policy measures, cost estimates for monitoring schemes are seldom available, hampering their inclusion in policy programme budgets. Empirical data collected from 12 case studies across Europe were used in a power analysis to estimate the number of farms that would need to be sampled per major farm type to detect changes in species richness over time for four taxa (vascular plants, earthworms, spiders and bees). A sampling design was developed to allocate spatially, across Europe, the farms that should be sampled. Cost estimates are provided for nine monitoring scenarios with differing robustness for detecting temporal changes in species numbers. These cost estimates are compared with the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) budget (2014-2020) to determine the budget allocation required for the proposed farmland biodiversity monitoring. Results show that the bee indicator requires the highest number of farms to be sampled and the vascular plant indicator the lowest. The costs for the nine farmland biodiversity monitoring scenarios corresponded to 0·01{\%}-0·74{\%} of the total CAP budget and to 0·04{\%}-2·48{\%} of the CAP budget specifically allocated to environmental targets. Synthesis and applications. The results of the cost scenarios demonstrate that, based on the taxa and methods used in this study, a Europe-wide farmland biodiversity monitoring scheme would require a modest share of the Common Agricultural Policy budget. The monitoring scenarios are flexible and can be adapted or complemented with alternate data collection options (e.g. at national scale or voluntary efforts), data mobilization, data integration or modelling efforts.",
keywords = "Agri-environment schemes, Agriculture, Biodiversity indicator, Common agricultural policy, Empirical data, Farming system, Habitat, Power analysis, Sampling design, Species trend",
author = "Geijzendorffer, {Ilse R.} and Stefano Targetti and Schneider, {Manuel K.} and Brus, {Dick J.} and Jongman, {Robert H.G.} and Martin Knotters and Bogers, {Marion M.B.} and Igor Staritsky",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1111/1365-2664.12552",
language = "English",
volume = "53",
pages = "140--149",
journal = "Journal of Applied Ecology",
issn = "0021-8901",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "1",

}

How much would it cost to monitor farmland biodiversity in Europe? / Geijzendorffer, Ilse R.; Targetti, Stefano; Schneider, Manuel K.; Brus, Dick J.; Jongman, Robert H.G.; Knotters, Martin; Bogers, Marion M.B.; Staritsky, Igor.

In: Journal of Applied Ecology, Vol. 53, No. 1, 2016, p. 140-149.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - How much would it cost to monitor farmland biodiversity in Europe?

AU - Geijzendorffer, Ilse R.

AU - Targetti, Stefano

AU - Schneider, Manuel K.

AU - Brus, Dick J.

AU - Jongman, Robert H.G.

AU - Knotters, Martin

AU - Bogers, Marion M.B.

AU - Staritsky, Igor

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - To evaluate progress on political biodiversity objectives, biodiversity monitoring provides information on whether intended results are being achieved. Despite scientific proof that monitoring and evaluation increase the (cost) efficiency of policy measures, cost estimates for monitoring schemes are seldom available, hampering their inclusion in policy programme budgets. Empirical data collected from 12 case studies across Europe were used in a power analysis to estimate the number of farms that would need to be sampled per major farm type to detect changes in species richness over time for four taxa (vascular plants, earthworms, spiders and bees). A sampling design was developed to allocate spatially, across Europe, the farms that should be sampled. Cost estimates are provided for nine monitoring scenarios with differing robustness for detecting temporal changes in species numbers. These cost estimates are compared with the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) budget (2014-2020) to determine the budget allocation required for the proposed farmland biodiversity monitoring. Results show that the bee indicator requires the highest number of farms to be sampled and the vascular plant indicator the lowest. The costs for the nine farmland biodiversity monitoring scenarios corresponded to 0·01%-0·74% of the total CAP budget and to 0·04%-2·48% of the CAP budget specifically allocated to environmental targets. Synthesis and applications. The results of the cost scenarios demonstrate that, based on the taxa and methods used in this study, a Europe-wide farmland biodiversity monitoring scheme would require a modest share of the Common Agricultural Policy budget. The monitoring scenarios are flexible and can be adapted or complemented with alternate data collection options (e.g. at national scale or voluntary efforts), data mobilization, data integration or modelling efforts.

AB - To evaluate progress on political biodiversity objectives, biodiversity monitoring provides information on whether intended results are being achieved. Despite scientific proof that monitoring and evaluation increase the (cost) efficiency of policy measures, cost estimates for monitoring schemes are seldom available, hampering their inclusion in policy programme budgets. Empirical data collected from 12 case studies across Europe were used in a power analysis to estimate the number of farms that would need to be sampled per major farm type to detect changes in species richness over time for four taxa (vascular plants, earthworms, spiders and bees). A sampling design was developed to allocate spatially, across Europe, the farms that should be sampled. Cost estimates are provided for nine monitoring scenarios with differing robustness for detecting temporal changes in species numbers. These cost estimates are compared with the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) budget (2014-2020) to determine the budget allocation required for the proposed farmland biodiversity monitoring. Results show that the bee indicator requires the highest number of farms to be sampled and the vascular plant indicator the lowest. The costs for the nine farmland biodiversity monitoring scenarios corresponded to 0·01%-0·74% of the total CAP budget and to 0·04%-2·48% of the CAP budget specifically allocated to environmental targets. Synthesis and applications. The results of the cost scenarios demonstrate that, based on the taxa and methods used in this study, a Europe-wide farmland biodiversity monitoring scheme would require a modest share of the Common Agricultural Policy budget. The monitoring scenarios are flexible and can be adapted or complemented with alternate data collection options (e.g. at national scale or voluntary efforts), data mobilization, data integration or modelling efforts.

KW - Agri-environment schemes

KW - Agriculture

KW - Biodiversity indicator

KW - Common agricultural policy

KW - Empirical data

KW - Farming system

KW - Habitat

KW - Power analysis

KW - Sampling design

KW - Species trend

U2 - 10.1111/1365-2664.12552

DO - 10.1111/1365-2664.12552

M3 - Article

VL - 53

SP - 140

EP - 149

JO - Journal of Applied Ecology

T2 - Journal of Applied Ecology

JF - Journal of Applied Ecology

SN - 0021-8901

IS - 1

ER -