A study into the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes is calling for the reassessment of biodiversity approaches and their implications for management of agricultural landscapes.
The study which is a joint effort between the Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility Institute of CIAT and the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) is titled “Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes—are we asking the right questions?”
The study acknowledges the need to put the appropriate value on ecosystem services. Some examples of significant ecosystem services are; pollination by insects, tree varieties that stop soil erosion and regulate carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and those that provide nutrient cycling and watershed protection.
However, it argues against ‘a one size fits all’ approach and calls for a deeper understanding of the complex biological and socioeconomic dynamics at play. The argument follows that functional composition and their interactions at different scales is far more important than abundance of species in determining the effects of biodiversity on ecosystem services. It is also takes cognizance of resilience as a factor which must be considered to ensure the long term sustainability in ecosystem management.
According to the study, priorities differ considerably between small scale and large-scale farmers and between, policy makers, civil society, activist communities, researchers and private sector. For instance at an individual level, farmers are less likely to maintain biodiversity if there is little direct benefit to them, this is especially so in poor rural agricultural communities. The exception is where indigenous knowledge, traditional and religious values compel the communities to do so.
“When advising farmers on adoption of biodiversity approaches, we must ensure that decisions are informed by solid scientific evidence. In order to provide policy makers with appropriate advice on the functional value of diversity it is necessary to consider the ways in which biodiversity, agricultural productivity and profitability, and ecosystem services intersect at the landscape scale.”
The study also points to inherent knowledge gaps which need to be urgently addressed. “Assessments of biodiversity values of different management scenarios will have to form the basis of discussions of the effectiveness of different policy interventions. These policy implications and the need for diversity enhancing communal action remain largely unexplored territory.” It argues that while a number of studies advocate for broad sweeping ecosystem approaches and policy changes they do not take into account the unique and complex local circumstances.
It posits for instance that although agricultural intensification often implies a direct reduction in diversity, it does not necessarily spell doom to the ecosystem services which the farmer is dependent upon. It can impact the ecosystem services positively if carefully designed and managed to ensure that the equilibrium between functional groups and species are correctly balanced. The study discourages the promotion of wholesale approaches to management of biodiversity in different agricultural landscapes. It further calls for a better understanding of the social dynamics involved as well as a cost/benefit balance at individual, community and global levels.
For More Information Contact
Marsden Momanyi
momanyi@gmail.com
0720145009
