Softening the agricultural matrix: a novel agri‐environment scheme that balances habitat restoration and livestock grazing

The loss and degradation of woody vegetation in the agricultural matrix represents a key threat to biodiversity. Strategies for habitat restoration in these landscapes should maximize the biodiversity benefit for each dollar spent in order to achieve the greatest conservation outcomes with scarce fu...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Restoration ecology 2016-03, Vol.24 (2), p.159-164
Hauptverfasser: Ansell, Dean, Fifield, Graham, Munro, Nicola, Freudenberger, David, Gibbons, Philip
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 164
container_issue 2
container_start_page 159
container_title Restoration ecology
container_volume 24
creator Ansell, Dean
Fifield, Graham
Munro, Nicola
Freudenberger, David
Gibbons, Philip
description The loss and degradation of woody vegetation in the agricultural matrix represents a key threat to biodiversity. Strategies for habitat restoration in these landscapes should maximize the biodiversity benefit for each dollar spent in order to achieve the greatest conservation outcomes with scarce funding. To be effective at scale, such strategies also need to account for the opportunity cost of restoration to the farmer. Here, we critique the Whole‐of‐Paddock Rehabilitation program, a novel agri‐environment scheme which seeks to provide a cost‐effective strategy for balancing habitat restoration and livestock grazing. The scheme involves the revegetation of large (minimum 10 ha) fields, designed to maximize biodiversity benefits and minimize costs while allowing for continued agricultural production. The objectives and design of the scheme are outlined, biodiversity and production benefits are discussed, and we contrast its cost‐effectiveness with alternative habitat restoration strategies. Our analysis indicates that this scheme achieves greater restoration outcomes at approximately half the cost of windbreak‐style plantings, the prevailing planting configuration in southeastern Australia, largely due to a focus on larger fields, and the avoidance of fencing costs through the use of existing farm configuration and infrastructure. This emphasis on cost‐effectiveness, the offsetting of opportunity costs through incentive payments, and the use of a planting design that seeks to maximize biodiversity benefits while achieving production benefits to the farmer, has the potential to achieve conservation in productive parts of the agricultural landscape that have traditionally been “off limits” to conservation.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/rec.12304
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1780521295</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3974813791</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3924-f6446660688f2d0fa0736a6b39248fd450ee4f85bd02484a5cc500125a6939a43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1u1DAUhSMEEqWw4AmwxAYWaf2fhB0a-oM0AkGp2p11x2PPuE3s1naGFnXBI_CMPAmeBlgg4Y2tc79zfe1TVc8J3iNl7Uej9whlmD-odoigsiYYnz8sZyxJTbuGPK6epHSBMRFty3aqu5Ngs_HOr1BeGwSr6PTY5zFCjwbI0d28QYB82Jj-vvjz-w_jNy4GPxifUdJrM5hihYwW0IPXJqE1LFwuQjQphwjZBY_AL1HvNltFX6JVhG_lyqfVIwt9Ms9-77vV6eHBl9lxPf949H72dl5r1lFeW8m5lBLLtrV0iS3ghkmQi22xtUsusDHctmKxxEXgILQW5YFUgOxYB5ztVq-mvlcxXI9lBjW4pE1f5jVhTIo0LRaU0E4U9OU_6EUYoy_TFaohnDUdpoV6PVE6hpSiseoqugHirSJYbXNQJQd1n0Nh9yf2q-vN7f9B9flg9sdRTw6Xsrn564B4qWTDGqHOPhypszk_F-8-HSpc-BcTbyGobUhJnZ5QTGT5BFY6MvYLMtmjhg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1771437902</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Softening the agricultural matrix: a novel agri‐environment scheme that balances habitat restoration and livestock grazing</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Ansell, Dean ; Fifield, Graham ; Munro, Nicola ; Freudenberger, David ; Gibbons, Philip</creator><creatorcontrib>Ansell, Dean ; Fifield, Graham ; Munro, Nicola ; Freudenberger, David ; Gibbons, Philip</creatorcontrib><description>The loss and degradation of woody vegetation in the agricultural matrix represents a key threat to biodiversity. Strategies for habitat restoration in these landscapes should maximize the biodiversity benefit for each dollar spent in order to achieve the greatest conservation outcomes with scarce funding. To be effective at scale, such strategies also need to account for the opportunity cost of restoration to the farmer. Here, we critique the Whole‐of‐Paddock Rehabilitation program, a novel agri‐environment scheme which seeks to provide a cost‐effective strategy for balancing habitat restoration and livestock grazing. The scheme involves the revegetation of large (minimum 10 ha) fields, designed to maximize biodiversity benefits and minimize costs while allowing for continued agricultural production. The objectives and design of the scheme are outlined, biodiversity and production benefits are discussed, and we contrast its cost‐effectiveness with alternative habitat restoration strategies. Our analysis indicates that this scheme achieves greater restoration outcomes at approximately half the cost of windbreak‐style plantings, the prevailing planting configuration in southeastern Australia, largely due to a focus on larger fields, and the avoidance of fencing costs through the use of existing farm configuration and infrastructure. This emphasis on cost‐effectiveness, the offsetting of opportunity costs through incentive payments, and the use of a planting design that seeks to maximize biodiversity benefits while achieving production benefits to the farmer, has the potential to achieve conservation in productive parts of the agricultural landscape that have traditionally been “off limits” to conservation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1061-2971</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-100X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/rec.12304</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Wiley Periodicals, Inc</publisher><subject>Agricultural land ; agricultural landscapes ; Agricultural production ; Biodiversity ; Cost analysis ; cost effectiveness ; cost-effective conservation ; ecological restoration ; Environmental restoration ; Farmers ; farmland biodiversity ; farms ; funding ; Grazing ; habitat conservation ; Habitats ; infrastructure ; land restoration ; landscapes ; Livestock ; opportunity costs ; planting ; Revegetation ; vegetation ; Wildlife conservation ; Windbreaks ; Woody plants</subject><ispartof>Restoration ecology, 2016-03, Vol.24 (2), p.159-164</ispartof><rights>2015 Society for Ecological Restoration</rights><rights>2016 Society for Ecological Restoration</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3924-f6446660688f2d0fa0736a6b39248fd450ee4f85bd02484a5cc500125a6939a43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3924-f6446660688f2d0fa0736a6b39248fd450ee4f85bd02484a5cc500125a6939a43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Frec.12304$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Frec.12304$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1418,27929,27930,45579,45580</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ansell, Dean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fifield, Graham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Munro, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freudenberger, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbons, Philip</creatorcontrib><title>Softening the agricultural matrix: a novel agri‐environment scheme that balances habitat restoration and livestock grazing</title><title>Restoration ecology</title><addtitle>Restor Ecol</addtitle><description>The loss and degradation of woody vegetation in the agricultural matrix represents a key threat to biodiversity. Strategies for habitat restoration in these landscapes should maximize the biodiversity benefit for each dollar spent in order to achieve the greatest conservation outcomes with scarce funding. To be effective at scale, such strategies also need to account for the opportunity cost of restoration to the farmer. Here, we critique the Whole‐of‐Paddock Rehabilitation program, a novel agri‐environment scheme which seeks to provide a cost‐effective strategy for balancing habitat restoration and livestock grazing. The scheme involves the revegetation of large (minimum 10 ha) fields, designed to maximize biodiversity benefits and minimize costs while allowing for continued agricultural production. The objectives and design of the scheme are outlined, biodiversity and production benefits are discussed, and we contrast its cost‐effectiveness with alternative habitat restoration strategies. Our analysis indicates that this scheme achieves greater restoration outcomes at approximately half the cost of windbreak‐style plantings, the prevailing planting configuration in southeastern Australia, largely due to a focus on larger fields, and the avoidance of fencing costs through the use of existing farm configuration and infrastructure. This emphasis on cost‐effectiveness, the offsetting of opportunity costs through incentive payments, and the use of a planting design that seeks to maximize biodiversity benefits while achieving production benefits to the farmer, has the potential to achieve conservation in productive parts of the agricultural landscape that have traditionally been “off limits” to conservation.</description><subject>Agricultural land</subject><subject>agricultural landscapes</subject><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>cost effectiveness</subject><subject>cost-effective conservation</subject><subject>ecological restoration</subject><subject>Environmental restoration</subject><subject>Farmers</subject><subject>farmland biodiversity</subject><subject>farms</subject><subject>funding</subject><subject>Grazing</subject><subject>habitat conservation</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>infrastructure</subject><subject>land restoration</subject><subject>landscapes</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>opportunity costs</subject><subject>planting</subject><subject>Revegetation</subject><subject>vegetation</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><subject>Windbreaks</subject><subject>Woody plants</subject><issn>1061-2971</issn><issn>1526-100X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc1u1DAUhSMEEqWw4AmwxAYWaf2fhB0a-oM0AkGp2p11x2PPuE3s1naGFnXBI_CMPAmeBlgg4Y2tc79zfe1TVc8J3iNl7Uej9whlmD-odoigsiYYnz8sZyxJTbuGPK6epHSBMRFty3aqu5Ngs_HOr1BeGwSr6PTY5zFCjwbI0d28QYB82Jj-vvjz-w_jNy4GPxifUdJrM5hihYwW0IPXJqE1LFwuQjQphwjZBY_AL1HvNltFX6JVhG_lyqfVIwt9Ms9-77vV6eHBl9lxPf949H72dl5r1lFeW8m5lBLLtrV0iS3ghkmQi22xtUsusDHctmKxxEXgILQW5YFUgOxYB5ztVq-mvlcxXI9lBjW4pE1f5jVhTIo0LRaU0E4U9OU_6EUYoy_TFaohnDUdpoV6PVE6hpSiseoqugHirSJYbXNQJQd1n0Nh9yf2q-vN7f9B9flg9sdRTw6Xsrn564B4qWTDGqHOPhypszk_F-8-HSpc-BcTbyGobUhJnZ5QTGT5BFY6MvYLMtmjhg</recordid><startdate>201603</startdate><enddate>201603</enddate><creator>Ansell, Dean</creator><creator>Fifield, Graham</creator><creator>Munro, Nicola</creator><creator>Freudenberger, David</creator><creator>Gibbons, Philip</creator><general>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201603</creationdate><title>Softening the agricultural matrix: a novel agri‐environment scheme that balances habitat restoration and livestock grazing</title><author>Ansell, Dean ; Fifield, Graham ; Munro, Nicola ; Freudenberger, David ; Gibbons, Philip</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3924-f6446660688f2d0fa0736a6b39248fd450ee4f85bd02484a5cc500125a6939a43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Agricultural land</topic><topic>agricultural landscapes</topic><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>cost effectiveness</topic><topic>cost-effective conservation</topic><topic>ecological restoration</topic><topic>Environmental restoration</topic><topic>Farmers</topic><topic>farmland biodiversity</topic><topic>farms</topic><topic>funding</topic><topic>Grazing</topic><topic>habitat conservation</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>infrastructure</topic><topic>land restoration</topic><topic>landscapes</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>opportunity costs</topic><topic>planting</topic><topic>Revegetation</topic><topic>vegetation</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><topic>Windbreaks</topic><topic>Woody plants</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ansell, Dean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fifield, Graham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Munro, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freudenberger, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbons, Philip</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Restoration ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ansell, Dean</au><au>Fifield, Graham</au><au>Munro, Nicola</au><au>Freudenberger, David</au><au>Gibbons, Philip</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Softening the agricultural matrix: a novel agri‐environment scheme that balances habitat restoration and livestock grazing</atitle><jtitle>Restoration ecology</jtitle><addtitle>Restor Ecol</addtitle><date>2016-03</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>159</spage><epage>164</epage><pages>159-164</pages><issn>1061-2971</issn><eissn>1526-100X</eissn><abstract>The loss and degradation of woody vegetation in the agricultural matrix represents a key threat to biodiversity. Strategies for habitat restoration in these landscapes should maximize the biodiversity benefit for each dollar spent in order to achieve the greatest conservation outcomes with scarce funding. To be effective at scale, such strategies also need to account for the opportunity cost of restoration to the farmer. Here, we critique the Whole‐of‐Paddock Rehabilitation program, a novel agri‐environment scheme which seeks to provide a cost‐effective strategy for balancing habitat restoration and livestock grazing. The scheme involves the revegetation of large (minimum 10 ha) fields, designed to maximize biodiversity benefits and minimize costs while allowing for continued agricultural production. The objectives and design of the scheme are outlined, biodiversity and production benefits are discussed, and we contrast its cost‐effectiveness with alternative habitat restoration strategies. Our analysis indicates that this scheme achieves greater restoration outcomes at approximately half the cost of windbreak‐style plantings, the prevailing planting configuration in southeastern Australia, largely due to a focus on larger fields, and the avoidance of fencing costs through the use of existing farm configuration and infrastructure. This emphasis on cost‐effectiveness, the offsetting of opportunity costs through incentive payments, and the use of a planting design that seeks to maximize biodiversity benefits while achieving production benefits to the farmer, has the potential to achieve conservation in productive parts of the agricultural landscape that have traditionally been “off limits” to conservation.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/rec.12304</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1061-2971
ispartof Restoration ecology, 2016-03, Vol.24 (2), p.159-164
issn 1061-2971
1526-100X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1780521295
source Wiley Journals
subjects Agricultural land
agricultural landscapes
Agricultural production
Biodiversity
Cost analysis
cost effectiveness
cost-effective conservation
ecological restoration
Environmental restoration
Farmers
farmland biodiversity
farms
funding
Grazing
habitat conservation
Habitats
infrastructure
land restoration
landscapes
Livestock
opportunity costs
planting
Revegetation
vegetation
Wildlife conservation
Windbreaks
Woody plants
title Softening the agricultural matrix: a novel agri‐environment scheme that balances habitat restoration and livestock grazing
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T17%3A07%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Softening%20the%20agricultural%20matrix:%20a%20novel%20agri%E2%80%90environment%20scheme%20that%20balances%20habitat%20restoration%20and%20livestock%20grazing&rft.jtitle=Restoration%20ecology&rft.au=Ansell,%20Dean&rft.date=2016-03&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=159&rft.epage=164&rft.pages=159-164&rft.issn=1061-2971&rft.eissn=1526-100X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/rec.12304&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3974813791%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1771437902&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true