Why has farming in Europe changed? A farmers' perspective on the development since the 1960s.

Farming in Europe has been the scene of several important socio-economic and environmental developments and crises throughout the last century. Therefore, an understanding of the historical driving forces of farm change helps identifying potentials for navigating future pathways of agricultural development. However, long-term driving forces have so far been studied, e.g. in anecdotal local case studies or in systematic literature reviews, which often lack context dependency. In this study, we bridged local and continental scales by conducting 123 oral history interviews (OHIs) with elderly farmers across 13 study sites in 10 European countries. We applied a driving forces framework to systematically analyse the OHIs. We find that the most prevalent driving forces were the introduction of new technologies, developments in agricultural markets that pushed farmers for farm size enlargement and technological optimisation, agricultural policies, but also cultural aspects such as cooperation and intergenerational arrangements. However, we find considerable heterogeneity in the specific influence of individual driving forces across the study sites, implying that generic assumptions about the dynamics and impacts of European agricultural change drivers hold limited explanatory power on the local scale. Our results suggest that site-specific factors and their historical development will need to be considered when addressing the future of agriculture in Europe in a scientific or policy context. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10113-023-02150-y.

Farmer surveys in Europe suggest that specialized, intensive farms were more likely to perceive negative impacts from COVID-19.

It has been shown that the COVID-19 pandemic affected some agricultural systems more than others, and even within geographic regions, not all farms were affected to the same extent. To build resilience of agricultural systems to future shocks, it is key to understand which farms were affected and why. In this study, we examined farmers' perceived robustness to COVID-19, a key resilience capacity. We conducted standardized farmer interviews (n = 257) in 15 case study areas across Europe, covering a large range of socio-ecological contexts and farm types. Interviews targeted perceived livelihood impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on productivity, sales, price, labor availability, and supply chains in 2020, as well as farm(er) characteristics and farm management. Our study corroborates earlier evidence that most farms were not or only slightly affected by the first wave(s) of the pandemic in 2020, and that impacts varied widely by study region. However, a significant minority of farmers across Europe reported that the pandemic was "the worst crisis in a lifetime" (3%) or "the worst crisis in a decade" (7%). Statistical analysis showed that more specialized and intensive farms were more likely to have perceived negative impacts. From a societal perspective, this suggests that highly specialized, intensive farms face higher vulnerability to shocks that affect regional to global supply chains. Supporting farmers in the diversification of their production systems while decreasing dependence on service suppliers and supply chain actors may increase their robustness to future disruptions. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13593-022-00820-5.

Framework and tools for agricultural landscape assessment relating to water quality protection.

While many scientific studies show the influence of agricultural landscape patterns on water cycle and water quality, only a few of these have proposed scientifically based and operational methods to improve water management. Territ'eau is a framework developed to adapt agricultural landscapes to water quality protection, using components such as farmers' fields, seminatural areas, and human infrastructures, which can act as sources, sinks, or buffers on water quality. This framework allows us to delimit active areas contributing to water quality, defined by the following three characteristics: (i) the dominant hydrological processes and their flow pathways, (ii) the characteristics of each considered pollutant, and (iii) the main landscape features. These areas are delineated by analyzing the flow connectivity from the stream to the croplands, by assessing the buffer functions of seminatural areas according to their flow pathways. Hence, this framework allows us to identify functional seminatural areas in terms of water quality and assess their limits and functions; it helps in proposing different approaches for changing agricultural landscape, acting on agricultural practices or systems, and/or conserving or rebuilding seminatural areas in controversial landscapes. Finally, it allows us to objectivize the functions of the landscape components, for adapting these components to new environmental constraints.

A method for improving the management of controversial wetland.

Valley bottom wetlands in agricultural landscapes often are neglected in national and regional wetland inventories. Although these areas are small, located in the bottomlands of the headwater catchments, and scattered in the rural landscape, they strongly influence hydrology, water quality, and biodiversity over the whole catchment area. Valley bottom wetlands often are considered as controversial wetlands. Awareness of the functional role of wetlands is increasing, in parallel with their progressive disappearance in intensive farming landscapes. The need to improve tools for controlling wetland management is a primary consideration for decision makers and land users. This article proposes a method for the inventory of valley bottom wetlands. The method is based on the functional analysis of potential, existing, and efficient valley bottom wetlands (the PEEW approach). Several indicators are proposed for checking the validity of such an approach. Potential wetlands are delineated by means of a topographic index using topographic and pedoclimatic criteria computed from a Digital Elevation Model and easily accessible databases. Existing wetlands are identified from observed surface moisture, the presence of specific wetland vegetation, or soil feature criteria. Efficient wetlands are defined through a given function, such as flow or pollutant regulation or biodiversity control. An analysis of areas at the limits between potential, existing, and efficient wetlands highlights land cultivated or drained in the past, which currently represents negotiating areas in which rehabilitation and other intended management actions can be implemented.

Farm riparian land use and management: driving factors and tensions between technical and ecological functions.

Because of their specific role in the fate of natural resources of landscapes, riparian lands are considered as landscape management units. Yet, they are part of many farms: In what way does this influence their land use and sustainability? In this article, farm riparian land was defined as the set of riparian fields of a given farm. Our aim was to evaluate farm riparian lands as farm management units and the balance between technical and ecological functions associated with farm riparian land-use types. Technical functions designated the role of land use in elaborating farm production and maintaining farm territory. Ecological functions corresponded to farm riparian land-use intensity and ratio of permanent vegetation. The analysis was carried on 102 farms from 5 study sites representative of dairy agriculture and landscapes in a region straddling Brittany and Normandy (France). Farm riparian land-use types were identified using statistical clustering. Technical and ecological functions associated with land-use types were expressed in the light of agronomy and landscape ecology expertise. Descriptors of farm holdings and farm riparian land were tested as explanatory factors of farm riparian land-use types. The use of farm riparian lands was diverse but well defined; they proved to be farm management units. Compatibilities or antagonisms between technical and ecological functions were underscored according to farm riparian land-use type. We argued that decision support could gain in combining perspectives on riparian lands as landscape management units and farm management units.

Landscape changes in agrarian landscapes in the 1990s: the interaction between farmers and the farmed landscape. A case study from Jutland, Denmark.

Recent landscape changes in a farmed landscape are analysed and related to farm and farmer characteristics. It is assumed that farm and farmer characteristics serve as mediators of large scale or macro driving forces of change-in the present case, a changing farming context including demands for a more environmentally friendly farming practise and a reduced output. The results are based on multivariate analyses of data collected from structured interviews of 160 farmers in a case study area, in central Jutland, measuring 5000 ha. The analysis shows that farmers are highly involved in landscape changes. The investigated landscape changes include creation and removal of landscape elements as well as certain management changes. The most common activity was creation of elements: hedgerows, small woodlands and conversion of rotational arable land to permanent grassland, whereas removal of elements, mainly hedgerows and semi-natural grasslands, were seen less frequently. Management changes like abandonment of permanent grassland were widespread. The results indicate a general extensification of the land use and the authors interpret the results partly as an indication of a change from productivism to a more multifunctional agricultural regime. The observed landscape changes at the farm level show a low, but structured relationship with the current farm and farmer characteristics, meaning that landscape changes were undertaken by various farmers and on various farms. On a general level, however, the age of the farmer and the duration of farm ownership seem to have a major influence on the landscape changes.