Valorization for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in the Agri-Food Value Chain.

This article defines the term valorization of biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES) measures, as distinguished from their valuation, and underpins it with an assessment of private valorization examples along the agri-food value chain. Valorization incentivizes measures for promoting BES, while valuation refers to its quantification. Valuation can be a step of valorization but is not indispensable. In scientific literature, the terms valorization and valuation are often used interchangeably. In addition, there is a lack of research on private options versus conventional, public policy options. Therefore, we searched for private valorization options primarily in public sources (gray literature and websites). This led to the identification of four clusters (markets for voluntary services, labeling, and certification, environmental management/CSR, and tradable permits and quotas). Based on these clusters the options were assessed from a legal and systems dynamics perspective. In addition, the viability of selected valorization options in different future scenarios was examined. The analysis revealed a wide range of private valorization options, which in contrast to public policy options that focus almost entirely on the production stage, are spread across the agri-food value chain. Their suitability differs under different future scenarios, legal and systems conditions.

Future agricultural systems and the role of digitalization for achieving sustainability goals. A review.

By leveraging a wide range of novel, data-driven technologies for agricultural production and agri-food value chains, digital agriculture presents potential enhancements to sustainability across food systems. Accordingly, digital agriculture has received considerable attention in policy in recent years, with emphasis mostly placed on the potential of digital agriculture to improve efficiency, productivity and food security, and less attention given to how digitalization may impact other principles of sustainable development, such as biodiversity conservation, soil protection, and human health, for example. Here, we review high-level policy and law in the German and European context to highlight a number of important institutional, societal, and legal preconditions for leveraging digital agriculture to achieve diverse sustainability targets. Additionally, we combine foresight analysis with our review to reflect on how future frame conditions influencing agricultural digitalization and sustainability could conceivably arise. The major points are the following: (1) some polices consider the benefits of digital agriculture, although only to a limited extent and mostly in terms of resource use efficiency; (2) law as it applies to digital agriculture is emerging but is highly fragmented; and (3) the adoption of digital agriculture and if it is used to enhance sustainability will be dependent on future data ownership regimes. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13593-022-00792-6.