The role of agroecology in sustainable intensification June 2015

163 Pages·2015·3.93 MB·English

LUPG

The Role of Agroecology in Sustainable
Intensification

Lampkin, N.H., Pearce, B.D., Leake, A.R., Creissen, H.,
Gerrard, C.L., Girling, R., Lloyd, S., Padel, S., Smith, J.,
Smith, L.G., Vieweger, A., Wolfe, M.S.

June 2015
Disclaimer
This report was produced by the authors on behalf of the Land Use Policy Group (LUPG).
The views expressed within the report are those of the contractors and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the agencies within LUPG.

This report should be quoted as:
Lampkin, N.H., Pearce, B.D., Leake, A.R., Creissen, H., Gerrard, C.L., Girling, R., Lloyd, S.,
Padel, S., Smith, J., Smith, L.G., Vieweger, A., Wolfe, M.S., 2015. The role of agroecology
in sustainable intensification. Report for the Land Use Policy Group. Organic Research
Centre, Elm Farm and Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust.
Corresponding author: Prof Nic Lampkin ([email protected])

Copyright
The copyright to this report is the joint property of the LUPG agencies.

For further information, the LUPG contact is:
Cécile Smith, Scottish Natural Heritage ([email protected])
LUPG
LUPG comprises Natural England, Natural Resources Wales, Scottish Natural Heritage, the
Environment Agency, Northern Ireland Environment Agency, Scottish Environment
Protection Agency. LUPG provides independent evidence and analysis to Government on
matters of common concern related to agriculture, woodlands and other rural land uses. It
seeks to develop a common understanding of the pros and cons of policy mechanisms
related to land use, particularly farming and forestry.

Natural England
Natural England is the government’s advisor on the natural environment. We provide
practical advice, grounded in science, on how best to safeguard England’s natural wealth for
the benefit of everyone. Our remit is to ensure sustainable stewardship of the land and sea
so that people and nature can thrive. It is our responsibility to see that England’s rich natural
environment can adapt and survive intact for future generations to enjoy.
www.naturalengland.org.uk

Natural Resources Wales
Natural Resources Wales is a Welsh Government Sponsored Body. Our Purpose is to
ensure that the environment and natural resources of Wales are sustainably maintained,
sustainably enhanced and sustainably used, now and in the future.
http://naturalresources.wales/

Scottish Natural Heritage
Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) is a government body established to secure conservation
and enhancement of Scotland’s unique and valued natural heritage – the wildlife, habitats
and landscapes that have evolved in Scotland through long partnership between people and
nature. SNH advises on policies and promotes projects that aim to improve the natural
heritage and support its sustainable use. Its aim is to help people to enjoy Scotland’s natural
heritage responsibly, understand it more fully and use it wisely so it can be sustained for
future generations.
www.snh.org.uk

The Environment Agency
The Environment Agency (EA) is the leading public organisation for protecting and improving
the environment in England and Wales. The EA achieves this by regulating industry, waste
and water quality; managing flood risk and water resources, and improving wildlife habitats
in addition to many other activities. The EA also monitors the environment, and makes the
information that it collects widely available.
www.environment-agency.gov.uk

Northern Ireland Environment Agency
The Northern Ireland Environment Agency takes the lead in advising on, and in
implementing, the Government's environmental policy and strategy in Northern Ireland. The
Agency carries out a range of activities, which promote the Government's key themes of
sustainable development, biodiversity and climate change. Our overall aims are to protect
and conserve Northern Ireland's natural heritage and built environment, to control pollution
and to promote the wider appreciation of the environment and best environmental practices.
www.ni-environment.gov.uk

The Scottish Environment Protection Agency
The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) is Scotland's environmental regulator.
SEPA's main role is to protect and improve the environment, and it does so by regulating
activities that can cause pollution, and by monitoring the quality of Scotland's air, land and
water. SEPA reports on the state of Scotland's environment and publishes a wide range of
environmental data and information.
http://www.sepa.org.uk/
FOREWORD
The capacity of the global food system to support a rising world population while preserving
healthy ecosystems is the subject of much debate. Going back to 2007-08, the global spike
in commodity prices highlighted that demand for food was starting to rise faster than supply.
A range of factors are responsible for this trend. Failures in distribution, wastage along
supply chains and inequalities in purchasing power are among the structural problems
affecting food availability. The ongoing rise in the global population and the expansion of the
middle-class within many countries is affecting the magnitude and the nature of the demand
for food, with a shift to diets which are richer in animal-proteins. The ongoing rise in global
temperatures, increasingly changeable weather patterns and greater competition for land,
energy and water will affect the global food system as well as the ecosystem services which
underpin agriculture and the natural environment in general1.
In 2009, The Royal Society addressed the challenge of how food availability might be
increased without repeating the environmental damage of the mid-20th Century - and
discussed the concept of ‘sustainable intensification’ of global agriculture in which yields are
increased without adverse environmental impact and without the cultivation of more land.
This concept was developed in more detail in the Foresight report on the Future of Food and
Farming, which described sustainable intensification as “simultaneously raising yields,
increasing the efficiency with which inputs are being used and reducing the negative
environmental effects of food production”2.
Working through the Land Use Policy Group (LUPG), the statutory conservation, countryside
and environmental agencies from across the UK are able to collaborate on a wide range of
issues relating to land management. As such we have been engaging with the concept of
sustainable intensification for a number of years. For example, a previous LUPG report
considered how the sustainable intensification concept could be applied at the level of
individual farms. In particular, the project aimed to explore whether there were examples of
farmers increasing yields at the same time as reducing negative environmental impacts – or
even enhancing the environment on their farms. The resulting piece of work - “Exploring the
Concept of Sustainable Intensification” - was undertaken by John Elliott of ADAS and
Professor Les Firbank of Leeds University and published in January 2013. The final report
showed that out of a sample of twenty cutting-edge farms across Great Britain, four of these
appeared to be carrying out sustainable intensification according to the research
methodology. The project also demonstrated the need for a range of mutually agreed
indicators and metrics that can be used to assess whether or not individual farms are on a
path towards sustainable intensification.
A significant amount of work is currently taking place under the auspices of Defra’s
Sustainable Intensification Platform. The LUPG agencies are keen to avoid duplication and
fund research work only where we can add value.

1 International Assessment of Agricultural knowledge, Science and Technology for Development
(IAASTD) (2009). Agriculture at a Crossroads: Global report 2009. FAO, GEF, UNDP, UNEP,
UNESCO, the World Bank and WHO.
http://www.unep.org/dewa/assessments/ecosystems/iaastd/tabid/105853/default.aspx
2 Foresight. The Future of Food and Farming (2011) Final Project Report. The Government Office for
Science, London.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288329/11-546-future-
of-food-and-farming-report.pdf
In parallel with the promotion of the sustainable intensification concept, we observed that
there has been a rise in interest in agro-ecology, as exemplified by a number of recent high
level reports3,4. We therefore felt there would be merit in developing an understanding of the
relationships between the sustainable intensification and agro-ecology concepts, the extent
to which they are compatible, and whether or not agro-ecological systems and practices can
form a valid path for achieving sustainable intensification.
While mindful of the political and social dimensions inherent in the concept of agroecology,
we chose to focus on systems and practices as these can be used to support the
management of individual farms. As a result, this particular report presents evidence from a
desk-based review of agro-ecological systems and practices followed by an evaluation that
compares agroecological and conventional systems in terms of energy and GHG emissions,
biodiversity, soil and water, profitability and productivity. We are now of the opinion that
agroecology can form an integral part of sustainable intensification, although there are a
number of barriers hindering the wider adoption of this kind of approach, in particular those
relating to knowledge exchange.
Clearly, further work is required to improve our understanding of the opportunities for
agroecological systems and practices to contribute to sustainable intensification - and for
these to be more widely adopted on farms. We now very much hope that others will use the
work we have commissioned in order to inform further research on this topic. In particular,
we believe that knowledge-based systems have a significant role to play alongside that of
technology – with substantial benefits to be gained from working with nature as part of a
more sustainable approach to agricultural production.

Ruth Jenkins
Chair of the Land Use Policy Group

3 The Centre for Agroecology and Food Security (2013) Mainstreaming Agroecology: Implications for
Global Food and Farming Systems. Coventry University/Garden Organic
http://www.coventry.ac.uk/Global/05%20Research%20section%20assets/Research/CAFS/Publication
,%20Journal%20Articles/MainstreamingAgroecology_WEB.pdf
4 Olivier de Schutter (2011) Agroecology and the Right to Food. Report by the Special Rapporteur on
the Right to Food. United Nations.
http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/officialreports/20110308_a-hrc-16-49_agroecology_en.pdf
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Organic Research Centre and the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust gratefully
acknowledge:
 the extensive contributions made by external experts contacted by the team as part
of the review process;
 the constructive input and feedback of members of the steering group (Cécile Smith
and Maria de la Torre, Scottish Natural Heritage; Brian Pawson, Natural Resources
Wales; James Petts, Natural England; and Steve Aston, Defra), both during steering
group meetings and through extensive comments on the draft reports;
 the helpful and encouraging inputs from the external reviewers (Prof. Tim Benton,
University of Leeds; Prof. Ian Crute, Non-Executive Director, AHDB; Prof. Charles
Godfray, Oxford University; Stuart Knight, NIAB; Daniel McGonigle, Defra; and Prof.
Christine Watson, SRUC), both during the workshop on January 14th, 2015, and
subsequently;
 the active participation of attendees in the January 2015 workshop; many of whom
also provided detailed contributions after the event;
 the authors and publishers who have granted permission for the use of Figures in
this publication;
 and last but not least, all the contributors from our staff:
o At ORC: Nicolas Lampkin; Bruce Pearce; Henry Creissen (at Teagasc from
April 2015), Catherine Gerrard, Robbie Girling (at Reading University from
March 2015); Susanne Padel; Jo Smith; Laurence Smith; Anja Vieweger;
Martin Wolfe.
o At GWCT: Alistair Leake; Sofi Lloyd; Phil Jarvis
Any errors or omissions are of course our responsibility as contractors.
SUMMARY
Background
‘Sustainable intensification’ is now often used to describe the future direction for agriculture
and food production as a way to address the challenges of increasing global population, food
security, climate change and resource conservation. While sustainable intensification is
interpreted by some to relate to increasing production, with more efficient but potentially
increased use of inputs and technology, there is also a need to consider environmental
protection, including the conservation and renewal of natural capital and the output of
ecosystem services. There is a growing consensus that sustainable intensification should
not only avoid further environmental damage, but actively encourage environmental benefits.
This includes addressing issues of consumption (including diets), waste, biodiversity
conservation and resource use, while ensuring sufficient overall levels of production to meet
human needs.
‘Agroecology’ is also now receiving increasing attention as an approach to agriculture that
attempts to reconcile environmental, sustainability and production goals by emphasising the
application of ecological concepts and principles to the design and management of
agricultural systems. Agroecology can be seen as part of a broader approach to sustainable
intensification focusing on ecological (or eco-functional) and knowledge intensification
alongside technological intensification.
Main findings
This report explores how agroecological approaches can contribute to sustainable
intensification in the UK and European contexts by:
(i) exploring the concepts of ‘sustainable intensification’ and ‘agroecology’ (Chapter
2);
(ii) reviewing the range of individual practices and systematic approaches that are
typically defined as agroecological (Chapter 3);
(iii) assessing the extent to which different agroecological approaches can contribute
to sustainability outcomes (Chapter 4); and
(iv) considering the policy drivers and constraints that may affect the adoption of
agroecological approaches (Chapter 5).
Agroecological perspectives may be applied to the management of soils, crops and
livestock, as well as to broader societal, environmental and food system issues.
Agroecological practices, such as the use of rotations and polycultures, biological pest
control, or legumes to biologically fix nitrogen, are not unique to particular groups of farmers.
They can be used by all farmers, individually or in combination. However, synergies
between individual practices can be important. Agroecology emphasises the idea of ‘system
redesign’ rather than ‘input substitution’ for maximum benefit. In some cases, as in organic
farming, the combination of practices may be codified (regulated) to enable marketing of
products at premium prices to consumers. A range of more or less codified, systematic
approaches, ranging from integrated pest and crop management through conservation
agriculture and organic farming to agroforestry and permaculture, are described in the
literature.
Three of the best documented approaches – integrated crop/farm management, organic
farming and agroforestry – are assessed in detail, in comparison with intensive, conventional
systems, with respect to their contribution to: (i) productivity; (ii) energy use and greenhouse
gas emissions; (iii) biodiversity and related ecosystem services; (iv) soil and water
conservation; and (v) profitability. This analysis concludes that agroecological approaches
can:
viii
 maintain or increase productivity, with the exception of organic farming where yields per
ha may be substantially reduced due to restrictions on the use of agrochemical inputs –
however organic system productivity with respect to other inputs including labour, and in
terms of resource use (other than land) per unit of food produced, may be similar or
better;
 contribute to reducing non-renewable energy consumption, both on a per unit of land and
a per unit of product basis – although the benefits per unit of product are not as high in
the organic case due to the lower yields;
 maintain or increase biodiversity and the output of related ecosystem services – with
appropriately designed and managed agroforestry and organic systems offering
potentially greater benefits than integrated systems;
 maintain natural capital in the form of soil and water resources as a result of reduced use,
careful management (e.g. reduced or zero tillage) and reduced or restricted use of
potentially polluting inputs;
 maintain or increase the profitability of farming systems through more efficient input use
reducing costs, diversifying the range of outputs and, in the organic case, developing
specialist markets with premium prices to help compensate for the lower yields.
The analysis further suggests that there will be both win-win situations, as in the case of
agroforestry, as well as trade-offs between objectives, for example between productivity and
biodiversity in the organic case. The latter might be compensated for by market
mechanisms and/or policy interventions. To the extent that high outputs per unit land
depend on inputs of non-renewable resources and degradation of natural capital, some
compromises might be needed to deliver longer-term sustainability. This also illustrates the
need for the maintenance of functional biodiversity components in productive agricultural
landscapes to deliver the ecosystem services that can enable reduced use of unsustainable
inputs and practices.
Overall, there is a clear case that agroecological approaches can make a substantial
contribution to sustainable intensification, but this needs to be supported by an improved
knowledge system (including training, education, advice and research with active farmer
engagement), as well as by policy drivers, such as those adopted in the French agroecology
action plan, to encourage change. There is also no one single approach that is likely to
deliver all benefits simultaneously – a mosaic of approaches addressing specific needs is
likely to deliver better overall results, as well as provide insurance against a single preferred
strategy failing to deliver in practice.
On the basis of the analysis in this report, it is recommended that:
 Future work on sustainable intensification should place high priority on the sustainability
component of the concept, including eco-functional and knowledge intensification,
environmental protection and the delivery of ecosystem services;
 The potential of agroecological approaches to contribute to sustainable intensification
(used in this sense described above) should be more widely recognised and developed.
Agroecology is not just an option for, but an essential component of, sustainable
intensification;
 Appropriate evaluation metrics should be developed to support business and policy
decision-making, both at farm and regional/landscape level and taking account of
different priorities (e.g. water use) in different areas;
 Policies to mitigate the negative impacts of many agricultural inputs, including fertilisers,
pesticides, anti-microbials and anti-helminthics, should emphasise agroecological
approaches in addition to technological or risk management solutions (as in the EU
Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive and the French agroecology action plan);
 Agri-environmental support, payments for ecosystem services (PES) and market-based
policies (e.g. product certification) should be used to encourage the adoption of a broad
range of agroecological approaches;
ix
 Improved agroecological information and knowledge exchange systems, building on tacit
farmer knowledge and active producer participation, should be developed and promoted.
Achieving this will require better integration and co-ordination between individuals and
organisations working on the subject, as well as the collaborative development of both
on-line resources and traditional extension services;
 Educational provision, whether at vocational skills, further and higher education levels or
more widely, should include a stronger focus on agroecological approaches – in the short
term this issue can be addressed through the provision of targeted support (using the
RDP vocational skills measures) but in the longer term a wide range of educational
curricula need to be reviewed and updated;
 Research and innovation policy should include more focus on the development of
agroecological approaches, not just their comparative evaluation. Support policies need
to facilitate participatory delivery models and address the challenges involved in securing
private sector funding for applied research that generates public knowledge not linked to
saleable technologies and intellectual property.

x