An official website of the United States government
Abstract Butterfly abundances are declining globally, with meta‐analysis showing a rate of −2% per year. Agriculture contributes to butterfly decline through habitat loss and degradation. Prairie strips—strips of farmland actively restored to native perennial vegetation—are a conservation practice with the potential to mitigate biodiversity loss, but their impact on butterfly biodiversity is not known.Working within a 30‐year‐old experiment that varied land use intensity, from natural areas to croplands (maize–soy–wheat rotation), we introduced prairie strips to less intensely managed crop treatments. Treatments included conservation land, biologically based (organic) row crops with prairie strips, reduced input row crops with prairie strips, no‐till row crops and conventional row crops. We measured butterfly abundance and richness: (1) within prairie strips and (2) across the gradient of land use intensity at the plot level.Butterfly abundance was higher within prairie strips than in all other treatments. Across the land use intensity gradient at the plot level, the conservation land treatment had the highest abundance, treatments with prairie strips had intermediate levels and no‐till and conventional treatments had the lowest abundances. Also across entire plots, butterfly richness increased as land use intensity decreased. Treatments with prairie strips, which also had reduced land use intensity, had distinct butterfly communities as they harboured several butterfly species that were not found in other row crop treatments.In addition to the known effects of prairie strips on ecosystem services including erosion control and increased water quality, prairie strips can increase biodiversity in multifunctional landscapes.
more »
« less
Potential Supply of Midwest Cropland for Conversion to In-Field Prairie Strips
Prairie strips planted into crop fields offer multiple environmental benefits. This study estimates the willingness of U.S. farmers to convert 5% of their largest corn-soybean field to prairie strips in exchange for payment. Using stated preference results to estimate land supply, we find that 20% of farmers are willing to adopt prairie strips at payments equivalent to average Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) rental rates, corresponding to potential conversion of 90,000 acres on 1.8m acres of cropland. Farmers are likelier to adopt in smaller fields and when they perceive that prairie strips will benefit environmental quality or agricultural productivity.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1832042
- PAR ID:
- 10331513
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Land Economics
- Volume:
- 98
- ISSN:
- 0023-7639
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 274-291R1
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Agricultural landscapes can be managed to protect biodiversity and maintain ecosystem services. One approach to achieve this is to restore native perennial vegetation within croplands. Where rowcrops have displaced prairie, as in the US Midwest, restoration of native perennial vegetation can align with crops in so called “prairie strips.” We tested the effect of prairie strips in addition to other management practices on a variety of taxa and on a suite of ecosystem services. To do so, we worked within a 33-year-old experiment that included treatments that varied methods of agricultural management across a gradient of land use intensity. In the two lowest intensity crop management treatments, we introduced prairie strips that occupied 5% of crop area. We addressed three questions: (1) What are the effects of newly established prairie strips on the spillover of biodiversity and ecosystem services into cropland? (2) How does time since prairie strip establishment affect biodiversity and ecosystem services? (3) What are the tradeoffs and synergies among biodiversity conservation, non-provisioning ecosystem services, and provisioning ecosystem services (crop yield) across a land use intensity gradient (which includes prairie strips)? Within prairie strip treatments, where sampling effort occurred within and at increasing distance from strips, dung beetle abundance, spider abundance and richness, active carbon, decomposition, and pollination decreased with distance from prairie strips, and this effect increased between the first and second year. Across the entire land use intensity gradient, treatments with prairie strips and reduced chemical inputs had higher butterfly abundance, spider abundance, and pollination services. In addition, soil organic carbon, butterfly richness, and spider richness increased with a decrease in land use intensity. Crop yield in one treatment with prairie strips was equal to that of the highest intensity management, even while including the area taken out of production. We found no effects of strips on ant biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions (N 2 O and CH 4 ). Our results show that, even in early establishment, prairie strips and lower land use intensity can contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services without a disproportionate loss of crop yield.more » « less
-
Unsustainable agriculture practices are undermining the world's future ability to reliably produce food. Assistance programmes, such as those offered by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) of the United States, can increase the uptake of sustainable practices, yet implementation of these alternatives in the US remains discouragingly limited. In this context, we used an interdisciplinary approach involving quantitative and qualitative data to assess the current efficacy of NRCS assistance programmes and identify areas for improvement. To do so, we first analyzed national reports of NRCS expenditures and acres treated over the last 15 years and then distributed an explorative survey to farmers and ranchers throughout Utah state. Our NRCS programme analysis suggested that historical increases in expenditures have been ineffective at increasing the number of acres treated. The survey responses indicated that both financial and non-financial factors were influential in farmer decisions. Farmers that assigned a high importance to sustainable practices were motivated by public perception and environmental stewardship while those that assigned a moderate importance were motivated by the potential return on investment. Overall, participants in NRCS programs reported more positive outcomes than expected by non-participants. We hope the findings from this study can guide future research and inform efforts to improve NRCS assistance programmes in Utah and other regions in the US and elsewhere.more » « less
-
Abstract Worldwide, voluntary agri-environmental programs encourage farmers to adopt environmentally friendly practices. However, the impact of program design on farmers’ participation and long-term practice persistence is unclear. Toward improving program effectiveness, this study illustrates the value of a tailored practice-specific approach to agri-environmental program design. We present a case study of programs promoting cover crops, a conservation practice that can improve soil health and reduce nutrient pollution, drawing from five focus groups with farmers (n = 20) and program administrators (n = 14) in the U.S. Midwest (Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana). Participants perceived cover crop programs to best support farmers is characterized by flexibility and minimal transaction costs. Participants suggested a more data-driven approach to program design particularly for understanding the farm-level economic implications of cover crop use. Integrating financial planning and participatory research components alongside traditional financial incentives and technical assistance were proposed as valuable strategies to enhance program design and broaden the appeal of conservation practices like cover crops.more » « less
-
Precision agricultural technologies (PA) such as global positioning system tools have been commercially available since the early 1990s and they are widely thought to have environmental and economic benefit; however, adoption studies show uneven adoption among farmers in the U.S. and Europe. This study aims to tackle a lingering puzzle regarding why some farmers adopt precision agriculture as an approach to food production and why others do not. The specific objective of this study is to examine the social and biophysical determinants of farmers’ adoption of PA. This paper fills a research gap by including measurements of farmer identity—specifically their own conceptions of their role in the food system—as well as their perceptions of biophysical risks as these relate to the adoption of PA among a large sample of Midwestern U.S. farmers. The study has identified that farmer identity and perceptions of environmental risk do indeed influence PA adoption and that these considerations ought to be incorporated into further studies of PA adoption in other jurisdictions. The findings also appear to highlight the social force of policy and industry efforts to frame PA as not only good for productivity and efficiency but also as an ecologically beneficial technology.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3368/le.98.2.082020-0129R1
