Biodiversity
The challenge
Our world faces a serious challenge: striking a healthy balance between agricultural production and biodiversity protection. Loss of species and an overall decline in the numbers of wild plants, birds, animals and insects are great cause for concern for legislators, scientists and the public. The UN declared 2010 the International Year of Biodiversity, the same year in which Europe failed to reach the set target 'of halting biodiversity loss'.
In some cases, these are species which are particularly adapted to farmland and are therefore vulnerable to changes in crops grown or other management practices. However, much greater threats come from more general loss of habitat and the overriding issue of climate change. A sustainable system balances the need to increase the food supply to meet the population’s demand with the need to protect the ecosystems on which we depend.
For agriculture, protecting the Earth is vital as long term farming isn’t possible without a healthy environment.Farming and wildlife can coexist. Management methods can be put in place, protecting natural wildlife’s habitats and non-cropped areas around the farm and ensuring land is used to the maximum benefit.
Approximately 12% (over 1.5 billion ha.) of the globe’s land surface (13.4 billion ha) is currently used in crop production (arable land and land under permanent crops). This area represents slightly over a third (36%) of the land estimated to be suitable for crop production. Increased productivity on land already cultivated is therefore essential.Environmental stewardship methods include soil protection, management of the availability of water, and the safe use of pesticides.
Farmland biodiversity exists because humans created the ecological niches
Farming is not natural. The first farmers cleared large areas of woodland, displacing woodland species but creating ecological niches for many others, such as the skylark. The present range of farmland biodiversity has become established because of the particular mix of crops and management techniques used. As these have changed, so some species have benefited and others lost.
Farming is not the biggest threat to biodiversity
Farmland – however it is managed – cannot provide habitats suitable for a wide range of wildlife. Unfarmed land is a much greater source of biodiversity and it is there that the greater threats lie. Encroachment by roads, urban and industrial development and loss of woodland can destroy habitats or cut across migration routes. Pollution, climate change and introduction of non-native species also threaten biodiversity.
European farming practices have increased biodiversity
Temperate woodlands, which existed over much of Europe before the advent of agriculture, are relatively poor in biodiversity, since the habitat they provide can support quite a narrow range of species. Clearing land for farming has allowed the much wider diversity of wildlife which see today to establish itself.
Most farmland wildlife lives on field margins
The primary purpose of a farmer's fields is to grow crops, and the habitat provided by these is not well suited to many species. Because of this, the great majority of farmland wildlife is found on uncultivated land at field margins, including hedges. Appropriate management of this land, which is unproductive and forms only a small percentage of the total area of farms, can have a dramatic effect on total biodiversity.
Biodiversity within fields depends mostly on the crop and when it is sown
All farming has a major effect on wildlife habitats and biodiversity. All aspects of farm management – ploughing, crop protection, fertilizer application etc – contribute to this, but the most important factors are the nature of the crop and the time it sown. Oilseed rape provides large amount of pollen, which attracts bees and other pollinating insects (and birds which feed on them), whereas cereals and sugar beet produce little or no pollen. Sowing seed in spring, as was the common practice a few decades ago, provides winter stubbles which are good habitats for skylarks and partridges.
Many farmers actively encourage wildlife on parts of their land
For example, some have been encouraged to sow small areas of unproductive land with wildflower mixes to encourage bees, which are vital for pollination but whose numbers have been in decline in recent years. Others work with conservation bodies to provide habitats for endangered bird species. This does not stop them producing high yields of crops, appropriately treated with pesticides when necessary, on the bulk of their land.
Farmers are well aware of the need to conserve biodiversity and most employ practices which foster this
Farmers are happy to adopt practices which minimise damage from pests while reducing any impact on other farmland species. The present CAP system rewards them for taking conservation measures rather than simply maximising production, and it makes economic sense for them to minimise their use of pesticides.
We need to produce more food
Already 1 billion people are regularly malnourished. By 2050 we will need to produce at least 70% more food, and the best way to do this is to maximise harvests on current farmland and allow other natural habitats for wildlife to flourish. At the same time, maximising yield on a given area will help to minimise the greenhouse gas footprint of food production.
Population growth puts pressure on land in many ways
Not only does a larger population have to be fed from the same area of farmland (by 2050 there will only be the equivalent of one football pitch available to produce food for every 5 people), but cities and towns encroach on valuable farmland and new and busier transport links both take land and contribute to pollution. Increasing the productivity of farmland and reducing losses to pests can ensure that farming does not exacerbate this.
Crop protection products help us grow more food without using more land
Current estimates are that 50 per cent European crop production would be destroyed by pests and disease without the use of pesticides. Losses can be due to insects, fungal, viral or bacterial disease, or weed competition. Without controlling these, European agriculture would be far less productive, and more wildlife habitats would be converted to farmland. If farming was less productive, the carbon footprint of food production would rise.
Crop protection products also help to reduce deforestation
Increasing the productivity of the best farmland helps control deforestation. Maintaining woodlands provides a major carbon sink to help mitigate climate change. India's increased yields – partly due to the appropriate use of pesticides – has prevented the conversion of 40 million hectares of virgin land (13.6% of the total land area of the country) to farmland and so conserved the biodiversity of this land.
We still lose significant amounts of each harvest to pests
Crop protection reduces crop losses significantly, about 50 percent of our food crop production is accounted for by advanced pest management. However, about 30% of the European wheat harvest is still lost to pests. If we were able to prevent this, farmers would be even more productive; thus there is plenty of room for further innovation. Extending this across the world would make a major contribution to guaranteeing food security during the 21st Century and reduce the loss of biodiversity due to habitat loss.
Organic farm management has no overall benefit for biodiversity
The lower productivity of organic farming means that more land has to be cultivated to produce the same harvest. This means that if organic were to become more than a niche sector, the net effect on wildlife from bringing more land into cultivation would be negative for biodiversity.
GM pest resistant crops only target pests which attack them, not helpful insects
The ability to control insect pests by modifying crop varieties to produce Bt protein has two beneficial effects for biodiversity: the crop is protected against all insects which try to feed on it, and beneficial species which do not attack the crop are not harmed.
All crop protection products are intensively assessed for their impact on wildlife before approval
Pesticides are not just evaluated for human safety, but also for their potential impact on farmland wildlife. If candidate products do not meet strict safety criteria, they will not be approved.
There are concerted EU efforts to halt biodiversity loss
The EU Biodiversity Action Plan expresses the political commitment to reducing biodiversity loss by 2010. Much of the focus of this is on protecting and maintaining natural habitats, which are much richer in wildlife than farmland. This is complemented by a number of agro-environment schemes aimed as supporting species for which farmland provides a good habitat.
The global community takes biodiversity loss seriously
Protecting wildlife is not just an issue in Europe. The FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN) focuses primarily on helping to feed the world in a sustainable way and, as part of this, has a number of agro-ecological schemes under way. These include mixed rice and fish farming, agro-forestry schemes and training in Integrated Pest Management.
Farmers are increasingly being rewarded for actions they can take to conserve and protect wild species on their land. But by far the biggest contribution they can make is to maximise productivity. By doing so, they can reduce encroachment of agriculture onto uncultivated land and help maintain existing wildlife habitats.
Get Food Policy Right
Some policy decisions made with the intention of conserving biodiversity – including further restrictions on the range of crop protection products available and the encouragement of organic farming – are more likely to have a negative impact. More extensive agriculture and poorer control of pests will mean that more land is needed to grow our crops and wildlife habitats will inevitably be lost.
