1. bookTom 68 (2022): Zeszyt 2 (June 2022)
Informacje o czasopiśmie
License
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
2454-0358
Pierwsze wydanie
14 Dec 2009
Częstotliwość wydawania
4 razy w roku
Języki
Angielski
access type Otwarty dostęp

Woodland planting on UK pasture land is not economically feasible, yet is more profitable than some traditional farming practices

Data publikacji: 09 May 2022
Tom & Zeszyt: Tom 68 (2022) - Zeszyt 2 (June 2022)
Zakres stron: 61 - 71
Informacje o czasopiśmie
License
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
2454-0358
Pierwsze wydanie
14 Dec 2009
Częstotliwość wydawania
4 razy w roku
Języki
Angielski
Abstract

Increasing ecosystem service provision is a key strategy of the UK’s ongoing agricultural and environmental policy reforms. Enhancing forest cover by 4%, particularly on the least productive agricultural land, aims to maximise carbon sequestration and achieve net zero by 2050. Multiple factors affect the sequestration potential of afforestation schemes and landowner participation in them, highlighting the need for spatially explicit research. We used the InVEST Carbon Model to investigate the Loddon Catchment, southeast England as a study area. We assessed the carbon sequestration potential and economic feasibility of three broadleaved woodland planting scenarios; arable, pasture, and stakeholder-approved (SA) scenario. We found that over a 50-year time horizon, woodland planting on arable land has the greatest sequestration potential (4.02 tC ha−1 yr−1), compared to planting on pasture land (3.75 tC ha−1 yr−1). When monetising carbon sequestration at current market rates, woodland planting on agricultural land incurs a loss across all farm types. However, when including the value of unpaid labour, lowland pasture farms presently incur a greater loss (−€285.14 ha−1 yr−1) than forestry (−€273.16 ha−1 yr−1), making forestry a more economical land use. Subsidising up to the social value of carbon (€342.23 tC−1) significantly reduces this loss and may make afforestation of pasture land more appealing to farmers. Woodland planting on lowland pasture land would increase forest cover by up to 3.62%. However, due to the influence of farmer attitudes on participation, it is more realistic for afforestation to occur on lowland pasture land in the SA scenario, equating to a 0.74% increase.

Keywords

Bartholomee, O., Grigulis, K., Colace, M. P., Arnoldi, C., Lavorel, S., 2018: Methodological uncertainties in estimating carbon storage in temperate forests and grasslands. Ecological Indicators, 1:331–342.10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.07.054Search in Google Scholar

Bateman, I., Lovett, A., 2000: Estimating and valuing the carbon sequestered in softwood and hardwood trees, timber products and forest soils in Wales. Journal of Environmental Management, 60:301–323.10.1006/jema.2000.0388Search in Google Scholar

Burke, T., Whyatt, D., Blackburn, A., Rowland, C., Abbatt, J., 2020: Large-scale tree planting in the UK: feasibility and implications, Lancaster: UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, 9 p.Search in Google Scholar

De Long, J. R., Jackson, B. G., Wilkinson, A., Pritchard, W. J., Oakley, S., Mason, K.E. et al., 2019: Relationships between plant traits, soil properties and carbon fluxes differ between monocultures and mixed communities in temperate grassland. Journal of Ecology, 107:1704–1719.10.1111/1365-2745.13160661775031341333Search in Google Scholar

Dunn, M., Sing, L., Clarke, T., Moseley, D., 2020: Attitudes Towards Landscape Benefits and Woodland Creation in Southern Scotland, Forest Research, 42 p.Search in Google Scholar

Elwin, A., Clark, J. M., Short, C., Badjana, M., Neumann, J., Elwin, A., 2020: LANDWISE NFM scenario workshop initial findings for the Loddon Catchment – Report of Loddon Catchment workshop, 11 October 2019, for workshop participants and the Loddon Catchment Partnership. Unpublished.Search in Google Scholar

England, J. R., Paul, K. L., Cunningham, S. C., Madhavan, D. B., Baker, T. G., Read, Z. et al., 2016: Previous land use and climate influence differences in soil organic carbon following reforestation of agricultural land with mixed-species plantings. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, 227:61–72.10.1016/j.agee.2016.04.026Search in Google Scholar

Evans, M., 2013: 12.11 Peatland Geomorphology. In: Shroder, J. (eds.): Treatise on Geomorphology. Academic Press, p. 165–181.10.1016/B978-0-12-374739-6.00327-4Search in Google Scholar

Garcia de Jalon, S., Graves, A., Palma, J. H. N., Williams, A., Upson, M., 2018: Modelling and valuing the environmental impacts of arable, forestry and agroforestry systems: a case study. Agroforestry Systems, 4:1059–1073.10.1007/s10457-017-0128-zSearch in Google Scholar

Giannitsopoulos, M. L., Graves, A. R., Burgess, P. J., Crous-Duran, J., Moreno, G., Herzog, F. et al., 2020: Whole system valuation of arable, agroforestry and tree-only systems at three case study sites in Europe. Journal of Cleaner Production, 23.10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122283Search in Google Scholar

Gregg, R., Elias, J. L., Alonso, I., Crosher, I. E., Muto, P., Morecroft, M. D., 2021: Carbon storage and sequestration by habitat: a review of the evidence (second edition) – Natural England Research Report NERR094, York: Natural England, 58 p.Search in Google Scholar

Grunelberg, E., Ziche, D., Wellbrock, N., 2014: Organic Carbon Stocks and Sequestration Rates of Forest Soils in Germany. Global Change Biology, 8:2644–2662.10.1111/gcb.12558425752424616061Search in Google Scholar

Hall, S., 2018: A novel agroecosystem: Beef production in abandoned farmland as a multifunctional alternative to rewilding. Agricultural Systems, 167:10–16.10.1016/j.agsy.2018.08.009Search in Google Scholar

Hamilton, W., Bosworth, G., Ruto, E., 2015: Entrepreneurial younger farmers and the “young farmer problem” in England. Agriculture and Forestry, 61:61–69.10.17707/AgricultForest.61.4.05Search in Google Scholar

Hardaker, A., 2018: Is forestry really more profitable than upland farming? A historic and present day farm level economic comparison of upland sheep farming and forestry in the UK. Land Use Policy, 71:98–120.10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.032Search in Google Scholar

Howley, P., Buckley, C., O’Donoghue, C., Ryan, M., 2015. Explaining the economic ‘irrationality’ of farmers’ land use behaviour: The role of productivist attitudes and non-pecuniary benefits. Ecological Economics, 109:186–193.10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.11.015Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, J. J., Jones, D. L., Parkhill, K. A., Barnes, A. P., Williams, A. P., 2016: Farmers’ perceptions of climate change: identifying types. Agriculture and Human Values, 33:323–339.10.1007/s10460-015-9608-9Search in Google Scholar

Kaske, K., Garcia de Jalon, S., Williams, A., Graves, A., 2021: Assessing the Impact of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on Economic Profitability of Arable, Forestry, and Silvoarable Systems. Sustainability, 7:363710.3390/su13073637Search in Google Scholar

Lange, M., Eisenhauer, N., Sierra, C. A., Bessler, H., Engels, C., Griffiths, R. I. et al., 2015: Plant diversity increases soil microbial activity and soil carbon storage. Nature Communications, 6:1–8.10.1038/ncomms770725848862Search in Google Scholar

Lawerence, A., Dandy, N., Urquhart, J., 2010: Landowner attitudes to woodland creation and management in the UK, Farnham: Forest Research.Search in Google Scholar

Lawrence, A., Edwards, D., 2013: Prospects for new productive woodland in Scotland: Insights from stake-holders, Roslin: Forestry Commission, 75 p.Search in Google Scholar

Maguire, P., Donofrio, S., Merry, W., Myers, K., Weatherer, L., Wildish, J. et al., 2021: A Green Growth Spurt – State of Forest Carbon Finance 2021, Washington DC: Ecosystem Marketplace, 64 p.Search in Google Scholar

Manzoor, S. A., Griffiths, G., Rose, D. C., Lukac, M., 2021: The Return of Wooded Landscapes in Wales: An Exploration of Possible Post-Brexit Futures. Land, 10: 59–64.10.3390/land10010059Search in Google Scholar

Matthews, K. B., Wardell-Johnson, D., Miller, D., Fitton, N., Jones, E., Bathgate, S. et al., 2020: Not seeing the carbon for the trees? Why area-based targets for establishing new woodlands can limit or underplay their climate change mitigation benefits. Land Use Policy, 97: 104690.10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104690Search in Google Scholar

Morison, J., Matthews, R., Miller, G., Perks, M., Randle, T., Vanguelova, E. et al., 2012: Understanding the carbon and greenhouse gas balance of forests in Britain - Forestry Commission Research Report, Edinburgh: Forestry Commission, 149 p.Search in Google Scholar

Nijnik, M., Pajot, G., Moffat, A., Slee, B., 2013: An economic analysis of the establishment of forest plantations in the United Kingdom to mitigate climatic change. Forest Policy and Economics, 26:34–42.10.1016/j.forpol.2012.10.002Search in Google Scholar

O’Neill, C., Lim, F., Edwards, D., Osborne, C., 2020: Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy. Environmental Research Letters, 15: 104090.10.1088/1748-9326/abaf87Search in Google Scholar

Ostle, N., Levy, P., Evans, C., Smith, P., 2009: UK land use and soil carbon sequestration. Land Use Policy, 26:274–283.10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.08.006Search in Google Scholar

Ovando, P., Begueria, S., Campos, P., 2019: Carbon sequestration or water yield? The effect of payments for ecosystem services on forest management decisions in Mediterranean forests. Water Resources and Economics, 28:100119.10.1016/j.wre.2018.04.002Search in Google Scholar

Patenaude, G., Briggs, B.D.J., Milne, R., Rowland, C.S., Dawson, T.P., Pryor, S.N., 2003: The carbon pool in a British Semi-Natural Woodland. Forestry, 76:109–119.10.1093/forestry/76.1.109Search in Google Scholar

Poulton, P., Pye, E., Hargreaves, P., Jenkinson, D., 2003: Accumulation of carbon and nitrogen by old arable land reverting to woodland. Global Change Biology, 9:942–955.10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00633.xSearch in Google Scholar

Redman, G., 2020: John Nix Pocketbook. 51st ed. Melton Mowbray, The Andersons Centre, 303 p.Search in Google Scholar

Reid, C., Hornigold, K., McHenry, E., Nichols, C., Townsend, M., Lewthwaite, K. et al., 2021: State of the UK’s Woods and Trees, Woodland Trust, 245 p.Search in Google Scholar

Ruskule, A., Nikodemus, O., Kasparinskis, R., Prižavoite, D., Bojāre, D., Brūmelis, G., 2016: Soil–vegetation interactions in abandoned farmland within the temperate region of Europe. New Forests, 47:587–605.10.1007/s11056-016-9532-xSearch in Google Scholar

Ryan, M., O’Donoghue, C. & Hynes, S., 2018: Heterogeneous economic and behavioural drivers of the Farm afforestation decision. Journal of Forest Economics, 33:63–74.10.1016/j.jfe.2018.11.002Search in Google Scholar

Senapati, N., Chabbi, A., Gastal, F., Smith, P., Mascher, N., Loubet, B. et al., 2014: Net carbon storage measured in a mowed and grazed temperate sown grassland shows potential for carbon sequestration under grazed system. Carbon Management, 5:131–144.10.1080/17583004.2014.912863Search in Google Scholar

Sławski, M., Tarabuła, T., Sławska, M., 2020: Does the enrichment of post-arable soil with organic matter stimulate forest ecosystem restoration–A view from the perspective of three decades after the afforestation of farmland. Forest Ecology and Management, 478:118525.10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118525Search in Google Scholar

Sharps, K., Masante, D., Thomas, A., Jackson, B., Redhead, J., May, L. et al., 2017: Comparing strengths and weaknesses of three ecosystem services modelling tools in a diverse UK river catchment. Science of the Total Environment, 584–585:118–130.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.16028147292Search in Google Scholar

Tupek, B., Zanchi, G., Verkerk, P. J., Churkina, G., Viovy, N., Hughes, J. K. et al., 2010: A comparison of alternative modelling approaches to evaluate the European forest carbon fluxes. Forest Ecology and Management, 260:241–251.10.1016/j.foreco.2010.01.045Search in Google Scholar

Upson, M., Burgess, P., Morison, J., 2016: Soil carbon changes after establishing woodland and agroforestry trees in a grazed pasture. Geoderma, 283:10–20.10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.07.002Search in Google Scholar

Vanguelova, E. I., Nisbet, T. R., Moffat, A. J., Broadmeadow, S., Sanders, T. G. M., Morison, J. I. L., 2013: A New Evaluation of Carbon Stocks in British Forest Soils. Soil Use and Management, 29:169–181.10.1111/sum.12025Search in Google Scholar

Vinogradovs, I., Nikodemus, O., Elferts, D., Brūmelis, G., 2018: Assessment of site-specific drivers of farmland abandonment in mosaic-type landscapes: A case study in Vidzeme, Latvia. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 253:113–121.10.1016/j.agee.2017.10.016Search in Google Scholar

Vlek, P. L. G., Khamzina, A., Azadi, H., Bhaduri, A., Bharati, L., Braimoh, A. et al., 2017: Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation. Sustainability, 9:1–19.10.3390/su9122196Search in Google Scholar

Watkins, C., Williams, D., Lloyd, T., 1996: Constraints on farm woodland planting in England: a study of Nottinghamshire farmers. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research, 69:167–176.10.1093/forestry/69.2.167Search in Google Scholar

Wilkes, M. A., Bennett, J., Burbi, S., Charlesworth, S., Dehnen-Schmutz, K., Rayns, F. et al., 2020: Making Way for Trees? Changes in Land-Use, Habitats and Protected Areas in Great Britain under “Global Tree Restoration Potential”. Sustainability, 12.10.3390/su12145845Search in Google Scholar

Willett, W., Rockstrom, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Vermeulen, S. et al., 2019: Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet, 393:447–492.10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4Search in Google Scholar

Wynne-Jones, S., 2013: Carbon blinkers and policy blindness: The difficulties of “Growing Our Woodland in Wales”. Land Use Policy, 32:250–260.10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.10.012Search in Google Scholar

CCC, 2020: Land use: Policies for a Net Zero UK, London: Committee on Climate Change.Search in Google Scholar

Climate Change Act 2008: (c.27). London: The Stationary Office. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/27/contentsSearch in Google Scholar

Coe, S., Finlay, J., 2020: The Agriculture Act 2020, London: House of Commons.Search in Google Scholar

DBEIS, 2021: 2019 UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Final Figures, London: Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy.Search in Google Scholar

DBEIS, 2021: Green Book supplementary guidance: valuation of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for appraisal - Data tables 1 to 19: supporting the toolkit and the guidance. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/valuation-of-energy-use-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions-for-appraisalSearch in Google Scholar

DEFRA, 2018: Moving away from Direct Payments – Agriculture Bill: Analysis of the impacts of removing Direct Payments. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/740669/agri-bill-evidence-slide-pack-direct-payments.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

DEFRA, 2021: Consultation outcome: Analysis of responses summary. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/environmental-land-management-policy-discussion-document/outcome/analysis-of-responses-summarySearch in Google Scholar

EftEC, 2015: Developing UK Natural Capital Accounts: Woodland Ecosystem Accounts, London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.Search in Google Scholar

Environment Agency, 2020: WFD River Waterbody Catchments Cycle 2. Available at: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/298258ee-c4a0-4505-a3b5-0e6585ecfdb2/wfd-river-waterbody-catchments-cycle-2Search in Google Scholar

HM Government, 2018: A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment, London: HM Government.Search in Google Scholar

HM Treasury, 2020: The Green Book - Central Government Guidance of Appraisal and Evaluation, London: HM Treasury.Search in Google Scholar

IPCC, 2006: Chapter 2: Generic Methodologies Applicable to Multiple Land-Use Categories. In: 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. Hayama, p. 2.27.Search in Google Scholar

IPCC, 2019: Chapter 4: Forest Land. In: 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, p. 4.19.Search in Google Scholar

Loddon Observatory, 2021: Loddon Catchment. Available at: https://loddonobservatory.org/loddoncatchment/Search in Google Scholar

Met Office, 2016: UK Regional climates – Southern England. Available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/weather/learn-about/uk-past-events/regional-climates/southern-england_-climate---met-office.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

MHCLG, 2020: Land Use in England, 2018, London: Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.Search in Google Scholar

Natural Capital Project, 2021: Carbon Storage and Sequestration. Available at: http://releases.natural-capitalproject.org/invest-userguide/latest/carbon-storage.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Natural England, 2020: Provisional Agricultural Land Classification (ALC). Available at: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/952421ec-da63-4569-817d-4d6399df40a1/provisional-agricultural-land-classification-alcSearch in Google Scholar

Stanford University, 2021: Natural Capital Project – Carbon. Available at: https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/software/invest-models/carbonSearch in Google Scholar

UKCEH, 2019: Digimap – Environment Data Download. Available at: https://digimap.edina.ac.uk/roam/download/environmentSearch in Google Scholar

UKCEH, 2020: The UKCEH Land Cover Maps for 2017, 2018 and 2019, UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology.Search in Google Scholar

World Bank Group, 2020: Country – United Kingdom. Available at: https://climateknowledgeportal.world-bank.org/country/united-kingdom#Search in Google Scholar

Polecane artykuły z Trend MD

Zaplanuj zdalną konferencję ze Sciendo