Impact of production intensity on the ability of the agricultural landscape to generate ecosystem services: an example from Sweden

Abstract This paper identifies a number of essential ecosystem services, and estimates their generation by the Swedish agricultural landscape under different production intensities. This is exemplified with data from a low-intensity period (1950s) and a high-intensity one (1990s). The services are described in qualitative and, to the extent possible, quantitative terms, and the ecological functions that support these services are identified. About 20% of Swedish agricultural land has been removed from production during the past 40 years. Production has been strongly intensified with respect to external inputs, and specialized regionally. Local landscape mosaics have been substantially altered, which resulted in a decreased ability of agricultural landscapes to support natural ecosystem components and processes. We argue that all of these changes affect the ability of the landscape to generate ecosystem services. Local, ecological ‘goods and services’ have largely been replaced by fossil fuel driven technology and the regulation of the system is now driven much more by external factors. However, there is no notable change in the system's ability to assimilate solar energy, measured by net primary production (NPP) and corrected for the cost of production (external inputs considered as foregone NPP). Most of the measures we derive indicate a loss of ecosystem services from the Swedish agricultural landscape. This is tantamount to losing an important form of ‘local ecological insurance’, and could lead to serious problems in a future with lower access to external resources, or with an altered energy policy.

[1]  W. Parton,et al.  Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. , 1997, Science.

[2]  H. B. James AGRICULTURE IN THE NATIONAL ECONOMY , 1956 .

[3]  P. Vitousek Beyond Global Warming: Ecology and Global Change , 1994 .

[4]  Robert Costanza,et al.  Investing in natural capital , 1993 .

[5]  Rodney B. Thompson,et al.  Reducing gaseous losses of nitrogen from cattle slurry applied to grassland by the use of additives. , 1990 .

[6]  M. Ihse,et al.  Landscape analysis in the Nordic countries : integrated research in a holistic perspective : proceedings from the second seminar of Nordic landscape research, Lund 13-14 May 1994 , 1996 .

[7]  J. Schnürer,et al.  Microbial biomass and activity in an agricultural soil with different organic matter contents , 1985 .

[8]  E. Odum,et al.  Ecology and Our Endangered Life-Support Systems , 1989 .

[9]  Ulf Gärdenfors,et al.  Rödlistade evertebrater i Sverige 1993 , 1993 .

[10]  L. F. Haber,et al.  The Nitrogen Problem , 1961, Nature.

[11]  L. Persson,et al.  Water Repellence of Cultivated Organic Soils , 1996 .

[12]  David Pimentel,et al.  Economics and energetics of organic and conventional farming , 1993 .

[13]  J. Frame,et al.  Improved Grassland Management , 1992 .

[14]  D. Pimentel,et al.  Agroecosystem biodiversity: matching production and conservation biology , 1992 .

[15]  R. L. Graney,et al.  AQUATIC MESOCOSM STUDIES in ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT , 1993 .

[16]  H. Kirchmann,et al.  Carbon and nitrogen in arable soils as affected by supply of N fertilizers and organic manures , 1994 .

[17]  Mathis Wackernagel,et al.  Ecological Footprints and Appropriated Carrying Capacity: Measuring the Natural Capital Requirements of the Human Economy. , 1996 .

[18]  Pamela A. Matson,et al.  HUMAN APPROPRIATION OF THE PRODUCTS OF PHOTOSYNTHESIS , 1986 .

[19]  B. F. Pain,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from intensive livestock systems: Their estimation and technologies for reduction , 1994 .

[20]  Keiko Tanaka,et al.  THE BLACKLEG EPIDEMIC IN CANADIAN RAPESEED AS A “NORMAL AGRICULTURAL ACCIDENT” , 1997 .

[21]  R. Boerner,et al.  Ecology and Our Endangered Life-Support Systems , 1990 .

[22]  D. Pimentel,et al.  Economic and Environmental Benefits of Biodiversity , 1997 .

[23]  John P. Holdren,et al.  The Cassandra Conference: Resources and the Human Predicament , 1988 .

[24]  R. Andersson,et al.  Current status of Swedish arable soils , 1997 .

[25]  Michael Löfroth Våtmarkerna och deras betydelse , 1991 .

[26]  G. Daily Nature's services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. , 1998 .

[27]  J Walsh,et al.  The greening of the green revolution. , 1991, Science.

[28]  J. Lagerlöf,et al.  Soil Fauna (Microarthropods, Enchytraeids, Nematodes) in Swedish Agricultural Cropping Systems , 1983 .

[29]  E. A. Clark,et al.  Insect pollinators and sustainable agriculture , 1990 .

[30]  P. Nilsson Environmental Accounting—EMERGY and Environmental Decision Making , 1997 .

[31]  D. Tilman Biodiversity: Population Versus Ecosystem Stability , 1995 .

[32]  R. O'Neill,et al.  The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital , 1997, Nature.

[33]  M. Ihse,et al.  Swedish agricultural landscapes : patterns and changes during the last 50 years, studied by aerial photos , 1995 .

[34]  J. Banaszak Strategy for conservation of wild bees in an agricultural landscape , 1992 .

[35]  G. Fry,et al.  Field margins: can they enhance natural enemy population densities and general arthropod diversity on farmland? , 1992 .

[36]  G. Nabhan,et al.  Services provided by pollinators , 1997 .

[37]  A. Lofs-Holmin Influence of Agricultural Practices on Earthworms (Lumbricidae) , 1983 .

[38]  J. Osborne,et al.  Bees and the Pollination of Crops and Wild Flowers in the European Community , 1991 .

[39]  Dianne Dumanoski,et al.  Our Stolen Future , 1996 .

[40]  C. Bernes Biological diversity in Sweden : a country study , 1994 .