Model-based optimisation of agricultural profitability and nutrient management: a practical approach for dealing with issues of scale

To manage agricultural landscapes more sustainably, we must understand and quantify the synergies and trade-offs between environmental impact, production, and other ecosystem services. Models play an important role in this type of analysis as generally it is infeasible to test multiple scenarios by experiment. These models can be linked with algorithms that optimise for multiple objectives by searching a space of allowable management interventions (the control variables). Optimisation of landscapes for multiple objectives can be computationally challenging, however, particularly if the scale of management is typically smaller (e.g. field scale) than the scale at which the objective is quantified (landscape scale) resulting in a large number of control variables whose impacts do not necessarily scale linearly. In this paper, we explore some practical solutions to this problem through a case study. In our case study, we link a relatively detailed, agricultural landscape model with a multiple-objective optimisation algorithm to determine solutions that both maximise profitability and minimise greenhouse gas emissions in response to management. The optimisation algorithm combines a non-dominated sorting routine with differential evolution, whereby a ‘population’ of 100 solutions evolves over time to a Pareto optimal front. We show the advantages of using a hierarchical approach to the optimisation, whereby it is applied to finer-scale units first (i.e. fields), and then the solutions from each optimisation are combined in a second step to produce landscape-scale outcomes. We show that if there is no interaction between units, then the solution derived using such an approach will be the same as the one obtained if the landscape is optimised in one step. However, if there is spatial interaction, or if there are constraints on the allowable sets of solutions, then outcomes can be quite different. In these cases, other approaches to increase the efficiency of the optimisation may be more appropriate—such as initialising the control variables for half of the population of solutions with values expected to be near optimal. Our analysis shows the importance of aligning a policy or management recommendation with the appropriate scale.

[1]  Georgina M. Mace,et al.  Creating win-wins from trade-offs? Ecosystem services for human well-being: A meta-analysis of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies in the real world , 2014 .

[2]  P. O’Farrell,et al.  Sustainable multifunctional landscapes: a review to implementation , 2010 .

[3]  Julie A. Jedlicka,et al.  Effects of Natural Enemy Biodiversity on the Suppression of Arthropod Herbivores in Terrestrial Ecosystems , 2009 .

[4]  Muriel Tichit,et al.  Optimal allocations of agricultural intensity reveal win-no loss solutions for food production and biodiversity , 2017, Regional Environmental Change.

[5]  Peter Gladders,et al.  Effects of disease control by fungicides on greenhouse gas emissions by U.K. arable crop production. , 2011, Pest management science.

[6]  Walter A.H. Rossing,et al.  Exploring ecosystem services trade-offs in agricultural landscapes with a multi-objective programming approach , 2018 .

[7]  R. Webster,et al.  Exploring the spatial variation in the fertilizer-nitrogen requirement of wheat within fields , 2014, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[8]  Frédérick Garcia,et al.  Models to support cropping plan and crop rotation decisions. A review , 2011, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[9]  H. Keulen,et al.  LINTUL3, a simulation model for nitrogen-limited situations: Application to rice , 2010 .

[10]  Christina M. Kennedy,et al.  Optimizing land use decision-making to sustain Brazilian agricultural profits, biodiversity and ecosystem services , 2016 .

[11]  Alice E. Milne,et al.  The landscape model: A model for exploring trade-offs between agricultural production and the environment , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[12]  Alice E. Milne,et al.  Scale‐ and location‐dependent correlation of nitrous oxide emissions with soil properties: an analysis using wavelets , 2004 .

[13]  S. Treyer,et al.  Multi-objective optimization as a tool to identify possibilities for future agricultural landscapes , 2019, The Science of the total environment.

[14]  Michael Verdone,et al.  Optimizing investments in national-scale forest landscape restoration in Uganda to maximize multiple benefits , 2016 .

[15]  Joern Fischer,et al.  A plea for multifunctional landscapes , 2017 .

[16]  Garry D. Peterson,et al.  Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[17]  Ralf Seppelt,et al.  Harmonizing Biodiversity Conservation and Productivity in the Context of Increasing Demands on Landscapes , 2016, Bioscience.

[18]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[19]  W. Rawls Estimating soil bulk density from particle size analysis and organic matter content. , 1983 .

[20]  Rainer Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , 1997, J. Glob. Optim..

[21]  Andrew P. Whitmore,et al.  Simulation of solute leaching in soils of differing permeabilities , 1991 .

[22]  Haitang Hu,et al.  SAORES: a spatially explicit assessment and optimization tool for regional ecosystem services , 2014, Landscape Ecology.

[23]  Muriel Tichit,et al.  Biodiversity and food security: from trade-offs to synergies , 2017, Regional Environmental Change.

[24]  S. Polasky,et al.  Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices , 2002, Nature.

[25]  Manoj K. Nayak,et al.  Optimal crop planning and water resources allocation in a coastal groundwater basin, Orissa, India , 2006 .

[26]  David J. Parsons,et al.  Optimising Fungicide Applications on Winter Wheat using Genetic Algorithms , 2004 .

[27]  Peter H. Verburg,et al.  Optimizing the allocation of agri-environment measures to navigate the trade-offs between ecosystem services, biodiversity and agricultural production , 2018, Environmental Science & Policy.