ArticleEcological modelling2020
Reconciling biodiversity conservation, food production and farmers' demand in agricultural landscapes.
Article in Ecological modelling, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Plant Metabolites to Pollinator Safety: Rethinking Selectivity of Botanical Insecticides in Bees-A Review.Biology · 2026Review
- Spatiotemporal effects of landscape structure on the trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem service functions in Yangtze River Economic Belt, China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Impact of cucurbit crop management techniques on the foraging behavior of honeybees and hoverflies in Morogoro, Tanzania.BMC ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Protect European green agricultural policies for future food security.Communications earth & environment · 2022Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Efficient management of agricultural management should consider multiple services and stakeholders. Yet, it remains unclear how to guarantee ecosystem services for multiple stakeholders' demands, especially considering the observed biodiversity decline following reductions in semi-natural habitat (SNH), and global change. Here, we use an ecosystem service model of intensively-managed agricultural landscapes to derive the best landscape compositions for different stakeholders' demands, and how they vary with stochasticity and the degree of pollination dependence of crops. We analyse three groups of stakeholders assumed to value different ecosystem services most - individual farmers (crop yield per area), agricultural unions (landscape production) and conservationists (biodiversity). Additionally, we consider a social average scenario that aims at maximizing multifunctionality. Trade-offs among stakeholders' demands strongly depend on the degree of pollination dependence of crops, the strength of environmental and demographic stochasticity, and the relative amount of an ecosystem service demanded by each stakeholder. Intermediate amounts of SNH deliver relatively high levels of the three services (social average). Our analysis further suggests that the current levels of SNH protection lie below these intermediate amounts of SNH in intensively-managed agricultural landscapes. Given the worldwide trends in agriculture and global change, current policies should start to consider factors such as crop type and stochasticity, as they can strongly influence best landscape compositions for different stakeholders. Our results suggest ways of managing landscapes to reconcile several actors' demands and ensure for biodiversity conservation and food production.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.