Study

Effects of agri-environment schemes on biodiversity vary between taxa and species in arable landscapes in Switzerland

  • Published source details Herzog F., Buholzer S., Dreier S., Hofer G., Jeanneret P., Pfiffner L., Poiger T., Prasuhn V., Richner W., Schupbach B., Spiess E., Spiess M., Walter T. & Winzeler M. (2006) Effects of the Swiss agri-environmental scheme on biodiversity and water quality. Mitteilungen der Biologischen Bundesanstalt für Land-u. Forstwirtschaft, 403, 34-39

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Increase the proportion of semi-natural habitat in the farmed landscape

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Reduce management intensity on permanent grasslands (several interventions at once)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Plant nectar flower mixture/wildflower strips

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Increase the proportion of semi-natural habitat in the farmed landscape

    A review on effects of the Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas (ECA) scheme on biodiversity in arable landscapes in Switzerland (Herzog et al. 2006) found that effects differed between species and taxa. Bird species breeding in hedgerows (dominated by yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella, linnet Carduelis cannabina, red-backed shrike Lanius collurio and common whitethroat Syliva communis) and wetlands (mainly reed warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus and marsh warbler A. palustris), had more territories than expected near ECAs (hedgerows: 143 territories expected vs 293 observed; wetlands: 31 territories expected vs 52 observed). For species preferring open agricultural habitats (skylark Alauda arvensis, common quail Coturnix coturnix and common kestrel Falco tinnunculus), fewer territories than expected were recorded near ECAs (151 expected vs 68 observed). Many compensation areas were located near vertical structures (such as hedgerows or forest edges), which may bias these results. A correlation between the proportion of ECAs in the landscape and presence of the meadow grasshopper Chorthippus parallelus was found, but there was no such correlation for the bow-winged grasshopper C. biguttulus. The report reviews results from a number of studies. No details on study design, monitoring techniques or other methods were given.

     

  2. Reduce management intensity on permanent grasslands (several interventions at once)

    A 2006 review on the effects of the Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas scheme in Switzerland (Herzog et al. 2006) found that out of 1,401 Ecological Compensation Area meadows investigated, only around 25% reached the required minimum quality, containing indicator plant species of species-rich semi-natural grasslands. The remaining 75% of Ecological Compensation Area meadows were species-poor with a simple vegetation structure. Several case studies showed that the community composition of spiders (Araneae) differs between extensively and conventionally managed meadows. No details on study design, monitoring techniques or other methods were given.

     

  3. Plant nectar flower mixture/wildflower strips

    A 2006 review on the effects of the Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas scheme in Switzerland (Herzog et al. 2006) found wildflower strips sown with native flowers on set-aside land attracted ground beetle species (Carabidae) that were never or only rarely found in wheat fields. No details on study design, monitoring techniques or other methods were given.

     

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust