Repository logoRepository logo
GRO
  • GRO.data
  • GRO.plan
Help
  • English
  • Deutsch
Log In
New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
Publications
Researcher
Organizations
Other
  • Journals
  • Series
  • Events
  • Projects
  • Working Groups

Browsing by Author "Oppermann, Rainer"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Results Per Page
  • Sort Options
  • Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Action needed for the EU Common Agricultural Policy to address sustainability challenges
    (2020-03-08)
    Pe’er, Guy
    ;
    Bonn, Aletta
    ;
    Bruelheide, Helge
    ;
    Dieker, Petra
    ;
    Eisenhauer, Nico  
    ;
    Feindt, Peter H.
    ;
    Hagedorn, Gregor
    ;
    Hansjürgens, Bernd
    ;
    Herzon, Irina
    ;
    Lomba, Ângela
    ;
    Marquard, Elisabeth
    ;
    Moreira, Francisco
    ;
    Nitsch, Heike
    ;
    Oppermann, Rainer
    ;
    Perino, Andrea
    ;
    Röder, Norbert
    ;
    Schleyer, Christian
    ;
    Schindler, Stefan
    ;
    Wolf, Christine
    ;
    Zinngrebe, Yves  
    ;
    Lakner, Sebastian  
    ;
    Bonn, Aletta; 1German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle‐Jena‐Leipzig Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Bruelheide, Helge; 1German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle‐Jena‐Leipzig Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Dieker, Petra; 6Thünen Institute of Biodiversity Braunschweig Germany
    ;
    Eisenhauer, Nico; 1German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle‐Jena‐Leipzig Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Feindt, Peter H.; 7Thaer Institute for Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Agricultural and Food Policy Group Humboldt‐Universität zu Berlin Berlin Germany
    ;
    Hagedorn, Gregor; 8Scientists for Future Berlin Germany
    ;
    Hansjürgens, Bernd; 2Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research ‐ UFZ Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Herzon, Irina; 9Department of Agricultural Sciences and Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science University of HelsinkiHELSUS Helsinki Finland
    ;
    Lomba, Ângela; 10CIBIO‐InBIO University of Porto Vairao Portugal
    ;
    Marquard, Elisabeth; 2Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research ‐ UFZ Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Moreira, Francisco; 10CIBIO‐InBIO University of Porto Vairao Portugal
    ;
    Nitsch, Heike; 12Institute for Rural Development Research Frankfurt‐am‐Main Germany
    ;
    Oppermann, Rainer; 13Institute for Agroecology and Biodiversity (IFAB) Mannheim Germany
    ;
    Perino, Andrea; 1German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle‐Jena‐Leipzig Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Röder, Norbert; 14Thünen Institute for Rural Studies Braunschweig Germany
    ;
    Schleyer, Christian; 15Institute of Geography University of Innsbruck Innsbruck Austria
    ;
    Schindler, Stefan; 16Division of Conservation Biology, Vegetation and Landscape Ecology University of Vienna Vienna Austria
    ;
    Wolf, Christine; 2Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research ‐ UFZ Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Zinngrebe, Yves; 2Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research ‐ UFZ Leipzig Germany
    ;
    Lakner, Sebastian; 14Thünen Institute for Rural Studies Braunschweig Germany
    ;
    Gaston, Kevin
    Abstract Making agriculture sustainable is a global challenge. In the European Union (EU), the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is failing with respect to biodiversity, climate, soil, land degradation as well as socio‐economic challenges. The European Commission's proposal for a CAP post‐2020 provides a scope for enhanced sustainability. However, it also allows Member States to choose low‐ambition implementation pathways. It therefore remains essential to address citizens' demands for sustainable agriculture and rectify systemic weaknesses in the CAP, using the full breadth of available scientific evidence and knowledge. Concerned about current attempts to dilute the environmental ambition of the future CAP, and the lack of concrete proposals for improving the CAP in the draft of the European Green Deal, we call on the European Parliament, Council and Commission to adopt 10 urgent action points for delivering sustainable food production, biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation. Knowledge is available to help moving towards evidence‐based, sustainable European agriculture that can benefit people, nature and their joint futures. The statements made in this article have the broad support of the scientific community, as expressed by above 3,600 signatories to the preprint version of this manuscript. The list can be found here (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3685632). A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.
  • Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Adding Some Green to the Greening: Improving the EU's Ecological Focus Areas for Biodiversity and Farmers
    (2017)
    Pe’er, Guy
    ;
    Zinngrebe, Yves  
    ;
    Hauck, Jennifer
    ;
    Schindler, Stefan
    ;
    Dittrich, Andreas
    ;
    Zingg, Silvia
    ;
    Tscharntke, Teja  
    ;
    Oppermann, Rainer
    ;
    Sutcliffe, Laura M.E.
    ;
    Sirami, Clélia
    ;
    Schmidt, Jenny
    ;
    Hoyer, Christian
    ;
    Schleyer, Christian
    ;
    Lakner, Sebastian  
    Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) are one of the three new greening measures of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). We used an interdisciplinary and European-scale approach to evaluate ecological effectiveness and farmers’ perception of the different EFA options. We assessed potential benefits of EFA options for biodiversity using a survey among 88 ecologists from 17 European countries. We further analyzed data on EFA uptake at the EU level and in eight EU Member States, and reviewed socio-economic factors influencing farmers’ decisions. We then identified possible ways to improve EFAs. Ecologists scored field margins, buffer strips, fallow land, and landscape features as most beneficial whereas farmers mostly implemented “catch crops and green cover,” nitrogen-fixing crops, and fallow land. Based on the expert inputs and a review of the factors influencing farmers’ decisions, we suggest that EFA implementation could be improved by (a) prioritizing EFA options that promote biodiversity (e.g., reducing the weight or even excluding ineffective options); (b) reducing administrative constraints; (c) setting stricter management requirements (e.g., limiting agrochemical use); and (d) offering further incentives for expanding options like landscape features and buffer strips. We finally propose further improvements at the next CAP reform, to improve ecological effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

About

About Us
FAQ
ORCID
End User Agreement
Privacy policy
Cookie consent
Imprint

Contact

Team GRO.publications
support-gro.publications@uni-goettingen.de
Matrix Chat: #support_gro_publications
Feedback

Göttingen Research Online

Göttingen Research Online bundles various services for Göttingen researchers:

GRO.data (research data repository)
GRO.plan (data management planning)
GRO.publications (publication data repository)
Logo Uni Göttingen
Logo Campus Göttingen
Logo SUB Göttingen
Logo eResearch Alliance

Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.