SCENARIOS FOR MANAGING OF EUROPEAN VITICULTURAL LANDSCAPES

iEMSs 2020Session C1 Methods for integrated modelling of spatial-environmental planning issues

17 September

Yang Chen1, Louise L. Willemen2, Nina Schwarz1

1 Department of Urban and Regional Planning and Geo-Information Management, ITC, University of Twente, The Netherlands2 Departement of Natural Resources, ITC, University of Twente

Introduction - SECBIVIT project and cases Modelling winegrowers’ behaviour

• Conceptual model• Workflow

Generic vs locally adapted agent-based models• Why generic vs. locally adapted?• Relations between generic and locally adapted models

Computerised generic model Discussion and outlook: local vs generic: relations? spatial

extent?

OVERVIEW

2

http://www.secbivit.boku.ac.at/

SECBIVIT — SCENARIOS FOR PROVIDING MULTIPLE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND BIODIVERSITY IN VITICULTURAL LANDSCAPES

1. ABMs on winegrowers’ land use decisions2. Quantification of ecosystem services (ES) 3. Analyzing trade-offs and synergies between

biodiversity and ES 4. Decision-support tool for stakeholders

3

CASE STUDY REGIONS

4

MONTILLA-MORILES, SPAIN

Photo credit: S. Winter

Grapevine

Inter-rows

5

LEITHABERG, AUSTRIA

Photo credit: S. Winter

6

Groundcover management (inter-row vegetation, soil tillage)

Pesticide use• Herbicides• Insecticides• Pheromone

dispenser• Fungicides

o Synthetic o Sulphur + copper

COMMONALITIES ACROSS EUROPEAN VITICULTURAL LANDSCAPES

Yield Pest abundance Habitat for natural

predators Biodiversity Soil conservation Landscape

aesthetics

https://www.jeanleon.com/en/a-step-by-step-look-at-the-grapevine-growth-cycle/

7

CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF THE ABM

Winegrowers as agents who take land use decisions in coupled human-natural systems

8

Generic ABM

Locally adapted ABMsSpain France Germany Austria Romania

IMPLEMENTATION: GENERIC VS LOCALLY ADAPTED ABM

9

Stakeholder involvement

- Expert interviews- Focus group- Current policies

ABM (landscape)- ABM: Winegrowers’ behavior on

inter-row ground cover management &

pesticide use

Generic ABM & Locally adapted ABMs

Validation & Analyses

- Validating against independent statistics (e.g. NUTS 2/3 level)- Comparing model outcomes: generic ABM vs. locally adapted ones

WORKFLOW TO OPERATIONALIZE THE ABM

- CLIMEX 4.0- Statistical analyses

Policy drivers

Scenarios with estimates on biocontrol,

carbon sequestration,

and biodiversity

- Field experiment: soil / grapevine / pest / natural enemies /… sampling and analyses -> Biocontrol model

Climate drivers

Ecological processes

- Questionnaire design and implementation-> Survey results-> Decision rules

10

SURVEYKey concepts covered in this survey General information about the

winegrower General information about the vineyard

(physical and agri-business) Actual behavior on

Inter-row vegetation management Herbicide, Insecticide, and Fungicide use

(average and extreme situations) Pheromone dispenser use

Driving factors behind actual behavior—per behavior and in general Economic factors (cost, subsidy, risk, etc.) Social factors (tradition, respect, etc.) Environmental factors (commitment,

preservation, etc.) Adaptive capacity (resources, information,

etc.)

11

Why a generic model? (common ground, and inform policy) Cost effective Easy to be implemented and integrated for large-scale modelling To explore and inform policy Serve as blueprints for locally-adapted models, no re-inventing all the

time

Why locally adapted? Heterogeneity in climate, social-economic, policy environment Allows for considerations when implementing higher-level policies

A GENERIC MODEL VS LOCALLY ADAPTED ABMS

12

CONSIDERATIONS IN THE GENERIC VS LOCAL ABMS

Factors Generic ABM Locally-adapted ABMs

Spatial resolution 1 hectare same

Spatial extent Fixed extent Fixed extent across the cases?

Temporal resolution 1 year same

Temporal extent 20-30 years, 50 years max same

Landscape characteristics VirtualInitialized to match with

case region (Corine CLC2018, USGS DEM)

Winegrowers decision rules

Based on all survey results

Adjust to case-specific conditions

Ecological processes Average statistical relationships

Case-specific experimental results and

observations

Scenario drivers General trends Case-specific policies, climate conditions 13

Winegrower characteristics-Personal-Attitudes-Management

Vineyard properties-Slope-Water-Soil-Pest-Natural enemies-Groundcover-Yield

Landscape properties:Spatial extent, climate, soil, policy, market, etc.

ILLUSTRATION OF THE GENERIC ABM (NETLOGO)

14

Limitation we are facing: less survey data than planned (COVID19) two case studies likely will be dropped

Ongoing work: finalize concept, implement, validate ABM and run scenarios

Current issues in the concept: Potentially ignoring processes at landscape level given a

chosen spatial extent? Comments, suggestions, questions on the generic vs. locally

adapted ABMs?

DISCUSSION

15

References Anderson, K., Findlay, C., Fuentes, S., & Tyerman, S. (2008). Garmaute Climate Change Review: Viticulture, Wine and

Climate Change. University of Adelaide.

Bartkowski, B., & Bartke, S. (2018). Leverage points for governing agricultural soils: A review of empirical studies of European farmers’ decision-making. Sustainability, 10(9), 3179.

Dessart, F. J., Barreiro-Hurlé, J., & van Bavel, R. (2019). Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainablefarming practices: a policy-oriented review. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46(3), 417-471.

EIP-AGRI. (2019). Diseases and pests in viticulture. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/sites/agri-eip/files/eip-agri_fg_diseases_and_pests_in_viticulture_final_report_2019_en.pdf

Kallas, Z., Serra, T., & Gil, J. M. (2010). Farmers’ objectives as determinants of organic farming adoption: The case of Catalonian vineyard production. Agricultural Economics, 41(5), 409-423.

Neethling, E., Petitjean, T., Quénol, H., & Barbeau, G. (2017). Assessing local climate vulnerability and winegrowers’ adaptive processes in the context of climate change. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 22(5), 777-803.

Pertot, I., Caffi, T., Rossi, V., Mugnai, L., Hoffmann, C., Grando, M. S., . . . Anfora, G. (2017). A critical review of plant protection tools for reducing pesticide use on grapevine and new perspectives for the implementation of IPM in viticulture. Crop Protection, 97, 70-84. doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2016.11.025

Schlüter, M., Baeza, A., Dressler, G., Frank, K., Groeneveld, J., Jager, W., . . . Wijermans, N. (2017). A framework formapping and comparing behavioural theories in models of social-ecological systems. Ecological Economics, 131, 21-35. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.08.008

Winkler, K. J., Viers, J. H., & Nicholas, K. A. (2017). Assessing ecosystem services and multifunctionality for vineyardsystems. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 5, 15.

Winter, S., Bauer, T., Strauss, P., Kratschmer, S., Paredes, D., Popescu, D., . . . Batáry, P. (2018). Effects of vegetationmanagement intensity on biodiversity and ecosystem services in vineyards: A meta-analysis. Journal of AppliedEcology. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13124 16

THANK YOU!

9 institutions in 7 countries Funded by:

17

EXTRA INFORMATION

EXTRA MATERIALS

Eurostat, 2015

PEST AND THEIR NATURAL ENEMIES

Reineke and Thiery, 2016

CLIMATE, SOIL, TERRAIN

Case region Climate Soil Annual rainfall

Mean daily Maximum

summer temp

Number of rainy days in the

growing season (March-

September)

Slope (percent rise) of

vineyards: mean and (max)

Montilla-moriles,Spain

Semi-continential mediterranean cliamte (Csa)

blinding-white Albariza 627 36 24 7.4 (53.6)

Entre-deux-Mers,France Oceanic climate (Cfb) compact sands; silt;

clayey-limestone 914 27 69 4.3 (50.6)

Tarnave,Romania

Continental climate (Dfb)

brown soil (eumezobasic/eutricam

bisol); regosols; anthropic soil

586 28 57 12.8 (51.8)

Leithaberg,Austria

Continental climate (Cfb)

calcareous silt, sands, gravels, loam,

lacustrine clay, gritty alluvial deposits

614 27 65 3.8 (52.3)

Palatinate,Germany

Temperature oceanic climate (Cfb) sandstone, volvanic soil 675 24 94 5.2 (56.9)

Csa: hot-summer Mediterranean climateCfb: temperate oceanic climateDfb: warm-summer humid continental climate

Sources: climate-data.org; meteoblue.com; wine-searcher.com; terroir-france.com; austrianwine.com; USGS DEM (srtm-1-a-s); CORINE land cover 2018

OVERVIEW OF VINEYARDS PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

OVERVIEW OF VINEYARD MANAGEMENT PROPERTIES

OVERVIEW OF THE REPORTED BEHAVIOR ON INTER-ROW MANAGEMENT

OVERVIEW OF THE REPORTED BEHAVIOR ON PESTICIDE USE

ATTITUDES — LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE IN VITICULTURAL ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

80% training (87,3% accurate)20% testing(78,6% accurate)

80% training (risk estimate 2,02)20% testing(risk estimate 4,39)

Groundcover Bare soil in the inter-row is more common in Spain Seed mixtures are used in Austria, France, and Germany

Pesticides Herbicides are not used in Austria, France, and Germany Insecticides are not used in Germany (small sample all organic) Pheromone dispenser are much more common and more used

in Austria, France, and Germany than in Spain and Romania

DIFFERENCES IN REPORTED BEHAVIOR

CURRENT POLICIESCountry Groundcover

managementPesticide use

Austria Groundcover on slope, managed green cover instead of spontaneous

Subsidies if not using herbicides and insecticidesBuyers restrict useOrganic viticulture rules

France Local AOC forbids glyphosate, mandatory to treat leafhopper (Scaphoideus titanus); National movement to promote organic production

Germany Government requires winter green cover, some labels require year-round cover and even well-mixed variety

Buyers restrict number of substance residues

Romania EU organic viticulture rules

Spain Financial support for covered vineyards

EU organic viticulture rules