F. Teillard, G. Allaire, E. Cahuzac, F. Léger, E. Maigné and M. Tichit

The spatial aggregation of agricultural intensity

What opportunities for policy targeting?

WCCA – Brisbane – September, 29th, 2011

F O O D

A G R I C U L T U R E

E N V I R O N M E N T

1

2Introduction

How to improve the efficiency of conservation policies?

One option : better spatial targeting (Feehan 2005, Uthes 2010)

05

00

10

00

15

00

20

00

Ag

ri-e

nv

iro

nm

en

t b

ud

ge

t (

10

6 €

)

1990 1995 2000 2005

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Year

Fre

nc

h F

arm

lan

d B

ird

In

de

x

.

3Introduction – Objectives

Map agricultural intensity on large scale, at resolution adequate

for policy targeting

• We develop an intensity indicator

computable on large scale

• We estimate it at infra regional

resolution

• We map agricultural intensity and

test for its aggregation

.

.

4Methods – The intensity indicator

The Input Cost / ha intensity indicator (€ / ha)

• Relevant for the five main production types in France (84% of total UAA)

• Computed with FADN variables (Farm Accountancy Data Network)

• Estimated at higher resolution using other agricultural datasets

5Methods – Spatial scale and resolution

National scale, Small Agric. Region (“SAR”) resolution

0 20 40 60 80 100

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

Estimation resolution

Es

tim

ati

on

ac

cu

rac

y

Region

Department SAR

County

Municipality

100km

• Estimation

accuracy/resolution

trade-off

• The local Moran index of

spatial auto-correlation

High LM Low LM

6Results – Agricultural intensity indicator

The IC / ha indicator displays a broad intensity gradient

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

0.0

00

00

.00

10

0.0

02

0

Intensity - IC / ha (€ / ha)

Fre

qu

en

cy

7Results – Agricultural intensity indicator

Production types and cost structure along the intensity gradient:

Mainly

bovine livestock

All production

types

Mainly

indus. crops bovine dairy

< 300 €/ha > 500 €/ha

Fertilizers

Feed

Pesticides

Seed

Other

8Results – Agricultural intensity distribution

The distribution of agricultural intensity:

• Sharp regional contrasts

• Infra-regional heterogeneity

100km ≠

Random

Regional

averages

Intensity -IC / ha (€ / ha)

200

300

400

500

600

.

.

9Results – Agricultural intensity aggregation

Segregation of agricultural intensity: clusters of significant

aggregation within the two intensity extremes

100km

0 200 400 600 800 1000-0

.00

50

.00

50

.01

50

.02

5

Intensity - IC / ha (€ / ha)

Ag

gre

ga

tio

n (

loc

al M

ora

n)

Intensity -IC / ha (€ / ha)

300

500

Significant NSaggregation aggregation

10Discussion

We show strong spatial segregation of agricultural intensity

.

+ Indicator and method usable in other countries

- Other intensity components should be combined with the IC/ha

11Discussion

The theory (Primdahl 2003, Kleijn 2003) :

“Improvement” measuresTarget most sensitive area

Reverse biodiversity decline?

Our results give opportunity for going from theory to practice

.

“Protection” measuresTarget high quality areas

Current focus

12

Thank you

Funding 2009-2012: FarmBird Project

“Coviability models of FARMing and BIRD biodiversity”

email: teillard@agroparistech.fr

Submitted paper: The spatial aggregation of agricultural intensity: what implications

for conservation policies?