Agroecological farming promotes yield and biodiversity but may require subsidy to be profitable

Woodcock, B.A. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0300-9951; Cook, S.; Hulmes, L.; Hulmes, S.; Torrance, M.; Redhead, J. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2233-3848; Swain, J.; Ostler, R.; Rainey, J.; Weites, M.G.; Heard, M.S.; Nowakowski, M.; Bullock, J.M. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0529-4020; Carvell, C. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6784-3593; Storkey, J.; Pywell, R.F. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6431-9959. 2025 Agroecological farming promotes yield and biodiversity but may require subsidy to be profitable. Journal of Applied Ecology. 12, pp. 10.1111/1365-2664.70079

Before downloading, please read NORA policies.

Preview

Text Journal of Applied Ecology - 2025 - Woodcock - Agroecological farming promotes yield and biodiversity but may require.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. Download (4MB) | Preview

Abstract/Summary

•1. Intensive arable agriculture uses agrochemicals to replace ecosystem services (e.g. pest control and soil health) while simultaneously degrading others (e.g. pollination). Agroecological farming aims to reduce this reliance on agrochemicals. Whether these practices maintain yields at a scale relevant to farm business viability is unclear. •2. In a 4‐year replicated study across 17 English farms we assessed the ability of farmer co‐designed agroecological systems to support regulating services, beneficial invertebrates, crop yield and profitability. We test three management systems: (1) ‘business‐as‐usual (BAU)’ control; (2) ‘enhancing‐ES’ supporting beneficial invertebrates with wildflower field margins and protecting soils with cover crops; (3) ‘maximising ES’ with the further addition of soil organic matter and in‐field strips to bring beneficial invertebrates into the crop. •3. Soil carbon stocks were highest in the maximising‐ES system. Predation and pollination ecosystem services were higher in the enhancing‐ES and maximising‐ES systems, as were earthworms and other populations of beneficial predatory and pollinating invertebrates. Pest snail biomass was also lowest in the enhancing‐ES and maximising‐ES systems, although aphid numbers were higher. •4. The enhancing‐ES and maximising‐ES systems increase yields of cereals and oilseed rape. However, the loss of productive agricultural land and establishment costs exceeded the value of increased yields. Only enhancing‐ES breaks even with agri‐environmental subsidies. •5. Synthesis and applications . These results highlight that while evidence for the role of ecosystem services in supporting crop yield can be found, overcoming economic constraints within conventional farming systems is likely to be a key barrier to widespread uptake. Agri‐environmental subsidy payments can offset these costs, but only for moderate interventions. Transition to more sustainable farming systems needs to overcome these economic constraints with new policy interventions.

Item Type:	Publication - Article
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):	10.1111/1365-2664.70079
UKCEH and CEH Sections/Science Areas:	Biodiversity and Land Use (2025-) UKCEH Fellows
ISSN:	0021-8901
Additional Information:	Open Access paper - full text available via Official URL link.
Additional Keywords:	agroecological, arable, biodiversity, ecosystem services, farming, profit, sustainable intensification, yield
NORA Subject Terms:	Ecology and Environment Agriculture and Soil Science
Related URLs:	Dataset
Date made live:	08 Jul 2025 11:59 +0 (UTC)
URI:	https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/539806

Actions (login required)

View Item

Document Downloads

More statistics for this item...