Cited by 83Sustainable Agricultural Systems AnalysisLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems

Contribution of agroecological farming systems to the delivery of ecosystem services

Open access
Boeraeve, Fanny, Dendoncker, Nicolas, Cornélis, Jean-Thomas, Degrune, Florine, Dufrêne, Marc·2020·Journal of Environmental Management

Abstract

Agroecology has been suggested as a promising concept for reconciling agricultural production and environmental sustainability by optimizing ecological processes that deliver ecosystem services (ES) to replace external inputs. While this statement is widely agreed upon, few assessments of real-life conditions exist that assess multiple ES simultaneously. This paper provides an assessment of seven ES based on 14 indicators in three agroecological farming systems (AFS) and thirteen of their adjacent conventional farming systems (CFS). Based on field-scale measurements spread over three years, our findings suggest that the studied AFS succeed in providing a wider array of regulating services than their neighboring CFS. Soil aggregate stability and soil respiration rates are in general more supported in AFS, which also show lower pest abundance. On the other hand, CFS show higher grain production and higher performance for two out of three fodder quality indices. While this 'productivity gap' may be due to the still-evolving state of the studied AFS, we nuance this through the lens of an emerging paradigm to assess farming system multi-performance. It is now argued that we need to shift from a volume-focused production system to a system that also values the ecological processes underpinning crop production and other benefits to society. Based on our findings, we recommend future work to iterate our initiative, including several indicators per service and embed these into a wider context of co-adaptive science-practice to further develop context-specific and user-useful research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109576

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The ES field measurements showed a similar productivity within agroecological and conventional parcels.

    “which showed a similar productivity within agroecological and conventional parcels and more regulating ES in agroecological parcels.”

    From How Are Landscapes under Agroecological Transition Perceived and Appreciated? A Belgian Case Study (2020) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Results (section 3.4; page unavailable) report significantly higher grain production in conventional parcels (P < .001), contrary to the claimed similar productivity. Section 4.1 likewise says conventional systems delivered more provisioning ecosystem services. The citing sentence’s separate point about more regulating services in agroecological parcels is supported. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Three out of nine regulating ES indicators are significantly higher in the AE parcels (erosion protection, soil respiration rate, and aphid control).

    “and three out of nine regulating ES indicators are significantly higher in the AE parcels (erosion protection, soil respiration rate, and aphid control) [45].”
  • The ES field measurements showed more regulating ES in agroecological parcels.

    “which showed a similar productivity within agroecological and conventional parcels and more regulating ES in agroecological parcels.”
  • One out of two food production indicators (straw yield) is quantified as similar (i.e., not significantly different) in the AE and CV parcels.

    “One out of two food production indicators (straw yield) is quantified as similar (i.e., not significantly di erent) in the AE and CV parcels”
  • Within the biophysical approach, different indicators or measurement methods for the same ecosystem service led to distinct ecosystem service outcomes.

    “Within the biophysical approach itself, di erent indicators or measurement methods for the same ES led to distinct ES outcomes ([45], Table 5).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Hatt, S., Artru, S., Brédart, D., Lassois, L., Francis, F., Haubruge, E., Garré, S., Stassart, P., Dufrêne, M., Monty, A., Boeraeve, F., 2016. Toward a sustainable development within agriculture: a review of what agroecology suggests. Biotechnologie, agro- nomie, société et environnement 20 (S1), 2015-2224.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boeraeve, F., Dendoncker, N., Cornélis, J.-T., Degrune, F., & Dufrêne, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Liège (BE)
  • University of Namur (BE)
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Boeraeve, Fanny
Venue
Journal of Environmental Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-04
Volume
260
Pages
109576
ISSN
0301-4797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2982497090
Cited by
83
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 6
FWCI
3.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Environmental Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository of the University of Namur (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Keywords
agroecological farming systems, ecosystem services, conventional farming systems, regulating services, soil aggregate stability, soil respiration, pest abundance, grain production, feed quality, environmental sustainability of agriculture, ecosystem service indicators
MeSH terms
Crop Production, Farms, Agriculture, Edible Grain, Conservation of Natural Resources, Ecosystem

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review