Display options
Share it on

PLoS One. 2018 Nov 19;13(11):e0207454. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207454. eCollection 2018.

Crop diversity and stability of revenue on farms in Central Europe: An analysis of big data from a comprehensive agricultural census in Bavaria.

PloS one

Robert Weigel, Thomas Koellner, Patrick Poppenborg, Christina Bogner

Affiliations

  1. Professorship of Ecological Services, BayCEER, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.
  2. Ecological Modelling, BayCEER, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.
  3. Experimental Plant Ecology, Institute of Botany and Landscape Ecology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

PMID: 30452486 PMCID: PMC6242357 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207454

Abstract

Diversity of agricultural landscapes is important to maintain the provision of ecosystem services. In face of decreasing support measures for agricultural markets in the European Union, diversified crop portfolios could also offer a possibility to stabilize revenue at farm level (portfolio effect). We hypothesize that (i) diversity of crop portfolios changes along spatial gradients in the study area (Bavaria, Germany), (ii) the composition of portfolios depends on farm parameters, and (iii) more diverse portfolios on arable land provide higher revenue stability. We analysed agricultural census data comprising all farms (N = 105 314) in the study area and identified 26 typical crop portfolios. We show that portfolio composition is related to farm characteristics (whole farm revenue, farm type, farm size) and location. Currently, diversification of crop portfolios fails to promote stability of portfolio revenue in the study area, where policy still indirectly influences market prices of energy crops. We conclude that the portfolio effect as a natural insurance was less important in recent years due to high market prices for specific crops. This low need for natural insurances probably favoured simplified portfolios leading to decreased agricultural diversity.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

  1. Ecol Appl. 2014 Apr;24(3):560-70 - PubMed
  2. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jul 31;109(31):12302-8 - PubMed
  3. Vet J. 2013 Oct;198(1):19-27 - PubMed
  4. BMC Bioinformatics. 2007 Jan 25;8:25 - PubMed
  5. Trends Ecol Evol. 2013 Apr;28(4):230-8 - PubMed
  6. Environ Manage. 1997 Sep;21(5):747-58 - PubMed
  7. Nature. 2012 May 10;485(7397):229-32 - PubMed
  8. Science. 2010 Feb 12;327(5967):812-8 - PubMed
  9. Science. 2003 May 2;300(5620):758-62 - PubMed
  10. PeerJ. 2013 Oct 24;1:e188 - PubMed
  11. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47149 - PubMed
  12. Science. 2014 Jun 6;344(6188):1090-2 - PubMed
  13. Psychol Methods. 2009 Dec;14(4):323-48 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types