{"id":69,"date":"2026-07-14T22:42:35","date_gmt":"2026-07-14T22:42:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/?p=69"},"modified":"2026-07-14T22:49:20","modified_gmt":"2026-07-14T22:49:20","slug":"the-farmer-as-a-steward-of-the-environment-ecological-functions-territorial-responsibilities-and-agricultural-policy-instruments","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/?p=69","title":{"rendered":"The Farmer as a Steward of the Environment: Ecological Functions, Territorial Responsibilities, and Agricultural Policy Instruments"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Agriculture has a relationship of mutual dependence with the environment. On the one hand, food production requires fertile soils, available water, biodiversity, pollination, and climatic stability; on the other hand, agricultural practices profoundly alter these resources, contributing either to their conservation or to their degradation. The concept of the farmer as a steward of the environment is situated within this context and should be understood not as a symbolic definition, but as a concrete function involving the responsible management of the land.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This paper, developed through a narrative review of the scientific literature, analyses the farmer\u2019s role in protecting soil, water, biodiversity, landscapes, and ecosystem services. It also examines the economic, cultural, and institutional factors that may encourage or hinder the adoption of sustainable practices. The analysis shows that environmental stewardship does not automatically arise from the practice of farming but requires specific knowledge, operational capacity, economic sustainability, territorial cooperation, and appropriate monitoring systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The article therefore proposes a conception of the farmer-steward as an actor embedded within a system of shared responsibilities, in which public policies, agri-food supply chains, scientific research, and local communities contribute jointly to the production of collective environmental goods. The protection of the agricultural environment cannot, in fact, be attributed exclusively to the individual willingness of the farmer, but must be supported through coherent incentives, technical assistance, and the economic recognition of the ecosystem services generated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keywords:<\/strong> sustainable agriculture; environmental stewardship; ecosystem services; biodiversity; soil; rural landscape; Common Agricultural Policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. Introduction<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Agriculture represents one of the oldest and most profound forms of transformation of the natural environment. Through cultivation, livestock farming, irrigation, and land management, human societies have altered landscapes, selected plant and animal species, and developed production systems essential to their survival. However, this transformation has not produced uniform effects. In some contexts, agricultural activity has contributed to the creation of complex landscapes, the conservation of local varieties, and the maintenance of semi-natural habitats; in others, it has caused erosion, biodiversity loss, water pollution, and declining soil fertility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The growing attention paid to climate change, the degradation of natural resources, and food security has once again placed the relationship between agricultural production and environmental protection at the centre of public debate. It is no longer sufficient to assess the efficiency of a farm exclusively on the basis of the quantity of output obtained. It is also necessary to consider how such production affects soil, water, the atmosphere, biodiversity, and territorial stability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Within this perspective, the figure of the \u201cfarmer-steward\u201d has gradually gained prominence. The expression conveys the idea that those who cultivate the land are not merely producers of goods intended for the market, but also managers of natural resources and individuals responsible for the ecological continuity of rural areas. Stewardship, however, does not coincide with a generic closeness to nature or with an idealised representation of rural life. It entails observable behaviours, technical expertise, the ability to prevent degradation, and a willingness to integrate production objectives with environmental goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The main question addressed in this article may be formulated as follows: under what conditions can a farmer be regarded as an effective steward of the environment?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The argument advanced here is that this role does not automatically derive from the ownership or management of land. Farmers become stewards when they organise their productive activities in such a way as to preserve over time the ecological resources on which the farm depends, and when they have access to the economic, cognitive, and institutional conditions required to do so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. Method and Objectives of the Analysis<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This contribution takes the form of a critical narrative review. Scientific studies concerning agricultural biodiversity, soil conservation, ecosystem services, agricultural diversification, farmers\u2019 behaviour, and agri-environmental policy instruments were considered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The aim is not to identify a single universally valid practice, since the effectiveness of environmental measures varies according to climate, soil, farming system, and landscape structure. Instead, the analysis seeks to relate three dimensions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • decisions adopted within the farm;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • environmental effects produced at farm and territorial level;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • economic and institutional conditions that make the continuation of sustainable practices possible.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    On this basis, an interpretation of agricultural stewardship is proposed, founded on five elements: ecological competence, operational capacity, economic sustainability, territorial cooperation, and the verifiability of results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    3. Agriculture Between Economic Production and the Production of Collective Goods<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Agricultural activity generates goods intended for the market, such as food, fibre, and raw materials, but it also produces effects that concern society as a whole. The conservation of a rural landscape, the protection of an aquifer, the reduction of erosion, or the maintenance of habitats for pollinators constitute benefits that extend beyond the boundaries of the farm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    These benefits may be interpreted as ecosystem services, namely the contributions that ecosystems make to human well-being. In agriculture, they include, among others, soil fertility, pollination, water regulation, the biological control of harmful organisms, carbon storage, and the cultural value of the landscape.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The main problem is that many of these services do not have a directly recognisable market price. A farmer who maintains a hedgerow, reduces erosion, or conserves a local variety bears costs and uses resources, while the resulting benefits are distributed across a wider group of people. Conversely, certain practices capable of generating an immediate economic advantage may produce environmental consequences whose costs are borne by society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    A possible divergence therefore arises between private convenience and the public interest. This observation makes it necessary to avoid a moralistic interpretation of environmental stewardship. It is not sufficient to ask farmers to protect nature by appealing exclusively to their individual sense of responsibility. The production of environmental goods requires labour, capital, knowledge, and risk-taking; it must therefore be recognised and supported through appropriate policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The European Union\u2019s Common Agricultural Policy has progressively integrated objectives relating to climate, biodiversity, the protection of natural resources, and landscapes. Agri-climate-environmental measures and eco-schemes are intended to compensate farmers who adopt practices capable of generating collective benefits. This approach implicitly recognises that land stewardship constitutes an additional productive function, even when its outcomes do not take the form of directly marketable goods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    4. Soil Stewardship<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Soil represents the physical and biological foundation of agricultural activity. Its quality depends on its structure, organic matter content, water-holding capacity, biological activity, and nutrient balance. Treating it as a merely inert support means overlooking the processes that make long-term production possible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Management oriented towards stewardship must therefore move beyond an assessment based exclusively on annual yield. An increase in production achieved through practices that progressively reduce fertility, intensify compaction, or encourage erosion cannot be considered fully efficient. Agricultural efficiency must also include the capacity to preserve soil functionality for future generations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Among the most widely studied practices are cover crops, diversified crop rotations, the retention of crop residues, reduced tillage, and the addition of organic matter. Cover crops can limit the periods during which soil remains exposed, contribute to reducing erosion, recover nutrients, and increase biological activity. Blanco-Canqui et al. (2015) show that such crops can provide various ecosystem services in temperate agricultural systems, although outcomes vary depending on the species used and the pedoclimatic conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Through a meta-analysis, Poeplau and Don (2015) also identified the potential of cover crops to increase soil organic carbon. However, this result should not be interpreted as automatic: the amount of carbon accumulated depends on the duration of the intervention, the biomass produced, the climate, and the management methods adopted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Similar considerations apply to reduced or no tillage. Pittelkow et al. (2015) showed that no-tillage, when applied in isolation, may in some conditions lead to a reduction in yields. Results are generally more favourable when it forms part of a broader system that includes rotations, soil cover, and residue management.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The literature therefore suggests that no single technique can, by itself, guarantee soil conservation. Stewardship requires a combination of practices adapted to the characteristics of the farm. The farmer-steward does not mechanically apply a protocol but observes the responses of the soil, evaluates the effects, and modifies decisions according to the results obtained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    5. Biodiversity, Pollination, and Biological Control<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Agricultural biodiversity includes cultivated species, local varieties, livestock breeds, spontaneous vegetation, soil organisms, pollinators, and natural predators. It does not refer solely to the number of species present but also includes the ecological relationships that contribute to the stability and adaptive capacity of the agroecosystem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Landscape simplification and the spread of poorly diversified production systems can reduce the habitats, food sources, and refuge areas available to numerous organisms. By contrast, diversified rotations, catch crops, hedgerows, flower strips, grasslands, tree rows, and semi-natural areas can support biodiversity and sustain functions that are useful to agricultural production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Through a meta-analysis, Tamburini et al. (2020) showed that agricultural diversification can simultaneously improve biodiversity, pollination, biological control, soil fertility, and water regulation, without necessarily causing a decline in yields. This finding is particularly important because it challenges the idea that environmental protection must always involve a productive sacrifice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Diversification must nevertheless be designed in relation to the specific context. It is not enough to increase the formal number of crops if they do not produce genuine ecological differentiation or if their management remains highly dependent on external inputs. Environmental value depends on temporal succession, soil cover, complementarity among species, and the presence of non-cultivated habitats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Pollinators provide a particularly significant example. Garibaldi et al. (2013) showed that wild pollinating insects can increase crop fruit set even in the presence of managed honeybees. This result demonstrates that managed pollinators cannot entirely replace the diversity of wild insects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The protection of pollinators requires a reduction in chemical pressures, the presence of flowering resources distributed throughout the year, and the conservation of nesting sites. Similarly, biological pest control can be supported by the presence of natural predators and parasitoids, but it depends on the overall structure of the landscape and not solely on the management of an individual plot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Biodiversity stewardship therefore has an inevitably territorial dimension. Many species cross farm boundaries and require interconnected habitats. Measures implemented by a single farmer can produce important benefits, but they are more effective when coordinated with those of neighbouring farms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    6. Water Management and Land Protection<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Water is an essential resource for agriculture and, at the same time, one of the main means through which the effects of farming practices spread into the environment. Fertilisers, plant protection products, and soil particles can be transported by runoff and reach rivers, lakes, and aquifers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Water stewardship requires integrated management. The efficiency of irrigation systems is an important element, but it is not sufficient. It must be accompanied by the selection of crops compatible with water availability, the correct scheduling of irrigation, the monitoring of soil moisture, and the protection of vulnerable areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Vegetated buffer strips, grass margins, hydraulic-agricultural land arrangements, and the maintenance of soil cover can reduce the transport of sediments and nutrients. Their effectiveness, however, depends on their location, size, and the characteristics of the catchment area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Through a farm-scale experiment, Bullock et al. (2021) showed that different agri-environmental interventions produce different benefits. Flower margins, grasslands, ponds, and fallow land do not provide the same services and are not always interchangeable. It follows that environmental management should be based on combinations of measures, avoiding the assumption that a single intervention can simultaneously solve all ecological problems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The farmer-steward also plays an important role in preventing hydrogeological instability. The maintenance of terraces, channels, ditches, and traditional land arrangements can contribute to slope stability and runoff regulation. Such activities, however, require a considerable amount of labour and do not always generate a direct economic return.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Land protection cannot therefore depend exclusively on individual initiative. Coordination is required among farms, consortia, local authorities, and river basin authorities, since water moves according to natural boundaries that do not coincide with those of individual properties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    7. Agriculture, Climate, and Landscape<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Agriculture is simultaneously exposed to the effects of climate change and involved in the production of greenhouse gas emissions. High temperatures, drought, extreme weather events, and changes in seasonal cycles affect yields and increase production uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The stewardship function therefore includes both mitigation measures and adaptation strategies. Increasing organic matter, agroforestry, permanent grassland management, efficient fertilisation, and the reduction of losses can contribute to lowering emissions or increasing carbon storage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    However, simplistic assessments must be avoided. Increased soil carbon may be reversible and does not always offset emissions produced during other stages of the agricultural cycle. Moreover, a practice capable of improving one indicator may have unfavourable effects on others. Evaluation must therefore consider the entire production system over a sufficiently long period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The rural landscape represents the visible expression of the interaction among agricultural activity, the environment, and local history. Hedgerows, tree lines, terraces, dry-stone walls, channels, pastures, and permanent crops do not perform merely an aesthetic function. They can contribute to water regulation, soil protection, habitat conservation, and the transmission of cultural identity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Landscape maintenance therefore constitutes a component of stewardship. In this case as well, however, the value produced is not necessarily recognised by the market. Farmers may bear considerable costs in preserving territorial features from which the whole community benefits. Public support is therefore justified when it remunerates actual activities and verifiable results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    8. Farmers\u2019 Motivations, Knowledge, and Capacity<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The adoption of sustainable practices does not depend exclusively on the existence of an economic incentive. Farmers\u2019 decisions are also influenced by experience, risk perception, social norms, trust in institutions, and professional identity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Mills et al. (2017) appropriately distinguish between the willingness and the capacity to adopt environmentally favourable behaviours. A farmer may recognise the importance of biodiversity but lack the financial resources, labour, or knowledge required. Conversely, a farmer may possess adequate resources without considering environmental protection a priority consistent with his or her understanding of agricultural activity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Dessart et al. (2019) emphasise that sustainable behaviours are shaped by cognitive, social, and dispositional factors. Technical communication is not very effective when it fails to address concerns relating to production risk, administrative complexity, or uncertainty regarding outcomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Technical assistance should therefore move beyond a purely transmissive model. The issue is not merely to communicate a set of practices regarded as correct, but to develop learning pathways through which farmers can observe, experiment, and adapt innovations to the characteristics of their farms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Peer-to-peer exchange is especially important. Farmers often attribute greater credibility to experiences carried out on farms operating under conditions similar to their own. Demonstration fields, cooperation groups, and territorial networks can reduce the perception of risk and encourage the diffusion of innovation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Klebl et al. (2024) also showed that the ways in which farmers attribute value to biodiversity influence their management strategies. Those who regard biodiversity mainly in terms of its productive usefulness may favour measures aimed at specific functions. Those who recognise a broader value in biodiversity may show greater willingness to adopt integrated approaches.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    These findings demonstrate that there is no single category of farmer. Farms differ in size, production structure, access to credit, labour availability, farmer education, age, and relationship with the market. Environmental policies must therefore be sufficiently flexible to respond to different situations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    9. The Economic Sustainability of Stewardship<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Environmental protection must be compatible with the economic continuity of the farm. A practice that generates constant losses or exposes the business to unsustainable risks is unlikely to be maintained in the long term, even when the farmer recognises its ecological value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Stewardship may be remunerated in different ways. Public payments can compensate for additional costs and income foregone; certifications and labels can make it possible to obtain a higher price; supply-chain contracts can provide greater stability; and reduced input use can improve economic margins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Each instrument, however, has limitations. Public incentives may encourage temporary behaviours that are abandoned once the support period ends. Certification may increase administrative burdens and does not always ensure a fair distribution of value. Reducing inputs may require a transition period during which uncertainty and the need for technical assistance increase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    An effective policy should provide long-term stability, proportionate procedures, qualified advice, and payments consistent with local conditions. It should also avoid placing entirely on the farmer the risks arising from external factors such as extreme climatic events or market fluctuations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Stewardship should not be considered an additional and unpaid activity separate from production. It constitutes a form of labour that generates public goods. Asking farmers to produce such goods without adequate remuneration means transferring the cost of objectives belonging to society as a whole onto them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    10. The Farmer-Steward in the Italian Legal System<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    In Italy, Law No. 194 of 1 December 2015 recognised the figure of farmers and livestock keepers as custodians within the framework of the protection of agricultural and food biodiversity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The legislation assigns particular importance to the in situ and on-farm conservation of local genetic resources at risk of extinction or genetic erosion. Farmer-stewards contribute to maintaining plant varieties and animal breeds closely linked to local areas, production practices, and food traditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This function cannot be fully replaced by conservation in gene banks. When a variety continues to be cultivated in its original environment, it remains part of a dynamic adaptation process and preserves its connection with the practical knowledge of local communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Italian legal recognition focuses mainly on agrobiodiversity. The broader concept of the farmer as a steward of the environment also includes the protection of soil, water, habitats, landscapes, and the climate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    It is therefore appropriate to distinguish between the role formally recognised by law and the general concept of environmental stewardship. A farmer may conserve a local variety without necessarily adopting sustainable management practices for all other resources. Likewise, a farm may perform important environmental functions without formally falling within the category established by law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    11. Critical Aspects of the Farmer-Steward Concept<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The concept of environmental stewardship presents several critical aspects that must be considered in order to avoid rhetorical interpretations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The first concerns the risk of idealising agriculture. Not all traditional practices are necessarily sustainable, and not all modern technologies produce negative effects. Evaluation must be based on actual impacts rather than on the cultural image associated with a particular technique.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The second critical issue concerns the excessive transfer of responsibility onto the individual farmer. Farm decisions are influenced by prices, contracts, the distribution of value along the supply chain, access to credit, and consumer demand. It is unrealistic to demand profound environmental transformation without intervening in the economic conditions that shape production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The third concerns the risk of greenwashing. Describing a farm or product as a \u201csteward of the environment\u201d without precise indicators can turn the concept into a purely promotional device. Stewardship must be connected to observable and verifiable results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The fourth critical issue concerns the fragmentation of interventions. A flower strip, hedgerow, or cover crop can produce benefits, but it does not automatically compensate for all the pressures generated by the farming system. The full set of practices and their cumulative effects must be evaluated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Finally, agricultural management inevitably involves trade-offs. Maximising production, protecting biodiversity, reducing emissions, and ensuring stable income are not always perfectly compatible. Stewardship does not eliminate such conflicts but requires them to be recognised and managed transparently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    12. A Model Based on Five Conditions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The analysis of the literature indicates that environmental stewardship can be interpreted through five fundamental conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    12.1 Ecological Competence<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    Farmers must understand the processes that regulate their agroecosystems. This includes soil structure, the water cycle, relationships between crops and organisms, the presence of habitats, and the effects of the practices adopted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Ecological competence arises from the interaction between scientific knowledge and local experience. Knowledge accumulated through long-term observation can provide valuable information, but it must be integrated with technical tools and updated expertise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    12.2 Operational Capacity<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    The willingness to protect the environment must be accompanied by the practical ability to act. Financial resources, labour, appropriate machinery, technical assistance, and access to information are all required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Without operational capacity, stewardship risks remaining an ideal without practical application.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    12.3 Economic Sustainability<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    Environmental practices must be compatible with farm income. The costs associated with the production of public goods cannot be borne exclusively by farmers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Economic sustainability can be supported through incentives, market premiums, supply-chain contracts, cost reductions, and payments for ecosystem services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    12.4 Territorial Cooperation<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    Many environmental processes extend beyond farm boundaries. Water, wildlife, pollinators, and ecological flows cross different properties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Stewardship therefore becomes more effective when farms cooperate with one another and with local authorities, consortia, associations, and scientific institutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    12.5 Verifiability of Results<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    Stewardship must be demonstrable through indicators consistent with the objectives pursued. These may include soil cover, organic matter, water quality, the presence of habitats, crop diversity, and reduced input use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Monitoring should not perform an exclusively punitive function. It should also help to understand the effects of practices, correct mistakes, and progressively improve management.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Effective stewardship can therefore be represented as the result of the interaction among:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    ecological knowledge, capacity for action, economic stability, territorial cooperation, and verification of results.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The absence of any one of these conditions can undermine the entire process. Strong motivation without economic support may lead to the abandonment of practices; an incentive without competence may finance ineffective measures; an isolated farm-level intervention may produce limited outcomes; and an excessively bureaucratic monitoring system may discourage participation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    13. Discussion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The farmer-steward should not be regarded as an alternative figure to the farmer-producer. Production and environmental protection are not necessarily separate activities. In the long term, the conservation of natural resources is a prerequisite for the continuity of production itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This approach nevertheless changes the way in which agricultural professionalism is evaluated. The quantity and commercial quality of products are accompanied by the capacity to maintain soil fertility, manage water, conserve habitats, and reduce climate vulnerability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The literature examined also shows that the most effective strategies are generally those based on a combination of practices. No single measure can simultaneously guarantee fertility, biodiversity, water quality, and production stability. Solutions must be designed according to local characteristics and evaluated over sufficiently long periods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Another central issue concerns the distribution of responsibilities. Farmers manage the land directly, but their decisions are influenced by supply chains, markets, credit institutions, public policies, and consumer behaviour. The transition towards sustainable agricultural systems cannot therefore depend solely on the individual willingness of the farm operator.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Stewardship must be interpreted as a pact between agriculture and society. Farmers undertake concrete commitments in the management of natural resources; institutions and other economic actors recognise the value of environmental work, share its costs, and create favourable conditions for its continuity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    14. Conclusions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Farmers can be regarded as stewards of the environment when their activities are not limited to the production of food goods but also contribute to the conservation of natural resources and the stability of the territory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Stewardship includes soil protection, responsible water management, biodiversity conservation, landscape maintenance, and adaptation to climate change. It is not, however, a quality automatically associated with the farming profession. It must be developed through knowledge, adequate resources, economic incentives, cooperation, and monitoring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Assigning environmental responsibility to farmers without recognising the costs and constraints of productive activity would be both unfair and ineffective. The protection of the agricultural environment must be supported by stable policies, more balanced supply chains, and instruments capable of remunerating ecosystem services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The farmer-steward is therefore neither the simple defender of an unchanging nature nor the romantic custodian of a rural past. The farmer is a professional who governs complex ecological processes and makes decisions that affect the future of soil, water, biodiversity, and communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The value of stewardship lies in the capacity to integrate production and conservation. Farming responsibly means not only obtaining a harvest but also preserving the conditions that will allow the land to continue producing and the territory to remain habitable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    References<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Blanco-Canqui, H., Shaver, T. M., Lindquist, J. L., Shapiro, C. A., Elmore, R. W., Francis, C. A., & Hergert, G. W. (2015). Cover crops and ecosystem services: Insights from studies in temperate soils. Agronomy Journal, 107<\/em>(6), 2449\u20132474. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2134\/agronj15.0086<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Bullock, J. M., McCracken, M. E., Bowes, M. J., Chapman, R. E., Graves, A. R., Hinsley, S. A., et al. (2021). Does agri-environmental management enhance biodiversity and multiple ecosystem services? A farm-scale experiment. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 320<\/em>, 107582. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.agee.2021.107582<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Cozim-Melges, F., Ripoll-Bosch, R., Veen, G. F., Oggiano, P., Bianchi, F. J. J. A., van der Putten, W. H., & van Zanten, H. H. E. (2024). Farming practices to enhance biodiversity across biomes: A systematic review. npj Biodiversity, 3<\/em>, Article 1. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s44185-023-00034-2<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Dessart, F. J., Barreiro-Hurl\u00e9, J., & van Bavel, R. (2019). Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: A policy-oriented review. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46<\/em>(3), 417\u2013471. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/erae\/jbz019<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Garibaldi, L. A., et al. (2013). Wild pollinators enhance fruit set of crops regardless of honey bee abundance. Science, 339<\/em>(6127), 1608\u20131611. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1126\/science.1230200<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Klebl, F., Parisi, A., H\u00e4fner, K., Adler, A., Barreiro, S., Bodea, F. V., et al. (2024). How values and perceptions shape farmers\u2019 biodiversity management: Insights from ten European countries. Biological Conservation, 291<\/em>, 110496. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.biocon.2024.110496<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Maas, B., Fabian, Y., Kross, S. M., & Richter, A. (2021). Divergent farmer and scientist perceptions of agricultural biodiversity, ecosystem services and decision-making. Biological Conservation, 256<\/em>, 109065. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.biocon.2021.109065<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Mills, J., Gaskell, P., Ingram, J., Dwyer, J., Reed, M., & Short, C. (2017). Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour. Agriculture and Human Values, 34<\/em>(2), 283\u2013299. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10460-016-9705-4<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Pittelkow, C. M., et al. (2015). Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture. Nature, 517<\/em>, 365\u2013368. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/nature13809<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Poeplau, C., & Don, A. (2015). Carbon sequestration in agricultural soils via cultivation of cover crops: A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 200<\/em>, 33\u201341. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.agee.2014.10.024<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Tamburini, G., Bommarco, R., Wanger, T. C., Kremen, C., van der Heijden, M. G. A., Liebman, M., & Hallin, S. (2020). Agricultural diversification promotes multiple ecosystem services without compromising yield. Science Advances, 6<\/em>(45), eaba1715. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1126\/sciadv.aba1715<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Italian Republic. (2015). Law No. 194 of 1 December 2015: Provisions for the protection and enhancement of biodiversity of agricultural and food interest<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    European Union. (2021). Regulation (EU) 2021\/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 laying down rules on support for strategic plans under the Common Agricultural Policy<\/em>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Abstract Agriculture has a relationship of mutual dependence with the environment. On the one hand, food production requires fertile soils,<\/p>\n

    Continue readingThe Farmer as a Steward of the Environment: Ecological Functions, Territorial Responsibilities, and Agricultural Policy Instruments<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-69","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=69"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":72,"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69\/revisions\/72"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=69"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=69"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/griscioli.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=69"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}