Monitoring pesticide use is essential for assessing farming practices and the risks associated with the use of pesticides. Currently, there are neither consolidated, public data available on glyphosate use in Europe, nor a standardized categorization of its major uses. In this study, data on glyphosate sales and use in Europe were collected from multiple sources and compiled into a dataset of the agricultural use of glyphosate from 2013 to 2017. The survey shows that glyphosate represented 33% of the herbicide volume sold in Europe in 2017. One third of the acreage of annual cropping systems and half of the acreage of perennial tree crops received glyphosate annually. Glyphosate is widely used for at least eight agronomic purposes, including weed control, crop desiccation, terminating cover crops, terminating temporary grassland and renewing permanent grassland. Glyphosate use can be classified into occasional uses—i.e., exceptional applications, triggered by meteorological conditions or specific farm constraints—and recurrent uses, which are widespread practices that are embedded in farming systems and for which other agronomic solutions may exist but are not frequently used. This article proposes a framework for the precise monitoring of glyphosate use, based on the identification of the cropping systems in which glyphosate is used, the agronomic purposes for which it is employed, the dose used and the rationale behind the different uses.

Agri-environmental schemes (AES) carry significant environmental expectations. However, their environmental performance has often been questioned. Existing research has tackled the issue from ecological and economic perspectives. This study aims to provide a complementary governance perspective. It first develops a theoretical framework to analyze AES governance through a multilevel lens, identifying three distinct levels based on different actors’ roles: macro (setting policy boundaries), meso (implementation of the policy framework), and micro (farmer actions). Second, this study develops an analytical framework to investigate barriers hindering AES environmental performance and their linkage to AES governance. The combined frameworks have been tested in a regional case study in the Hauts-de-France region. A list of 40 barriers is identified, spanning organizational, power dynamics, and financial issues. Barriers are not confined to farm or policy scale, distributing unevenly across governance levels, with different agencies across roles and actors in unlocking the AES performance.

Crop diversification is recognised as a central strategy towards improved productivity, delivery of ecosystem services and higher resilience of cropping systems. Crop diversification thus can help reaching the EU environmental sustainability targets. Although multiple benefits of crop diversification have been proven, the development of diversified cropping systems is still limited. In this context, a detailed analysis of barriers to crop diversification was undertaken based on the analysis of DiverIMPACTS' 25 case studies, participatory workshops and a literature review. In total, 46 barriers to crop diversification were identified. Barriers occur at different levels: at the farm level; from harvest to retail; at the market level; and in the coordination between value chain actors (Morel et al., 2020). Following-up on this exhaustive identification of barriers, DiverIMPACTS WP5's team gathered their expertise for identifying direct solutions addressing the barriers. The hereby report provides the solutions identified for the barriers to diversification at each level of the value chain and further discuss the conditions for enabling shifts towards more sustainable food systems. Chapter 1 highlights the strategic axis and concrete solutions identified for addressing each barrier2. Chapter 2 offers an identification of the actors to be involved in the implementation of each solution. Finally, recommendations are provided regarding the implementation of solutions in an effective way.

Crop diversification is recognised as a central strategy towards improved productivity, delivery of ecosystem services and higher resilience of cropping systems. Crop diversification thus can help reaching the EU environmental sustainability targets. Although multiple benefits of crop diversification have been proven, the development of diversified cropping systems is still limited. In this context, a detailed analysis of barriers to crop diversification was undertaken based on the analysis of DiverIMPACTS' 25 case studies, participatory workshops and a literature review. In total, 46 barriers to crop diversification were identified. Barriers occur at different levels: at the farm level; from harvest to retail; at the market level; and in the coordination between value chain actors (Morel et al., 2020). Following-up on this exhaustive identification of barriers, DiverIMPACTS WP5's team gathered their expertise for identifying direct solutions addressing the barriers. The hereby report provides the solutions identified for the barriers to diversification at each level of the value chain and further discuss the conditions for enabling shifts towards more sustainable food systems. Chapter 1 highlights the strategic axis and concrete solutions identified for addressing each barrier2. Chapter 2 offers an identification of the actors to be involved in the implementation of each solution. Finally, recommendations are provided regarding the implementation of solutions in an effective way.