This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.

Dr. Alexander Wezel
ISARA, Research unit Agroecology and Environment, Lyon, France

Basic Info


Research Keywords & Expertise

0 Agroecology
0 Sustainable Agriculture
0 conservation biological control
0 Agroecosystem management
0 Biodiversity management

Fingerprints

Agroecology
Sustainable Agriculture
Biodiversity management

Honors and Awards

The user has no records in this section


Career Timeline

The user has no records in this section.


Short Biography

The user biography is not available.
Following
Followers
Co Authors
The list of users this user is following is empty.
Following: 0 users

Feed

Journal article
Published: 18 May 2021 in Sustainability
Reads 0
Downloads 0

An ongoing decrease in habitat and species diversity is occurring in many areas across Europe, including in grasslands in mountain areas, calling for adapted biodiversity management and measures. In this context, we carried out 79 interviews with grassland farmers in five alpine mountain regions in Germany, France, Austria, Italy, and Switzerland. We analyzed farmers’ perceptions about the functions and services of their grasslands, how they qualify “good” grasslands, which grassland management practices have changed over the last 10 years, and proposals to increase species diversity on the farm. They related them primarily to cultural ecosystem services, secondly to provisioning services, and thirdly to regulating and supporting services. Good pastures or meadows were mostly related to composition, quality of forage and productivity, structural criteria, and certain characteristics of soils and topography. The measures for increasing biodiversity that were most frequently proposed were upgrading of forest edges, planting hedges or fruit trees, less or late grassland cutting, reduction or omission of fertilization, and more general extensification of farm productions. Factors hindering the implementation of these measures were mainly increased workload, insufficient time, and a lack of financial means or support to cover additional costs for biodiversity management. These factors have to be taken specifically into account for future policies for enhanced biodiversity management of grasslands, also beyond mountainous areas. Overall, we found that farmers have good but varying knowledge about biodiversity management of their grasslands, but also different perspectives on how to improve it. Here, local initiatives that bring together farmers and flora or fauna specialists to exchange knowledge could be designed and used in participatory pilot schemes to enhance the implementation of improved biodiversity management.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Sibylle Stöckli; Erich Tasser; Heike Nitsch; Audrey Vincent. Good Pastures, Good Meadows: Mountain Farmers’ Assessment, Perceptions on Ecosystem Services, and Proposals for Biodiversity Management. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5609 .

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Sibylle Stöckli, Erich Tasser, Heike Nitsch, Audrey Vincent. Good Pastures, Good Meadows: Mountain Farmers’ Assessment, Perceptions on Ecosystem Services, and Proposals for Biodiversity Management. Sustainability. 2021; 13 (10):5609.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Sibylle Stöckli; Erich Tasser; Heike Nitsch; Audrey Vincent. 2021. "Good Pastures, Good Meadows: Mountain Farmers’ Assessment, Perceptions on Ecosystem Services, and Proposals for Biodiversity Management." Sustainability 13, no. 10: 5609.

Review
Published: 23 April 2021 in Global Food Security
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Agroecology increasingly has gained scientific and policy recognition as having potential to address environmental and social issues within food production, but concerns have been raised about its implications for food security and nutrition, particularly in low-income countries. This review paper examines recent evidence (1998–2019) for whether agroecological practices can improve human food security and nutrition. A total of 11,771 articles were screened by abstract and title, 275 articles included for full review, with 56 articles (55 cases) selected. A majority of studies (78%) found evidence of positive outcomes in the use of agroecological practices on food security and nutrition of households in low and middle-income countries. Agroecological practices included crop diversification, intercropping, agroforestry, integrating crop and livestock, and soil management measures. More complex agroecological systems, that included multiple components (e.g., crop diversification, mixed crop-livestock systems and farmer-to-farmer networks) were more likely to have positive food security and nutrition outcomes.

ACS Style

Rachel Bezner Kerr; Sidney Madsen; Moritz Stüber; Jeffrey Liebert; Stephanie Enloe; Noélie Borghino; Phoebe Parros; Daniel Munyao Mutyambai; Marie Prudhon; Alexander Wezel. Can agroecology improve food security and nutrition? A review. Global Food Security 2021, 29, 100540 .

AMA Style

Rachel Bezner Kerr, Sidney Madsen, Moritz Stüber, Jeffrey Liebert, Stephanie Enloe, Noélie Borghino, Phoebe Parros, Daniel Munyao Mutyambai, Marie Prudhon, Alexander Wezel. Can agroecology improve food security and nutrition? A review. Global Food Security. 2021; 29 ():100540.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rachel Bezner Kerr; Sidney Madsen; Moritz Stüber; Jeffrey Liebert; Stephanie Enloe; Noélie Borghino; Phoebe Parros; Daniel Munyao Mutyambai; Marie Prudhon; Alexander Wezel. 2021. "Can agroecology improve food security and nutrition? A review." Global Food Security 29, no. : 100540.

Review
Published: 27 October 2020 in Agronomy for Sustainable Development
Reads 0
Downloads 0

There is consensus that the global food system is not delivering good nutrition for all and is causing environmental degradation and loss of biodiversity, such that a profound transformation is needed to meet the challenges of persistent malnutrition and rural poverty, aggravated by the growing consequences of climate change. Agroecological approaches have gained prominence in scientific, agricultural and political discourse in recent years, suggesting pathways to transform agricultural and food systems that address these issues. Here we present an extensive literature review of concepts, definitions and principles of agroecology, and their historical evolution, considering the three manifestations of agroecology as a science, a set of practices and a social movement; and relate them to the recent dialogue establishing a set of ten iconic elements of agroecology that have emerged from a global multi-stakeholder consultation and synthesis process. Based on this, a consolidated list of principles is developed and discussed in the context of presenting transition pathways to more sustainable food systems. The major outcomes of this paper are as follows. (1) Definition of 13 consolidated agroecological principles: recycling; input reduction; soil health; animal health; biodiversity; synergy; economic diversification; co-creation of knowledge; social values and diets; fairness; connectivity; land and natural resource governance; participation. (2) Confirmation that these principles are well aligned and complementary to the 10 elements of agroecology developed by FAO but articulate requirements of soil and animal health more explicitly and distinguish between biodiversity and economic diversification. (3) Clarification that application of these generic principles can generate diverse pathways for incremental and transformational change towards more sustainable farming and food systems. (4) Identification of four key entry points associated with the elements: diversity; circular and solidarity economy; co-creation and sharing of knowledge; and, responsible governance to enable plausible pathways of transformative change towards sustainable agriculture and food systems.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Barbara Gemmill Herren; Rachel Bezner Kerr; Edmundo Barrios; André Luiz Rodrigues Gonçalves; Fergus Sinclair. Agroecological principles and elements and their implications for transitioning to sustainable food systems. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2020, 40, 1 -13.

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Barbara Gemmill Herren, Rachel Bezner Kerr, Edmundo Barrios, André Luiz Rodrigues Gonçalves, Fergus Sinclair. Agroecological principles and elements and their implications for transitioning to sustainable food systems. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2020; 40 (6):1-13.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Barbara Gemmill Herren; Rachel Bezner Kerr; Edmundo Barrios; André Luiz Rodrigues Gonçalves; Fergus Sinclair. 2020. "Agroecological principles and elements and their implications for transitioning to sustainable food systems. A review." Agronomy for Sustainable Development 40, no. 6: 1-13.

Journal article
Published: 27 July 2019 in Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Increasing intrafield plant diversity has been shown to regulate pest populations. Mixing wheat cultivars and intercropping winter wheat and white clover are both promising agroecological practices. On field experiments over two growing seasons, we combined both practices and examined the impact on aphid populations and on wheat production. Results show that combining intra- and interspecific diversity did not outperform each practice individually in reducing aphid populations. Taken separately, intercropping tended to have lower aphid infestation, while it was intermediate in cultivar mixtures. Yearly variation in climatic conditions impacted wheat and clover development, as well as the appearance of aphid peaks. Wheat yields and grain nitrogen content were reduced in intercropping by 10% and 7%, respectively, but not in cultivar mixtures. Our findings suggest that intrafield diversification may regulate wheat aphids to some extent, but combining two diversification practices did not result in an attractive trade-off between pest regulation and wheat production in real farming conditions.

ACS Style

Agathe Mansion-Vaquié; Alexander Wezel; Aurélie Ferrer. Wheat genotypic diversity and intercropping to control cereal aphids. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 2019, 285, 106604 .

AMA Style

Agathe Mansion-Vaquié, Alexander Wezel, Aurélie Ferrer. Wheat genotypic diversity and intercropping to control cereal aphids. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 2019; 285 ():106604.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Agathe Mansion-Vaquié; Alexander Wezel; Aurélie Ferrer. 2019. "Wheat genotypic diversity and intercropping to control cereal aphids." Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 285, no. : 106604.

Articles
Published: 13 September 2018 in Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Climate change is expected to strongly affect African farming systems. As vast proportions of African countries’ populations rely on agriculture for livelihood and food security, there is a need to adapt current practices and develop new climate-resilient strategies and farming systems. Here, we inventory and review which agroecological practices currently implemented in semiarid and subhumid Africa can promote adaptation to climate change. This work was carried out through extensive literature research, plus interviews with 24 experts from different African and French NGOs active in agricultural development programs in Africa. We found that: (1) some inventoried practices may not specifically be implemented in response to climate change impacts, yet they aid in adapting to reduced or more variable rainfall and increased temperature, and/or enhance carbon sequestration; (2) other practices promote indirect adaptation by increasing resilience of cropping or livestock systems; (3) many farmers use combinations of different practices to increase overall farming system resilience and through this strategy can achieve efficient adaptation to climate changes, as single practices normally are not sufficient. Our review and evaluation show that a broad variety of agroecological practices provides high potential to adapt to climate change effects in semiarid and subhumid African farming systems.

ACS Style

Valentine Debray; Alexander Wezel; Adeline Lambert-Derkimba; Katia Roesch; Geir Lieblein; Charles Andrew Francis. Agroecological practices for climate change adaptation in semiarid and subhumid Africa. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 2018, 43, 429 -456.

AMA Style

Valentine Debray, Alexander Wezel, Adeline Lambert-Derkimba, Katia Roesch, Geir Lieblein, Charles Andrew Francis. Agroecological practices for climate change adaptation in semiarid and subhumid Africa. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems. 2018; 43 (4):429-456.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Valentine Debray; Alexander Wezel; Adeline Lambert-Derkimba; Katia Roesch; Geir Lieblein; Charles Andrew Francis. 2018. "Agroecological practices for climate change adaptation in semiarid and subhumid Africa." Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 43, no. 4: 429-456.

Editorial
Published: 03 August 2018 in Sustainability
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Agroecology has gradually developed in recent decades, but has only recently been more strongly promoted by different movements, organizations, institutions, farmer groups, and scholars.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Stéphane Bellon. Mapping Agroecology in Europe. New Developments and Applications. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2751 .

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Stéphane Bellon. Mapping Agroecology in Europe. New Developments and Applications. Sustainability. 2018; 10 (8):2751.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Stéphane Bellon. 2018. "Mapping Agroecology in Europe. New Developments and Applications." Sustainability 10, no. 8: 2751.

Research paper
Published: 14 June 2018 in Limnology
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Fishponds are often enriched with nutrients in order to increase phytoplankton and zooplankton populations to support fish production. This eutrophication often leads to a global decrease of biodiversity. This biodiversity shift may be identified by a tipping point, the value of an environmental parameter above which a significant change of species richness and abundance occurs. A total of 110 eutrophic to highly eutrophic fishponds were studied in two areas in France to investigate parameters governing dragonfly species richness and species abundance by determining tipping points. Parameters investigated were chlorophyll a (CHL), water transparency, total N (TN), total P (TP), aquatic plant richness and coverage, adult dragonfly richness and abundance, and fish harvest. A high species richness of dragonflies was found in fishponds, with a total of 34 species, including six species of conservation concern. Dragonfly richness and abundance was shown to be negatively influenced by higher degrees of eutrophication. A high diversity of dragonflies occurred in the fishponds with CHL concentrations below 127 µg/l, water transparency above 67 cm, TN concentrations below 2.30 mg/l, and a fish harvest smaller than 253 kg/ha. A minimum of 5% of aquatic plant cover and the presence of a minimum 9 aquatic plant species seem to promote the richness and abundance of dragonflies. According to tipping points, 19 dragonfly species could be determined as indicator species for water quality in fishponds.

ACS Style

Marie Vanacker; Alexander Wezel; Beat Oertli; Joël Robin. Water quality parameters and tipping points of dragonfly diversity and abundance in fishponds. Limnology 2018, 19, 321 -333.

AMA Style

Marie Vanacker, Alexander Wezel, Beat Oertli, Joël Robin. Water quality parameters and tipping points of dragonfly diversity and abundance in fishponds. Limnology. 2018; 19 (3):321-333.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Marie Vanacker; Alexander Wezel; Beat Oertli; Joël Robin. 2018. "Water quality parameters and tipping points of dragonfly diversity and abundance in fishponds." Limnology 19, no. 3: 321-333.

Journal article
Published: 16 May 2018 in Sustainability
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Agriculture in Europe results in the production of food for both the European population and for the export sector. Significant environmental and social problems have emerged with the intensification of European agriculture. These include the loss of biodiversity, the contamination of soils, water, and food with pesticides, and the eutrophication of water bodies. Industrialized agricultural and food systems are also a major contributing factor in the decline of farm numbers, and the high use of antibiotics has led to serious human health problems. In this respect, agroecology can provide insights into important pathways and guide the design, development, and promotion of the transition towards sustainable farming and food systems. An analysis of the major challenges for the amplification of agroecology in Europe was carried out by 310 stakeholders in a World Café exercise and 23 sessions and workshops during the Agroecology Europe Forum 2017. The different challenges that were identified can be grouped into seven categories: (1) definition and concepts; (2) education, training, and knowledge sharing; (3) research approach and funding; (4) policies; (5) productivity and practices; (5) food systems and consumer awareness; and (6) co-optation. To address these challenges, the following key actions are recommended: (1) to develop a common understanding of agroecology; (2) to enhance education in agroecology and knowledge exchange; (3) to invest in agroecological research; (4) to develop policies enhancing agroecology; (5) to support new and existing agroecological practices; (6) to transform food systems; and (7) to strengthen communication and alliances. In this paper we present and discuss these recommendations for pathways and actions to develop sustainable agro-food systems in Europe through agroecology.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Margriet Goris; Janneke Bruil; Georges F. Félix; Alain Peeters; Paolo Bàrberi; Stéphane Bellon; Paola Migliorini. Challenges and Action Points to Amplify Agroecology in Europe. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1598 .

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Margriet Goris, Janneke Bruil, Georges F. Félix, Alain Peeters, Paolo Bàrberi, Stéphane Bellon, Paola Migliorini. Challenges and Action Points to Amplify Agroecology in Europe. Sustainability. 2018; 10 (5):1598.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Margriet Goris; Janneke Bruil; Georges F. Félix; Alain Peeters; Paolo Bàrberi; Stéphane Bellon; Paola Migliorini. 2018. "Challenges and Action Points to Amplify Agroecology in Europe." Sustainability 10, no. 5: 1598.

Journal article
Published: 17 April 2018 in Sustainability
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Agroecology is considered with different focus and weight in different parts of the world as a social and political movement, as science, and as practice. Despite its multitude of definitions, agroecology has begun in Europe to develop in different regional, national and continental networks of researchers, practitioners, advocates and movements. However, there is a lack of a comprehensive overview about these different developments and networks. Therefore, this paper attempts to document and provide a mapping of the development of European agroecology in its diverse forms. Through a literature review, interviews, active conference participation, and an extensive internet search we have collected information about the current state and development of agroecology in Europe. Agroecological research and higher education exist more in western and northern Europe, but farm schools and farmer-to-farmer training are also present in other regions. Today a large variety of topics are studied at research institutions. There is an increasing number of bottom-up agroecological initiatives and national or continental networks and movements. Important movements are around food sovereignty, access to land and seeds. Except for France, there are very few concrete policies for agroecology in Europe. Agroecology is increasingly linked to different fields of agri-food systems. This includes Community Supported Agriculture systems, but also agroecological territories, and some examples of labelling products. To amplify agroecology in Europe in the coming years, policy development will be crucial and proponents of agroecology must join forces and work hand-in-hand with the many stakeholders engaged in initiatives to develop more sustainable agriculture and food systems.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Julia Goette; Elisabeth Lagneaux; Gloria Passuello; Erica Reisman; Christophe Rodier; Grégoire Turpin. Agroecology in Europe: Research, Education, Collective Action Networks, and Alternative Food Systems. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1214 .

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Julia Goette, Elisabeth Lagneaux, Gloria Passuello, Erica Reisman, Christophe Rodier, Grégoire Turpin. Agroecology in Europe: Research, Education, Collective Action Networks, and Alternative Food Systems. Sustainability. 2018; 10 (4):1214.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Julia Goette; Elisabeth Lagneaux; Gloria Passuello; Erica Reisman; Christophe Rodier; Grégoire Turpin. 2018. "Agroecology in Europe: Research, Education, Collective Action Networks, and Alternative Food Systems." Sustainability 10, no. 4: 1214.

Book chapter
Published: 13 June 2017 in Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The following sections are included:

ACS Style

Joël Aubin; Joël Robin; Alexander Wezel; Marielle Thomas. Agroecological Management in Fish Pond Systems. Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture 2017, 355 -394.

AMA Style

Joël Aubin, Joël Robin, Alexander Wezel, Marielle Thomas. Agroecological Management in Fish Pond Systems. Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture. 2017; ():355-394.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Joël Aubin; Joël Robin; Alexander Wezel; Marielle Thomas. 2017. "Agroecological Management in Fish Pond Systems." Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture , no. : 355-394.

Book chapter
Published: 13 June 2017 in Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The following sections are included:

ACS Style

Aurélie Ferrer; Florian Celette; Joséphine Peigné; Marion Casagrande; Jean-François Vian; Alexander Wezel. Teaching Agroecological Practices to Higher Education Students, Farmers, and Other Stakeholders: Examples from France. Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture 2017, 419 -444.

AMA Style

Aurélie Ferrer, Florian Celette, Joséphine Peigné, Marion Casagrande, Jean-François Vian, Alexander Wezel. Teaching Agroecological Practices to Higher Education Students, Farmers, and Other Stakeholders: Examples from France. Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture. 2017; ():419-444.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aurélie Ferrer; Florian Celette; Joséphine Peigné; Marion Casagrande; Jean-François Vian; Alexander Wezel. 2017. "Teaching Agroecological Practices to Higher Education Students, Farmers, and Other Stakeholders: Examples from France." Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture , no. : 419-444.

Book chapter
Published: 13 June 2017 in Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The following sections are included:

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Charles Francis. Agroecological Practices: Potentials and Policies. Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture 2017, 463 -480.

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Charles Francis. Agroecological Practices: Potentials and Policies. Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture. 2017; ():463-480.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Charles Francis. 2017. "Agroecological Practices: Potentials and Policies." Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture , no. : 463-480.

Journal article
Published: 01 September 2016 in Journal of Ethnopharmacology
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Wild foods constitute an essential component of people's diets around the world, but despite their widespread use and their cultural importance, wild edible plants (WEPs) lack recognition as significant contributors to the human diet in developed countries. We stimulate national and international bodies dealing with food and agriculture, to increase their attention and investments on WEPs, leveraging the results of scientific investigation, enhancing the link between in situ conservation strategies and sustainable use of plant genetic diversity. and Conclusions: WEPs should be reconsidered throughout their value chain, capturing their important socio-cultural, health, and economic benefits to indigenous and local communities and family farmers who are engaged in their production and wild-harvesting.

ACS Style

Loretta Bacchetta; Francesco Visioli; Giulia Cappelli; Emily Caruso; Gary Martin; Eva Nemeth; Gianni Bacchetta; Gianni Bedini; Alexander Wezel; Tedje van Asseldonk; Leo van Raamsdonk; Francesca Mariani; on behalf of the Eatwild Consortium. A manifesto for the valorization of wild edible plants. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 2016, 191, 180 -187.

AMA Style

Loretta Bacchetta, Francesco Visioli, Giulia Cappelli, Emily Caruso, Gary Martin, Eva Nemeth, Gianni Bacchetta, Gianni Bedini, Alexander Wezel, Tedje van Asseldonk, Leo van Raamsdonk, Francesca Mariani, on behalf of the Eatwild Consortium. A manifesto for the valorization of wild edible plants. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2016; 191 ():180-187.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Loretta Bacchetta; Francesco Visioli; Giulia Cappelli; Emily Caruso; Gary Martin; Eva Nemeth; Gianni Bacchetta; Gianni Bedini; Alexander Wezel; Tedje van Asseldonk; Leo van Raamsdonk; Francesca Mariani; on behalf of the Eatwild Consortium. 2016. "A manifesto for the valorization of wild edible plants." Journal of Ethnopharmacology 191, no. : 180-187.

Journal article
Published: 01 May 2016 in Ecological Indicators
Reads 0
Downloads 0

High levels of nutrients in fish ponds by fish farming may cause significant eutrophication leading to a loss in species richness and a decrease of cover of aquatic plants to phytoplankton dominance. This shift can be represented by a tipping point where a significant change in the state of the ecosystem is observed such as a change from high to low aquatic plants species richness and cover. A total of 100 fish ponds were studied during five years in the Dombes region, France, to determine tipping points in aquatic plant richness and cover using chlorophyll α (CHL), water transparency, Total N (TN) and Total P (TP) gradients with two statistical methods. The relationships between tipping points, nutrient loads and yearly variations in weather conditions were also evaluated. Looking at the five years data, tipping points were observed in aquatic plant richness at 6 and 60 μg/L for CHL, and at 3.90 mg/L for TN concentration; as well as at 70 cm for water transparency, but no tipping point was found with TP. For aquatic plant cover, tipping points were observed at 11 μg/L for CHL, 2.42 mg/L for TN, 0.05 mg/L for TP, and at 62 cm for water transparency. These tipping points showed a significant decrease of aquatic plant species richness and cover, linked to the nutrient concentrations which drive the competition between the primary producers phytoplankton and aquatic plants. However, tipping points could vary significantly between years. The inter-annual variability may be due to an early occurrence of phytoplankton blooms in some ponds in a year preventing the establishment of aquatic plants, and thus influencing the value of tipping points. Weather conditions influence the competition between primary producers by impacting chlorophyll α and nutrients concentrations. When weather conditions supported increased nutrient concentrations, the development of phytoplankton and aquatic plants was facilitated and tipping points in aquatic plant richness and cover occurred with relatively high values. Thus, a significant decrease of plant cover and richness occurred at higher level of nutrients compared to the other years. In these cases, aquatic plants dominated over phytoplankton for the spring period, and also often during summer. In conclusion, tipping points observed are mainly linked to the competition between aquatic plants and phytoplankton. In shallow and eutrophic systems like fish ponds where nutrients are not a limiting resource, weather conditions act temporarily during spring as the main regulator of this competition.

ACS Style

Marie Vanacker; Alexander Wezel; Florent Arthaud; Mathieu Guerin; Joël Robin. Determination of tipping points for aquatic plants and water quality parameters in fish pond systems: A multi-year approach. Ecological Indicators 2016, 64, 39 -48.

AMA Style

Marie Vanacker, Alexander Wezel, Florent Arthaud, Mathieu Guerin, Joël Robin. Determination of tipping points for aquatic plants and water quality parameters in fish pond systems: A multi-year approach. Ecological Indicators. 2016; 64 ():39-48.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Marie Vanacker; Alexander Wezel; Florent Arthaud; Mathieu Guerin; Joël Robin. 2016. "Determination of tipping points for aquatic plants and water quality parameters in fish pond systems: A multi-year approach." Ecological Indicators 64, no. : 39-48.

Articles
Published: 05 November 2015 in Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The development of sustainable agricultural and food systems is of significant importance considering the still-growing world population. For this, it is imperative to consider not only quantitative production issues, but also environmental issues such as water pollution, biodiversity loss, and land degradation as well as social and economic issues such as organization of supply chains and communication and coordination among stakeholders. However, the development of sustainable agricultural and food systems is so far almost exclusively proposed either at the scale of specific agricultural systems or for selected supply chains. Still strongly neglected is the development of sustainable systems at a territorial scale. We, therefore, present here the concept of agroecology territories. We define agroecology territories as places where a transition process toward sustainable agriculture and food systems is engaged. Three major domains must to be considered for the transition to take place: adaptation of agricultural practices; conservation of biodiversity and natural resources; and development of embedded food systems. Stakeholder group strategies, developed by those who actively engage in these three domains and are themselves actors in the transition, are integral to agroecology territories.

ACS Style

A. Wezel; H. Brives; M. Casagrande; C. Clément; A. Dufour; P. Vandenbroucke. Agroecology territories: places for sustainable agricultural and food systems and biodiversity conservation. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 2015, 40, 132 -144.

AMA Style

A. Wezel, H. Brives, M. Casagrande, C. Clément, A. Dufour, P. Vandenbroucke. Agroecology territories: places for sustainable agricultural and food systems and biodiversity conservation. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems. 2015; 40 (2):132-144.

Chicago/Turabian Style

A. Wezel; H. Brives; M. Casagrande; C. Clément; A. Dufour; P. Vandenbroucke. 2015. "Agroecology territories: places for sustainable agricultural and food systems and biodiversity conservation." Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 40, no. 2: 132-144.

Review
Published: 07 September 2015 in Agronomy for Sustainable Development
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The projected human population of nine billion by 2050 has led to ever growing discussion of the need for increasing agricultural output to meet estimated food demands, while mitigating environmental costs. Many stakeholders in agricultural circles are calling for the intensification of agriculture to meet these demands. However, it is neither clear nor readily agreed upon what is meant by intensification. Here, we compare the three major uses, ‘ecological intensification’, ‘sustainable intensification’ and ‘agroecological intensification’, by analysing their various definitions, principles and practices, and also their historical appearance and evolution. We used data from the scientific literature, the grey literature, the websites of international organizations and the Scopus and FAOLEX databases. Our major findings are: (1) sustainable intensification is the most frequently used term so far. (2) The three concepts ecological intensification, sustainable intensification and agroecological intensification overlap in terms of definitions, principles and practices, thus creating some confusion in their meanings, interpretations and implications. Nevertheless, some differences exist. (3) Sustainable intensification is more widely used and represents in many cases a rather generalised category, into which most current farming practices can be put so long as sustainability is in some way addressed. However, despite its wider use, it remains imprecisely defined. (4) Ecological and agroecological intensification do introduce some major nuances and, in general, more explicitly stated definitions. For instance, ecological intensification emphasizes the understanding and intensification of biological and ecological processes and functions in agroecosystem. (5) The notion of agroecological intensification accentuates the system approach and integrates more cultural and social perspectives in its concept. (6) Even if some boundaries can be seen, confusion is still predominant in the use of these terms. These blurred boundaries currently contribute to the use of these terms for justifying many different kinds of practices and interventions. We suggest that greater precision in defining the terms and the respective practices proposed would indicate more clearly what authors or institutions are aiming at with the proposed intensification. In this sense, we provide new definitions for all three intensification concepts based on the earlier ones.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Gizachew Soboksa; Shelby McClelland; Florian Delespesse; Apolline Boissau. The blurred boundaries of ecological, sustainable, and agroecological intensification: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2015, 35, 1283 -1295.

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Gizachew Soboksa, Shelby McClelland, Florian Delespesse, Apolline Boissau. The blurred boundaries of ecological, sustainable, and agroecological intensification: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2015; 35 (4):1283-1295.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Gizachew Soboksa; Shelby McClelland; Florian Delespesse; Apolline Boissau. 2015. "The blurred boundaries of ecological, sustainable, and agroecological intensification: a review." Agronomy for Sustainable Development 35, no. 4: 1283-1295.

Journal article
Published: 02 June 2015 in Environment, Development and Sustainability
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, sustainable development became an important issue. Sustainable development often focuses on a single sector or parameter such as tourism, energy supply, water management, different aspects of nature conservation, or economy. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive picture of the development of a region since the Middle Ages and discuss whether this development can be evaluated as socially, economically and ecologically sustainable. We carried out a combined qualitative–quantitative assessment where we use quantitative data and indicators when available, as well as literature sources and expert knowledge from the region for a qualitative assessment. We judge that generally a sustainable development in the Allgäu region can be found, although also some critical points and contentious issues exist. An overall good economic and income situation for most people, the good ecological conditions and rich biodiversity, the relatively well-established social structure, as well as the identity of the people with the region and comparatively low social discrepancy, can be positively stated. In contrast, different actual and future threats exist such as new or planned infrastructure, increasing traffic or tourism activities in certain areas that degrade habitats and reduce species richness, intensification of agriculture in certain areas, but also abandonment of agriculture in other areas, loss of traditions and customs, and declining numbers of smallholders. The objective for the region would be to minimise these negative impacts and reinforce positive trends to assure the sustainable development of the Allgäu.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Sabine Weizenegger. Rural agricultural regions and sustainable development: a case study of the Allgäu region in Germany. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2015, 18, 717 -737.

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Sabine Weizenegger. Rural agricultural regions and sustainable development: a case study of the Allgäu region in Germany. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2015; 18 (3):717-737.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Sabine Weizenegger. 2015. "Rural agricultural regions and sustainable development: a case study of the Allgäu region in Germany." Environment, Development and Sustainability 18, no. 3: 717-737.

Journal article
Published: 01 May 2015 in Ecological Indicators
Reads 0
Downloads 0

International audienceThe management of biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems requires knowing the state of water quality linked to regime shifts in various taxonomic groups. We examine this question by studying the fish ponds in the Dombes region, France. These waterbodies are characterized by a high diversity of species. High levels of nutrients due to certain fish farming practices may cause significant eutrophication leading to loss in biodiversity and a shift from high coverage of aquatic vegetation to phytoplankton dominance may also be observed. The aim of this study is to assess tipping points, thresholds for effect, along a gradi- ent of chlorophyll ̨ in different taxonomic groups: aquatic vascular plants, phytoplankton, dragonflies and aquatic macro-invertebrates. Tipping points are analyzed with three different statistical methods: a method which evaluates tipping points with a difference in the mean (TMEAN), a second method which evaluates tipping point by comparing the mean and linear regressions before and after the tipping point (FSTAT) and third a method which evaluates linear regressions with a pivotal tipping point (SEGMENTED). We also compare tipping points for the different taxonomic groups using five different diversity indices: Observed richness, Jackknife first order, Fisher’s alpha, Simpson index and Evenness.Our results show that there is an important variation in tipping points following the three statistical methods, but the SEGMENTED is the best method for evaluating tipping points. We observe a high differ- ence of tipping point values for the different taxonomic groups depending on the diversity indices used. Jackknife first order has a better performance to evaluate a eutrophic change according to the diversity than the other indices.In all taxonomic groups, aquatic vascular plants are the most impacted by the chlorophyll ̨ and almost all their tipping points are observed around 60 ug/L chlorophyll ̨ concentrations. No significant relation- ship is found between chlorophyll ̨ and phytoplankton diversity, while the two other groups, dragonflies and macro-invertebrates, are both impacted by the chlorophyll ̨ but their relevant tipping points are situated in higher values than aquatic vascular plants

ACS Style

Marie Vanacker; Alexander Wezel; Vincent Payet; Joël Robin. Determining tipping points in aquatic ecosystems: The case of biodiversity and chlorophyll α relations in fish pond systems. Ecological Indicators 2015, 52, 184 -193.

AMA Style

Marie Vanacker, Alexander Wezel, Vincent Payet, Joël Robin. Determining tipping points in aquatic ecosystems: The case of biodiversity and chlorophyll α relations in fish pond systems. Ecological Indicators. 2015; 52 ():184-193.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Marie Vanacker; Alexander Wezel; Vincent Payet; Joël Robin. 2015. "Determining tipping points in aquatic ecosystems: The case of biodiversity and chlorophyll α relations in fish pond systems." Ecological Indicators 52, no. : 184-193.

Research article
Published: 17 March 2015 in Journal of Environmental Planning and Management
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Management of water quality in drinking water catchments is of ongoing, high importance as nitrate concentrations are often still very high. We analysed the Augsburg catchment in Germany, a unique example where a result-oriented approach has been implemented. We investigated the historical evolution of the water protection programme, the result-oriented payment contracts with farmers, and farmer satisfaction with the contracts, based on interviews with the water utility and farmers as well as an analysis of the literature. Today, the water protection programme has been successfully implemented, and a significant reduction of nitrate concentration was achieved due to the following factors: (1) investment of non-negligible amounts of money for high compensation and remuneration payments, (2) different contract options, (3) farmers’ participation in the negotiation process for result-oriented payment contracts, (4) involvement of “outside” people and institutions in negotiation processes, (5) anticipation of starting a programme when nitrate levels were still far below legislative thresholds, and (6) a political and legislative framework allowing direct decisions by a water supplier.

ACS Style

Alexander Wezel; Maria Zipfer; Christine Aubry; Fabienne Barataud; Alois Heißenhuber. Result-oriented approaches to the management of drinking water catchments in agricultural landscapes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2015, 59, 1 -20.

AMA Style

Alexander Wezel, Maria Zipfer, Christine Aubry, Fabienne Barataud, Alois Heißenhuber. Result-oriented approaches to the management of drinking water catchments in agricultural landscapes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 2015; 59 (2):1-20.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alexander Wezel; Maria Zipfer; Christine Aubry; Fabienne Barataud; Alois Heißenhuber. 2015. "Result-oriented approaches to the management of drinking water catchments in agricultural landscapes." Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 59, no. 2: 1-20.

Journal article
Published: 01 January 2015 in Land Use Policy
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Water quality preservation programmes as currently proposed by public institutions are questionable with regards to efficient territorial development, yet necessary in catchment areas, and for the improvement of water quality. We provide a method based on a multi-criteria and multi-stakeholder analysis to assess cropping systems designed with farmers in a vulnerable drinking water catchment. Individual interviews with various stakeholders involved in the catchment improvement programme allowed us to gather a diversity of points of view on their preferences concerning various criteria describing cropping system sustainability and economic, social and environmental aspects. Five groups of stakeholders with different preferences were identified to define five scenarios of sustainability preferences. To support a result-oriented approach, achievable goals to improve water quality and contribute to sustainable development were chosen together with stakeholders. Then cropping systems designed with local farmers were assessed using the five scenarios of stakeholders’ preferences to open discussions on the implementation of alternative cropping systems within the drinking water catchment. The method was able to identify some cropping systems that, although very diverse, might assure the required drinking water quality, and were judged as theoretically highly sustainable by all the stakeholder groups

ACS Style

Clémence Ravier; Lorène Prost; Marie-Hélène Jeuffroy; Alexander Wezel; Laurette Paravano; Raymond Reau. Multi-criteria and multi-stakeholder assessment of cropping systems for a result-oriented water quality preservation action programme. Land Use Policy 2015, 42, 131 -140.

AMA Style

Clémence Ravier, Lorène Prost, Marie-Hélène Jeuffroy, Alexander Wezel, Laurette Paravano, Raymond Reau. Multi-criteria and multi-stakeholder assessment of cropping systems for a result-oriented water quality preservation action programme. Land Use Policy. 2015; 42 ():131-140.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Clémence Ravier; Lorène Prost; Marie-Hélène Jeuffroy; Alexander Wezel; Laurette Paravano; Raymond Reau. 2015. "Multi-criteria and multi-stakeholder assessment of cropping systems for a result-oriented water quality preservation action programme." Land Use Policy 42, no. : 131-140.