Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
and consumer pressures to produce more for less; on the other are societal demands
for a clean and healthful environment. Most growers are caught in the middle.
One avenue for addressing this conundrum is the potential for row-crop produc-
ers to farm for more than food, fuel, and fiber. Growing recognition that agricul-
ture can provide ecosystem services other than yield (Swinton et al. 2007, Power
2010) opens a potential for society to pay for improvements in services provided by
farming: a clean and well-regulated water supply, biodiversity, natural habitats for
conservation and recreation, climate stabilization, and aesthetic and cultural ameni-
ties such as vibrant farmscapes.
Operationalizing such an enterprise, however, is far from straightfor-
ward: Farming for services requires knowledge of what services can be practically
provided at what cost and how nonprovisioning services might be valued in the
absence of markets. The costs of providing services are both direct (e.g., the cost of
installing a streamside buffer strip) and indirect (e.g., the opportunity cost of sales
lost by installing such a strip on otherwise productive cropland). Moreover, valu-
ation includes not simply the monetary value of a provided service but also what
society (consumers) might be willing to pay through mechanisms such as higher
food prices or taxes.
Knowledge of the services themselves requires a fundamental understanding
not only of the biophysical basis for the service but also of how different ecological
processes interact to either synergize or offset the provisioning of different ser-
vices: Farming is a systems enterprise with multiple moving parts and sometimes
complex interactions. No-till practices, for example, can sequester soil carbon and
reduce fossil fuel consumption but require more herbicide use and can increase the
production of nitrous oxide (N
2
O; van Kessel et al. 2013), a potent greenhouse gas.
Understanding the basis for such trade-offs and synergies requires an ecological
systems approach absent from most agricultural research.
Since 1988, we have pursued research to understand the fundamental pro-
cesses that underpin the productivity and environmental performance of important
row-crop systems of the upper U.S. Midwest. Our aim is to understand the key
ecological interactions that constrain or enhance the performance of differently
managed model cropping systems and, therefore, to provide insight into the pro-
visioning of related services in a whole-systems context. Our global hypothesis is
that ecological knowledge can substitute for most chemical inputs in intensively
managed, highly productive, annual row crops. Together, long-term observations
and experiments at both local and landscape scales uniquely inform our analysis.
Experimental Context: The Search for Services
The Main Cropping System Experiment (MCSE) of the Kellogg Biological Station
(KBS), a member site of the U.S. Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network,
was initiated in 1988 in southwest Michigan. The site is in the U.S. North Central
Region, a 12-state region that is responsible for 80% of U.S. corn (
Zea mays
) and
soybean (
Glycine max
) production and 50% of the U.S. wheat (
Triticum aestivum
)
crop (NASS 2013a). The Great Lakes portion of the region is also an important
