Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Multifunctional Agriculture
Definition of Multifunctional Agriculture
Multifunctional Agriculture (MFA) analyzes the jointly produced economic, social and environmental functions from agricultural activities beyond the production of food and fiber. It was highly promoted by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the European Union in 1990s in both research and policy making (European Community, 1998; OECD, 2001).
Existing MFA projects on peri-urban agriculture focused more on socio-economic dimension than environment protection (Vandermeulen and Van Huylenbroeck, 2008). Prioritized functions were food supply, landscape amenity and environmental role against flood risk (Zasada, 2011; Aubry et al., 2012).
Role of MFA in the policies of France and Europe
In France and Europe, research and policies of MFA gradually reached its height from early 1990s on the occasion of the reforms of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) (Pisani, 1994; Groupe de Bruges, 1996; Laurent and Mouriaux, 1999; Laurent, 2002; Hervieu, 2002; Aumand et al., 2006). The reform of CAP reduced direct price supports and shifted to area-based income supports to farmers with the aim to sustain necessary land occupancy pattern for joint production of environmental goods at a landscape scale (Potter and Burney, 2002; Bills and Gross, 2005; Gomez y Paloma et al., 2013). MFA research made very important contributions by revealing the mechanism of jointness in production processes (Wossink et al., 2001; Schmid and Sinabell, 2004). At the Berlin Summit on the Agenda 2000, the European Union created the second pillar of the CAP around rural development and MFA (Hervieu, 2002).
In France, the concept of MFA was officially confirmed by the Agricultural Orientation law (LOA) in 1999; the instrument of Farming Territorial Contract (CTE) was established, which was a contract between farmers and the state about the delegation and payments for public services destined to stakeholders at the territorial level (Bonnal et al., 2012). The concept of MFA then failed in the political world for being criticized as “agricultural protectionism” (Bonnal et al., 2012) or lacking of precision. The instrument of CTE was also replaced by the Contract of Sustainable Agriculture (CAD) in 2002 and later by instruments associated with Agri-Environmental Measures. PAC reform now is turning to market incentives (e.g. PES) for the post-2013 period (Gomez y Paloma et al., 2013).
Future of MFA
The failure in political world does not mean that the concept of MFA is valueless. Focusing on the performance of agriculture, MFA strategy can more directly guide the overall management of farmers’ activities. It is rather the improper design of policy instruments that have caused market distortion. MFA is not incompatible with more efficient commercial incentives (van Huylenbroeck et al., 2007) or a remuneration/penalization policy frame directly linked to public goods/negative impacts (Blandford and Boisvert, 2002).
The flexibility covering a wide range of contributions from agriculture is an advantage of the concept which stimulates linkages with the territory, among multiple scales and between different disciplines, and makes MFA a promising way towards sustainable development (Caron et al., 2008). Scholars complained that it was very difficult for MFA to completely decouple environmental objectives with agricultural production (Potter and Burney, 2002). Nevertheless, this is beneficial for the preservation of peri-urban agriculture, which avoids the conversion of agricultural lands to extensive use like hobby farm or natural lands.
Certainly, MFA needs to overcome the shortcomings. First, the concept needs a firm base to specify the definition of agricultural functions. Different countries have diverse perspectives on multifunctional agriculture (Moon, 2012). The definition should allow communication among different perspectives without becoming too vague. Second, MFA lacks consideration on the role of ecosystem services, i.e. benefits from the functioning of agro-ecosystem. It always takes agricultural system as a human-made production system that pursues additionally positive environmental effects and reduction of negative influences.
Integrated approaches of ES and MFA
ES and MFA have similar objectives to recognize multiple agricultural benefits and impacts beyond the production of food and fibre. Each has advantages and also shortcomings. According to the above discussions, the two concepts are highly complementary. It is a good strategy to integrate two complementary mature concepts when there is too much uncertainty to create a new one. The criticisms are useful in indicating the shortcomings of a concept, but it’s not reasonable to move towards a quick abandonment of the concept:
For example, Maris (2014) claimed that PES was problematic because it resulted in a utilitarian view of nature by “selling nature”. But in fact, PES is just an instrument to promote the maintenance of ES, and does not equal the true value of ecosystem services. In the logic of environmental regulation, costs are paid by farmers; while in the logic of PES, costs are paid by the society (Desjeux et al., 2011). It does not mean that nature is sold by one person to another. Another tendency is turning from ecosystem service to environmental service as discussed above. The concerns of environmental services focus on the contributions or sacrifices of farmers to the providing of environmental benefits. Studies on “environmental services” are useful for the creation of effective instruments to motivate the farmers (Wunder et al., 2008; Aznar et al., 2009). However, the contributions of the ecosystem should not be ignored, for example, the contributions of various regulating service and supporting service to the production of final services (e.g. food and materials, esthetic and cultural service).
An integrated approach of ES and MFA can promote integration of the alternative agricultural benefits with the production of food and materials, avoiding over emphasis on productivity or environmental concerns. Peri-urban agricultural lands can be really preserved in that case. ES can be a firm base for the definition of agricultural functions, thus to improve the precision of MFA. Based upon ES cascade, the integrated approach can properly consider the role of ES, and manage a self-regulating agricultural system. MFA combines economic, social and environmental dimensions so can be a perfect mediation to integrate the logic of ES with the logic of economic and social benefits. The integrated approach will also help to distinguish the contribution of ecosystem and human actions. Especially, it will provide overall strategies for farmers to manage their activities and a framework about the relationships among multiple stakeholders. Integrated approach of ES and MFA is innovative; research is very rare in this domain.
Objectives of the dissertation
The objective of the dissertation is to explore an integrated approach of ES and MFA for the preservation of peri-urban agricultural lands. The first part is dedicated to the development of an integrated framework of ES and MFA for the research of peri-urban agricultural lands. The second and third parts are in-depth studies on management of abandoned farmlands and agricultural recycling of urban wastes in Ile-de-France Region, respectively. The aim of the in-depth studies is to demonstrate how the integrated approach of MFA and ES works on concrete problems linked to peri-urban agriculture. Multi-scale analyzes were carried out for the two in-depth studies.
Development of an integrated framework of ES and MFA for peri-urban agriculture
Comparative review of MFA and ES in agricultural research
Two scientific communities independently focus on MFA or ES. They have broad interest in sustainable agriculture but limited interaction and exchange. There are mainly two views in the literature about the relations between MFA and ES. The first perceives a trend of increasing use of ES and declining use of MFA (e.g. Bonnal et al., 2012). The other views the two concepts as the same things “under different headings” (e.g. Renting et al., 2009). So the primary work is dedicated to a comparative review on ES and MFA in published agricultural research.
The review addresses the following two specific objectives: first, it compares the publication trends, ideologies and research approaches of MFA and ES; second, it proposes dialogs and an integrated research framework that combine MFA and ES. The general framework mainly concludes a MFA strategy for farmer to consider multiple ecosystem services and disservices to and from agriculture as inputs and outputs of his farm.
Further development of the integrated framework for peri-urban agriculture
Application to a specific context as peri-urban agriculture requires further work to combine the demand side. The output ES from agro-ecosystem are consumed differently in different social economic structure, so the multifunctionality of a farm varies. For example, food supply varies with the commercial system. When products from peri-urban agriculture are largely destined to international markets, the increasing provisioning ES do not necessarily improve food function to the nearby urban dwellers.
Peri-urban farmers have direct contacts with a variety of stakeholders. Food security has critic meaning for the growing population in the city, especially when urban needs are rising for local food (Aubry and Kebir, 2013). Comparing to strong urban demands, peri-urban agriculture is underproducing environmental values and landscape elements (Zasada, 2011). Conventional farmers are marginally motivated to modify practices that maintain soil fertility, preserve biodiversity, or reduce pesticides use (Van Huylenbroeck et al., 2005; Torquati et al., 2008). Direct payments for these ES usually are far less attractive than the income from food production or the subsidies from land expropriation (Caro-Borrero et al., 2015).
Therefore, the integrated framework needs to combine ecological, social and economic dimensions to link ES with agricultural functions, in order to propose overall strategies for farmers’ activities. It also needs to understand the interactions among multiple ES/functions from peri-urban agriculture. This is the key for the permanent problem of coordinating urban needs for food, land and environmental services, to avoid the paradox that rise of urban-to-rural migration in search of rural open space and lifestyle drove rapid consumption of peri-urban agricultural lands. The integrated framework of ES and MFA is thus been further developed.
Application in the case of Ile-de-France Region
The integrated framework is then applied in the case of Ile-de-France Region, with the hope to enlighten policy making for peri-urban agricultural preservation.
Ile-de-France Region (Paris Region) is one of the world’s major metropolitan regions. It was profoundly affected by urban expansion and peri-urbanization in the past century (Boyer, 1988; Poulot and Rouyres, 2007), but remains to have 50% of its surface occupied by agricultural activities. ES degradation caused by agricultural industrialization contracts with the increasing urban demands for local food, recreation, climate regulation and other services (Poulot and Rouyres, 2007; Poulot, 2008; Aubry and Kebir, 2013). Evolution of policy instruments, especially the master plans, revealed the planners’ intention of considering different services/functions of agriculture (Bryant, 1986; Charvet, 2003; Poulot, 2011). The case of Ile-de-France is meaningful for drawing suggestions to other metropolitan regions.
Before the further development of the integrated framework, investigations are provided on the land loss, structural evolution and regional pattern of agricultural land uses in Ile-de-France. Then, the application of the general framework in the region looks into changes of ES and MFA following the evolution of agricultural lands, and how social needs or consumption of ES and MFA have driven the evolution of different agricultural land uses, such as open-field cereal crops, vegetable cultivations, fruit trees and natural prairies.
In-depth studies on abandoned farmlands and agricultural recycling of urban wastes
Two in-depth studies are carried out in Ile-de-France Region to demonstrate how the integrated approach of MFA and ES works on concrete problems linked to peri-urban agriculture. It concerns the combination of ecological, social and economic dimensions, interactions among multiple stakeholders and other questions. Management of abandoned farmlands and agricultural recycling of urban wastes are selected for particular reasons.
Management of abandoned lands in peri-urban agriculture
The comparative trends of land abandonment and reuse of abandoned lands signify the destiny of peri-urban agriculture in the big metropolitan areas. It is well known that agricultural lands are suffering great loss to urban expansion. The situation is even worse when abandoned farmlands are quite commonly seen in the big metropolitan region like Ile-de-France.
Abandoned farmlands in a restrictive sense are lands no longer used by agriculture or any other rural economic activity (Baudry, 1991). They become “abandoned lands” not necessarily because there is no property owner, but because the total termination of management has left the lands to their own spontaneous succession. A vegetation cover is then rapidly restored and evolves from grasses to brushes and then to forests in around 30 years when the local climatology and ecology conditions permit (Baudry and Acx, 1993). Being “vacant” lands in terms of land use, abandoned farmlands are never left behind by land use planners or other stakeholders, especially in peri-urban area. They are to be converted to constructive lands, urban green parks, ecological corridors, or certain forms of urban agriculture. Research on this process can help peri-urban agriculture to adapt to the urban demands of ES and agricultural functions, instead of crying desperately as a victim of urbanization.
Agricultural recycling of urban organic wastes
Agricultural recycling of urban organic wastes is particular because it is based upon two ES, namely, the ES of waste breakdown and ES of fertilization according to the general framework developed in part 1. So the waste producers can be both suppliers of fertilizer and requesters of waste breaking-down service, and correspondingly, the farmers are both requesters of organic fertilizer and suppliers of waste breaking-down service. In an ideal situation, the waste producers and farmers have a simple “win-win” relationship. That’s the case when urban organic wastes were highly appreciated by farmers in the old historic period in France (Phlipponneau, 1956; Moriceau, 1994; Barles, 2005).
However, urban wastes are not naturally harmless. Numerous studies revealed the risks linked to accumulation of heavy metals, pathogens and other micropollutants in soil and food (Déportes et al., 1995; Raven and Loeppert, 1997; Smith, 2009). Long term use of untreated waste water of Paris city from the end of 19th century followed by sewage sludge spreading of SIAAP caused severe soil pollution of heavy metals in the spreading zone near Achères (Mandinaud, 2005). The incident built a strong negative social image for land application of urban wastes in France.
Regulations were made in Europe and North America to strictly limit the concentration level of micropollutants (McGrath et al., 1994; Harrison et al., 1999; Dhaouadi, 2014). Many studies proved with experiments that agricultural use of urban organic wastes in accordance with the French regulations had no significant impact on soil and plants (Delmas et al., 2000; Baize, 2009; Houot et al., 2009; Brochier et al., 2012). But the reality is far more complicated than a simple win-win relationship between waste producers and peri-urban farmers. The technic control on risk problems by regulations, alone, does not resolve all problems.
Weights on the balance of agricultural use of urban wastes shifted since 20th century from the side of fertilizer to the side of urban waste eliminating in France (Nicourt and Girault, 2003; Joncoux, 2013). The European directive (91/271/EEC) strengthened requirements on wastewater collecting and treatment. Agricultural recycling is still the predominant choice of sewage sludge disposal (Kelessidis and Stasinakis, 2012) and also a promising solution for building integrated ecological waste management systems (Magid et al., 2006). But it may be embarrassing to move towards “payments for ecosystem services” to farmers for eliminating of urban wastes. Agricultural lands are not waste bin of the city. The fertilization effects (Ayuso et al., 1996; García-Gil et al., 2000; Ros et al., 2006; Ghaly and Alkoaik, 2010) are always the basic motivation for farmers to take urban organic wastes. Study on urban waste recycling may thus shed light on the proper use of ES instruments for peri-urban agriculture.
Proceeding with a land use type v.s. a service/function
The two themes are both selected to explore the methodology of integrated approach of MFA and ES, with the hope to illuminate future research. The study on conversions of abandoned farmlands proceeds with the management of a particular land use type; while the study on agricultural recycling of urban wastes proceeds with the management of a ES/agricultural function.
Land use types or characteristics were commonly linked to ES assessment and management in the literature (Costanza et al., 1997; Troy and Wilson, 2006; Ma et Swinton., 2011), as well as the reformed CAP and Agri-Environmental Measures (Potter and Burney, 2002; Donald and Evans, 2006). Burkhard et al. (2009, 2014) even concluded a matrix of the different land cover types’ capacities to provide selected ecosystem goods and services. Study on the appearance and management of abandoned farmlands reveals the mutual relations between land use change and evolution of ES/land functions. Study on agricultural recycling of urban wastes investigates the multiple influences on the supply-demand relationships. These approaches may be used for other land use types and ES/agricultural function, respectively.
Multi-level analyzes for the two in-depth studies
Multi-level analyzes are carried out for the two in-depth studies, including both an analysis on the regional pattern and a local investigation on practices and perceptions of different actors at two local areas. The two local areas investigated for abandoned farmlands are the bench of Seine at Triel-sur-Seine and Carrière-sous-Poissy. Another two local areas for investigation on agricultural recycling of urban wastes are the Plaine-de-Versailles and the Plateau-de-Saclay.
Multi-level issue in the management of abandoned farmlands
Management of abandoned farmlands is not a one-fold issue; a multi-scale approach is necessary. First, land abandonment is occurring within a landscape and reflects the change of landscape structure (Baudry, 1991). Ecological effects can only be told at the regional level. Analysis on abandoned farmlands within the context of regional land use pattern provides a comprehensive perspective to understand, predict and manage abandonment at regional scale. There are extensive studies on remote rural areas (Gellrich and Zimmermann, 2007; Díaz et al., 2011; Navarro and Pereira, 2012), but few about peri-urban areas. One example: La Greca et al. (2011) proposed a land use suitability model based on land cover analysis and fragmentation analysis to guide the regional management of land use, including the reuse of abandoned farmlands, in Catania metropolitan area of Italy.
Then, management of abandoned farmlands is inevitably a local issue, concerning a great heterogeneity that can be hardly perceived at the regional level. An abandoned land of 1000 m2 is striking in the neighborhood and in the municipal land use management, but is almost impossible to notice at the level of a big metropolitan region like Ile-de-France.
Furthermore, interactions between different scales are not negligible. Massive abandonment happens in the area where a national project is implanted. It is necessary to understand the mismatches and conflicts between local actors and managers at higher level. The study of Gervais and Jaouich (1984) on two lots of abandoned farmlands in the suburb of Québec revealed that the return of abandoned farmlands to agriculture may be difficult in local cases in despite of the favorable regional policy for peri-urban agriculture.
Table of contents :
General introduction
1. Challenge of peri-urban agriculture
1.1. A challenging future of peri-urban agriculture
1.2. Existing strategies for preserving peri-urban agricultural lands
1.3. Relations with “Urban Agriculture”
2. Ecosystem Services and agriculture
2.1. Definition of Ecosystem Services
2.2. Agro-ecosystem
2.3. Ecosystem Services and agriculture
2.4. Challenges of Ecosystem Services in agricultural research
3. Multifunctional Agriculture
3.1. Definition of Multifunctional Agriculture
3.2. Role of MFA in the policies of France and Europe
3.3. Future of MFA
4. Integrated approaches of ES and MFA
5. Objectives of the dissertation
5.1. Development of an integrated framework of ES and MFA for peri-urban agriculture
5.1.1. Comparative review of MFA and ES in agricultural research
5.1.2. Further development of the integrated framework for peri-urban agriculture
5.1.3. Application in the case of Ile-de-France Region
5.2. In-depth studies on abandoned farmlands and agricultural recycling of urban wastes
5.2.1. Management of abandoned lands in peri-urban agriculture
5.2.2. Agricultural recycling of urban organic wastes
5.2.3. Proceeding with a land use type v.s. a service/function
5.3. Multi-level analyzes for the two in-depth studies
5.3.1. Multi-level issue in the management of abandoned farmlands
5.3.2. Multi-level issue in the agricultural recycling of urban waste
6. Structure of the dissertation
Part 1 Development of an integrated framework of MFA and ES for peri-urban agriculture
Chapter 1 Comparative Review of Multifunctionality and Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Agriculture
1. Introduction
2. Literature review of multifunctional agriculture and ecosystem services
2.1. Publication statistics
2.2. Ideological bases of MFA and ES
2.2.1. Historical use of the term “function” in MFA and ES
2.2.2. Provision mechanisms of MFA and ES
2.2.3 Farm-centred approaches versus service-centred approaches
2.3. Comparison of MFA and ES research approaches
2.3.1. Identification and classification of functions/ecosystem services
2.3.2. Quantification, valuation, and mapping of functions/ecosystem services
2.3.3. Trade-offs and synergies between functions/ecosystem services
2.3.4. MFA design and ES management
3. Towards an integrated research framework for multifunctional agriculture and ecosystem
services
3.1. Bundle of ES and spectrum of MFA
3.2. Land-sharing versus land-sparing
3.3. An integrated conceptual framework of MFA and ES
4. Conclusions
Chapter 2 Evolution of agricultural land use in the Ile-de-France Region
1. Study area and methods
1.1. Study area
1.2. Methods
2. Results
2.1. Consumption of cultivable lands by urbanization
2.1.1. Continual urban extension before 1960s
2.1.2. Peri-urbanization and sub-center construction since 1960s
2.2. Evolution of agricultural land use
2.2.1. Structure of arable lands
2.2.2. Evolution of agricultural land use
2.3. Comparison between urban consumption of cultivable lands and the evolution of utilized agricultural lands
2.3.1. Fast urban consumption of agricultural lands drives fast land abandonment
2.3.2. Peri-urban agricultural land use pattern under urban influences
Chapter 3 Integrated framework of MFA and ES for peri-urban agriculture and application in Ile-de-France Region
1. An integrated framework of MFA and ES for peri-urban agriculture
2. Application of the framework in Ile-de-France Region
2.1. Food production ES and related social and economic functions
2.1.1. Food supply function
2.1.2. Function of economic revenue and employment
2.2. Alternative functions and related ES
2.2.1. Landscape aesthetic and cultural ES and related functions
2.2.2. Function of urban waste recycling and related ES
2.2.3 Environmental functions for maintenance of regulating and supporting ES
Conclusions
Part 2 Managing Abandoned Farmlands in Peri-Urban Area: a Multi-level Approach in the case of Ile-de- France Region
Introduction
Chapter 4 Materials and methodology of the study on abandoned farmlands in Ile-de-France
1. Study area and selection of local study sites
1.1. Abandoned farmlands in Ile-de-France Region
1.2. Selection of two local study sites
2. Identification of the principal land use trajectories and abandoned lands
2.1. Land use data
2.2. Computing and selection of the principal land use change trajectories
3. Classification of municipalities to identify different situations of abandonment
3.1. Indicators used for the clustering analysis
3.2. Clustering analysis on municipalities
3.3. Comparing the phenomenon of abandonment in the four groups of municipalities
4. Temporal evolution in the appearance and reuse of abandoned farmlands
5. Interviews with different actors in two local areas
5.1. Carrying out the interviews
5.2. Analysis of the interviews
Chapter 5 Results of the study on abandoned farmlands in Ile-de-France
1. Principal land use changes and the distribution of farmland abandonment
1.1. The principal land use change trajectories
1.2. Spatial distribution of land use changes and abandoned farmlands
2. Classification of municipalities and the different situations of abandonment
2.1. Naming the factors
2.2. Results of the classification
2.3. Differences among groups and test of significance
2.4. Different situations of abandoned lands among the four groups
2.4.1. Cluster 2: municipalities with strong rural characteristics
2.4.2. Cluster 3: highly urbanized municipalities
2.4.3. Cluster 6: municipalities in strong land abandonment because of non-urban factors 107
2.4.4. Cluster 7: municipalities in strong peri-urbanization
3. Evolution of the appearance and reuse of abandoned agricultural lands
4. Social perceptions of ecosystem services and functions of abandoned farmlands
4.1. Differences among actors at different levels
4.1.1. At the individual level
4.1.2. At the municipal level
4.1.3. Coordination of the PNR of Chevreuse
4.2. Comparison of social perceptions between two study areas
4.2.1. Convergences between the two areas
4.2.2. Divergences between the two areas
4.3. Three categories of actors identified with hierarchical clustering analysis
Conclusions
Part 3 Multiscale Influences on the Supply-Demand Relationships of Urban Waste Recycling in Peri-urban Agriculture in the Ile-de-France Region
Introduction
Chapter 6 Materials and methodology of the study on agricultural recycling of urban wastes in the Ile-de- France Region
1. Study area and selection of local study sites
1.1. Study area
1.2. Selection of two local study sites
2. Methods to analyze the regional pattern of supply-demand relationships of sewage sludge land application
2.1. Regional pattern of sewage sludge production
2.2. Distribution of suitable agricultural lands for sewage sludge application
2.2.1. Identification of lands of “Grande Culture”
2.2.2. Considering the limitation of regulations
2.2.3. Municipal potential for land application of sewage sludge
2.3. Spatial flows of sewage sludge through land application in Seine-et-Marne
2.4. Estimation on crop succession pattern in Ile-de-France
3. Interviews and analysis on multiscale influences on the supply-demand relationships
Chapter 7 Results of the study on agricultural recycling of urban waste in the Ile-de-France Region
1. Regional pattern of supply-demand relationship of sewage sludge for land application
1.1. The side of sewage sludge production in Ile-de-France
1.1.1. Statistics of the production and outlets of sewage sludge
1.1.2. Spatial pattern of sewage sludge production
1.2. Municipal potential regarding agricultural lands suitable for sewage sludge application
1.2.1. General structure of agricultural lands in Ile-de-France
1.2.2. Area of agricultural lands suitable for sewage sludge application at the municipal level
1.3. Spatial flows of sewage sludge through land application in Seine-et-Marne
1.3.1. An overall picture of the spatial flows in Seine-et-Marne
1.3.2. Spatial flows of sewage sludge from particular plants
1.4. Estimation of the regional pattern of crop succession
1.4.1. Preferences to crop types and periods for sewage sludge application
1.4.2. Estimation of crop succession pattern in Ile-de-France
2. Multiscale influences on the supply-demand relationships of urban waste recycling in periurban agriculture
2.1. A framework about the multiscale influences on supply-demand relationship
2.1.1. At individual scale
2.1.2. At the scale of local area
2.1.3. Regulations at superior scales
2.1.4. Interscale influences
2.2. Categories of farmers regarding urban waste use
Conclusions
General discussions
1. An integrated framework of MFA and ES for peri-urban agriculture
1.1. Value of the integrated framework for peri-urban agricultural research
1.2. The remaining question of defining ES and agricultural functions
1.3. Interaction between the different ES/functions
2. Considering the mutual relations between land use and ES/MFA
2.1. Mutual action between land use and ES/MFA
2.2. The mutual acting mechanism between land use and ES/function in the management of abandoned farmlands in peri-urban areas
3. Mutual services between actors in agricultural recycling of urban waste
3.1. Mutual services between farmers and waste producers in the agricultural recycling of urban waste
3.2. Implications to Payments for Ecosystem Services/Environmental Services
4. Multi-scale influences and scale mismatch
5. Methodology
5.1. Two in-depth studies
5.2. Multi-level approach
5.2.1. Considering the regional pattern
5.2.2. Inconsistence in the results between regional study and local investigations
6. Operational implications
6.1. Management of abandoned farmlands in peri-urban area
6.2. Improve the system of agricultural recycling of urban waste
Conclusions
References
Appendice
