The increased demand of food produced through sustainable agriculture has resulted in localised amelioration of intensive management imposed by agroecosystems. However, these newly available niches are often isolated and plant species may not be able to recolonise fragmented agroecosystems from where they have been extirpated. Plant reintroduction can overcome dispersal limitation in agroecosystems but may also generate conflicts that jeopardise conservation efforts. Conflicts arise when reintroductions are perceived to place constraints on the management and productivity of agroecosystems: the translocated plants may require space sharing with crops, may have negative effects on crop yields, and come with the expectation that farmers must modify their farming practices and accommodate legal obligations deriving from protected species status. Benefits include economic incentives that pay farmers through CAP, the conservation of nature, ecosystem services, an effective marketing strategy and increased aesthetic value that might generate ecotourism. We discuss the practical implications of the abovementioned issues by reference to two cases of European species in which different approaches to reintroduction resulted in opposite outcomes (i.e., consensus vs. opposition). Coexistence of threatened plants and crops is possible if farmers and local stakeholders are involved in a conservation project from an early stage and if farmers conservation efforts turn into benefits for their income. Based on these considerations, we propose a strategic framework to promote reintroduction of threatened plants in agroecosystems (land sharing) and policy advancement aimed at recognising the role of farmers in maintaining biodiversity on their lands.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.