PRODIGE - Taking into account the needs of potential users and functional representations of landscape elements in the design of a biodiversity indicator for agricultural landscape

PRODIGE aims both to (i) analyse the needs of potential users of biodiversity indicators and their position in relation to the NIVA-Biodiversity indicator; and (ii) assess the extent to which taking landscape elements (crops, semi-natural environments, etc.) into account, both quantitatively (e.g. number of crops, percentage of semi-natural environments) and qualitatively (functional characteristics incorporating agricultural practices), improves the consideration of biodiversity in agricultural practices. etc.) at a quantitative level (e.g. number of crops, percentage of semi-natural environments) and qualitative level (functional characteristics incorporating agricultural practices) improves the consideration of ecological mechanisms and therefore the relevance of the indicator, its usability and its suitability for the needs of users of the NIVA-Biodiversity indicator.

Approaches

• Survey to characterise the profiles of potential users, their approaches to assessing biodiversity in their activities, and their needs and expectations with regard to such indicators. It was conducted at the regional level for the usability analysis framework, in the Vallées et Coteaux de Gascogne region, in the PYGAR Workshop Zone, and at the national level for the usage diagnosis.
•  
• Characterisation of the functional diversity of landscape elements and crops using ecological concepts and agronomic knowledge. The effects on biodiversity were studied using a large pre-existing dataset (FarmLand project).
• Finally, this knowledge was integrated into a predictive indicator of impacts on biodiversity. It is in this context that a method for aggregating variables, CONTRA, was computerised on the INRAE MEANS platform to facilitate its use in the design of predictive indicators.

Results

The use of usability and usage diagnosis frameworks has highlighted divergent expectations and perceptions among users, depending on whether they are potential users or data providers. The definition of biodiversity is one example, between a more heritage-based approach focused on species conservation, championed by environmental protection stakeholders, and a more functional approach based on services, championed by agricultural stakeholders. However, a consensus emerged on the need for consultation between stakeholders on the indicator.
The functional characterisation of crops led to the establishment of a database for 300 crops (with a more complete version for 57 crops). Variables taking functional diversity into account were identified as relevant for inclusion in the indicator.
The feasibility of calculating the indicator was improved in the Tier 1 version. Work is to be continued to produce a consolidated version. 

Paricipants

INRAE units involved

• UMR LAE - Laboratoire Environnent et Agronomie - Université de Lorraine
• UMR DYNAFOR - Dynamiques et Écologie des Paysages Agriforestiers
• UMR SADAPT - Science pour l'action et le développement, activités, produits, territoires - Université Paris Saclay / AgroParisTech

Partners

• IDEAS - Initiative for Design in Agrifood Systems