Multifunctional Perennial Cropping Systems (MPCs) have the potential to produce material goods, while improving ecosystem health through soil stabilization, biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration, and other functions. Farmers and landowners, unfortunately, face critical barriers in the adoption of these systems. One barrier is the lack of tools to design, plan, and implement MCPs for optimal performance. The development of new decision support tools could provide information needed to weigh the tradeoffs and synergies in alternative landscape scenarios. Another critical barrier is the economics of perennial systems – they are difficult to justify when compared against the immediate returns of annual crops. Yet, by targeting lands that are marginal in their production capacity due to poor soil, frequent flooding, or other factors, the economic case for perennial systems becomes stronger. This study targeted landowners in the Upper Sangamon River Watershed (USRW) of the Midwest US. Landowners were surveyed to better understand adoption behaviors and motivations to guide the development of decision-support tools. A review of literature and web-based resources was conducted to determine tools currently available to support land use planning and design of MPCs. Finally, a GIS analysis of marginal land in the USRW revealed areas to target for design implementation.
Results/Conclusions .
Survey results revealed farmers’ greatest environmental concerns were agricultural run-off and soil loss, with less concern for wildlife habitat and biodiversity conservation. The most popular use for marginal land was to enroll it in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and 58% of respondents agreed they would be more likely to enroll in a CRP program if products could be harvested from it. The review of literature and web-based resources confirmed that, while some farm design tools do exist, they lack necessary features to support a transition to MPCs. GIS mapping and analysis of the Upper Sangamon River Watershed demonstrated that marginal lands exist throughout the area, even though much of the land is considered “prime farmland” by coarse mapping. For specific farms, highly detailed, fine resolution data from yield monitors would further refine the ideal “marginal” areas to convert to perennial systems. Since these are the same targets as for conservation programs, multifunctional and compatible activities should be further explored. Future work will include evaluating design alternatives on several participating small farms, engaging university students in the development of MPCs through existing courses, and developing software to assist farms with land planning for MPCs.