UDTR Global Rights of Nature Radar

Agroforstsysteme zum Gewässer-, Natur- und Klimaschutz: Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten in Sachsen im Naturwiederherstellungsgesetz, als PIK, im ANK und in der GAP

Identification

Public canonical key

radar:r-6b84e3d64ae7d2ce609846d102b71a20

Authors

Hübner, Rico

Reported year

2026

Reported language

und

Source type

Text

First detected

2026-11-13T08:57:07.153164+00:00

Last metadata observation

2026-11-13T08:57:07.153164+00:00

Last HTTP verification

Not checked

Institutions reported by the source

Deutscher Fachverband für Agroforstwirtschaft (DeFAF) e.V.

Documentary abstract — original language

The poster “Agroforstsysteme zum Gewässer-, Natur- und Klimaschutz” by Rico Hübner examines how agroforestry systems can contribute simultaneously to water protection, nature restoration, biodiversity conservation and climate protection, with a particular focus on the regulatory and funding framework in Saxony, Germany. It discusses four main implementation pathways: the EU Nature Restoration Law, production-integrated compensation measures (PIK), the German Action Programme for Natural Climate Protection (ANK), and the Common Agricultural Policy (GAP). A central message is that agroforestry can combine agricultural production with ecological functions. The illustration in the centre of the poster demonstrates this particularly clearly for watercourses: woody vegetation, shrub layers, riparian vegetation, buffer zones and short-rotation coppice strips can be integrated alongside arable land and grassland. These structures are presented as a way of intercepting nutrient inputs from agricultural areas and groundwater before they reach water bodies, while also creating structurally diverse riparian habitats. The diagram additionally places these elements in the context of changing high- and low-water levels, highlighting the potential relevance of agroforestry for riparian landscapes and landscape water management. Research and practical implementation in Saxony have already taken place through the OLGA, ElmaR and AGROfloW projects, which form part of the MODEMA network. AGROfloW has established three practical sites designed to be suitable for production-integrated compensation. Agroforestry under the Nature Restoration Law The poster identifies the EU Nature Restoration Law (Regulation (EU) 2024/1991) as an important new framework for agroforestry. Agroforestry is explicitly included among the examples of possible nature-restoration measures in Annex VII of the regulation. This provides a formal basis for considering agroforestry not only as an agricultural production system but also as an instrument for restoring ecological functions. The regulation also provides an important qualification concerning productive woody elements. Productive trees in sustainable agroforestry systems, trees in extensively managed old orchards on grassland, and productive elements in hedges can under certain conditions be regarded as high-diversity landscape features. According to the poster, this requires that they meet the relevant biodiversity criterion and that harvesting occurs only when it does not endanger biodiversity. Such elements should generally not receive fertilisers or pesticides, apart from the limited application of solid manure. This is significant because it illustrates how productive land use and biodiversity objectives do not necessarily have to be treated as mutually exclusive. Agroforestry can potentially retain an economic production function while simultaneously fulfilling requirements associated with ecological restoration. Production-integrated compensation and nature conservation A second implementation pathway concerns Ausgleichs- und Ersatzmaßnahmen (compensation and replacement measures) under Sections 13 and 15 of Germany's Federal Nature Conservation Act. Where unavoidable interventions damage nature or landscapes, the resulting impairment of ecosystem functions must be compensated for or replaced within the relevant natural area. Compensation aims to restore affected ecological functions in a similar manner, whereas replacement measures establish equivalent functions within the affected natural area. In both cases, the landscape itself must also be appropriately restored or redesigned. Within this context, agroforestry could potentially function as a Produktionsintegrierte Kompensationsmaßnahme (PIK)—a compensation measure that remains integrated into agricultural production rather than removing the land completely from productive use. The poster reports that an expert working group has been established at the Saxon ministry and that a draft concerning PIK is under coordination. However, practical implementation still faces challenges. A negative example involving compensation associated with a pig farm in northern Saxony shows that proposed measures may be rejected when they rely on non-native or unsuitable woody species or where the permanence of the planted vegetation is uncertain. Conversely, the poster cites the restoration of the Tauchnitzgraben as a positive example, involving 2,380 woody plants representing 20 species or varieties. This demonstrates the importance of species selection, ecological suitability and long-term establishment when woody agricultural systems are intended to perform nature-conservation functions. Additional possibilities are provided through Saxony's Förderrichtlinie Natürliches Erbe (FRL NE/2023). Relevant measures include maintenance of young fruit trees, individual nature-conservation projects, and investments in structural elements within agricultural landscapes, such as hedges, field and riparian woody vegetation, tree rows and roadside avenues. Agroforestry and natural climate protection The third policy framework discussed is Germany's Aktionsprogramm Natürlicher Klimaschutz (ANK). According to the poster, the programme provides substantial funding for agroforestry and explicitly recognises agroforestry systems as particularly suitable for increasing carbon storage. This connects agroforestry directly with climate-mitigation objectives as well as biodiversity-oriented agriculture. Nevertheless, the current framework contains limitations. Funding is restricted to strip-based agroforestry systems, meaning that the full range of possible agroforestry designs is not necessarily covered. The poster also argues that agroforestry and woody structures should receive greater recognition under ANK objective 5.b concerning the landscape water balance, particularly in relation to riparian buffer strips. At present, according to the poster, this objective focuses primarily on mineral soils. Future inclusion of agroforestry systems in ANK measure 3.a1 is anticipated. The draft framework foresees strengthening existing support through the GAK and an evaluation beginning in 2028. However, the poster notes an important regional implementation gap: Saxony has so far not planned to use ANK funding for agroforestry. Agroforestry within the Common Agricultural Policy The fourth major pathway is the Common Agricultural Policy (GAP) and its implementation in Germany and Saxony. The poster emphasises that German GAP regulations define woody plants in agroforestry systems as primarily serving raw-material production or food production. Consequently, establishing an agroforestry system does not automatically cause the agricultural area to lose its original land status or its basic agricultural payment. At the same time, these productive woody elements are not automatically classified as protected landscape elements. The GAP's Eco-scheme 3 (ÖR 3) provides an annual payment of €600 per hectare of woody area for maintaining agroforestry management. Restrictions apply to grassland in certain designated areas, including Natura 2000, FFH and SPA areas. Saxony additionally supports investment in establishing agroforestry systems through its agricultural investment funding framework. Eligible investments include establishing agroforestry systems and short-rotation coppice on arable land. The poster reports a 40% funding rate, with possible additional five-percentage-point increments for certain categories, including disadvantaged areas, organic farming and EIP participation. A minimum investment of €20,000 applies. The poster also provides differentiated establishment-support figures linked to the GAK framework. Funding varies according to the type and diversity of woody vegetation, ranging from support for short-rotation coppice strips to higher rates for shrubs and systems producing food, timber or valuable wood. An additional payment is possible where at least five woody species are incorporated, and a €1,300 lump sum is mentioned for preparation of a nature-conservation concept. Particularly relevant for water protection are the Saxon agri-environmental measures AL 13 and GL9, which support succession strips with natural streamside vegetation on arable land and grassland respectively. The poster gives funding levels of €6,301/ha for arable land and €2,455/ha for grassland. These measures have specific requirements concerning hedges and distances from woody vegetation and cannot be combined with Eco-scheme 3. Unlike productive agroforestry woody elements under the previously described GAP framework, these structures are treated as protected landscape elements. Overall conclusion Taken together, the poster presents agroforestry as a multifunctional land-use approach positioned at the intersection of agriculture, water management, biodiversity restoration and climate policy. Its potential goes beyond simply planting trees on agricultural land. In riparian landscapes in particular, agroforestry structures can potentially combine productive use with interception of nutrient flows, establishment of woody and riparian habitats, carbon storage and greater structural diversity. At the same time, the poster demonstrates that implementation depends heavily on how agroforestry is legally classified and which funding instrument is used. A woody strip may be considered a productive component of an agricultural agroforestry system under one mechanism, a protected landscape element under another, or potentially part of a production-integrated ecological compensation measure. These classifications affect agricultural payments, management restrictions, species selection and available financial support. The Saxon context therefore shows both considerable opportunities and remaining implementation barriers. The Nature Restoration Law gives agroforestry explicit recognition as a restoration measure; PIK could connect ecological compensation with continued agricultural production; the ANK establishes a climate-policy rationale based particularly on carbon storage; and the GAP provides both recurring and investment-based financial support. Yet limitations remain, including restrictions on eligible system designs, ecological requirements for woody vegetation, incompatibilities between some funding instruments, and the fact that some nationally available funding opportunities have not yet been taken up for agroforestry in Saxony. Overall, the poster argues for a more integrated understanding of agroforestry: rather than treating agricultural production, water protection, nature restoration and climate mitigation as separate land-use objectives, appropriately designed agroforestry systems can contribute to several of these objectives on the same area. The existing projects and PIK-capable demonstration sites in Saxony indicate that this concept is already moving from policy discussion toward practical implementation.

Identifiers

DOI

10.5281/zenodo.21493423

Documentary context

Documentary family

unknown

Source-reported types

Text

Publishers

Zenodo

Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.

Sources

DataCite · Record 1

• Document · https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.21493423

Documentary status

Relevance pending

Library

This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.