Agriculture for nature

The organisation of the rural area requires a spatial, horizontal approach: a way of thinking and acting in which land use, biodiversity, water, energy, agriculture, and the living environment are considered together within a geographically delineated area. This spatial logic is by definition area-based: solutions emerge from the soil, the landscape, and the local community. Examples include area-based processes around water levels, biodiversity restoration, nature-inclusive agriculture, or balancing competing spatial claims for housing, energy, or recreation. The core principle is that functions cannot ignore one another; they literally share the same physical space.

In contrast stands the vertical food chain, often depicted as the hourglass model: approximately 50,000 farmers at the base, several thousand processors above them, followed by a highly concentrated layer of five purchasing organisations (retail and food service), and finally millions of consumers. This chain is organised around scale, efficiency, standardisation, and international market dynamics. Value creation often shifts upward in the chain: farmers operate in a global market, while retailers and processors largely determine market power and price formation.

The clash between these vertical and horizontal logics arises when spatial choices—such as extensification, landscape elements, water management, or mixed land uses—appear to undermine the efficiency and economies of scale of the vertical chain. For example, an area may strive for nature-inclusive or circular agriculture, while the chain demands uniform products, low costs, and high volumes. Spatial requirements (such as buffer zones, ecological corridors, or water retention) can also affect the business model of individual farmers, while the chain itself shows limited flexibility in terms of pricing, risk sharing, or contractual conditions.

At the same time, these two systems cannot be seen in isolation. Sustainable spatial planning requires a value chain that supports area-based production—through long-term contracts, value creation for ecosystem services, or regional marketing models. Conversely, spatial logic can guide transition within the chain by incorporating new product streams, biodiversity requirements, or landscape management into chain agreements.

The challenge, therefore, is to connect the vertical value chain with the horizontal, area-based approach, so that spatial quality and economic performance reinforce rather than obstruct one.

Expected Outcomes (From Call):

• land managers, farmers, foresters, agri-businesses (including SMEs), and policy makers gain access to practical knowledge of clear demonstrations of benefits and trade-offs associated with biologically diversifying their agroecosystem;

• farmers, land managers and foresters are incentivised and rewarded for implementing practices that improve agrobiodiversity, leading to higher incomes and long-term sustainability and resilience of agriculture, greater food security, competitiveness, and healthier ecosystems;

• enhanced capabilities for farmers to store, process, and market their diverse raw materials and products, derived from greater agrobiodiversity, while improving their market access and strengthening their position within the value chain.