PMC9550154_01
Common agroforestry practices in the integrated landscape initiative: Sheep and sweet chestnuts (top left), cows with kiwi (top right), goat herding in a semi-open landscape (bottom left), unburned grazed fruit orchard surrounded by burned forests (bottom right). Note the discontinuous tree canopies and the sparce understory fuels in the agroforestry systems
10457_2022_771_Fig2_HTML.jpg
PMC9550154_01_10457_2022_771_Fig2_HTML.jpg
Fig2
Farms were often agroforestry systems, e.g. sheep husbandry in a chestnut orchard (Fig. 2).
Farmer perceptions of a Wildfire impacts, b Measures against wildfires, c Motivations for land management and d Barriers to success. Color intensity reflect answer categories. Mean values are shown in brackets. (Color figure online)
10457_2022_771_Fig3_HTML.jpg
PMC9550154_01_10457_2022_771_Fig3_HTML.jpg
Fig3
More than half fully or mainly agreed they were strongly affected by wildfire (Fig. 3a), with the vast majority in full agreement. We listed potential measures against wildfires and asked about their usefulness (Fig. 3b). We asked about the importance of various motivations for their land management as part of the initiative (Fig. 3c). We asked land managers to agree or disagree with statements about the severity of possible barriers to success for their activities (Fig. 3d).
Farmer perceptions of a Regional outcomes, b Personal outcomes, c Success factors and d Policy recommendations. Color intensity reflects answer categories. Mean values are shown in brackets. (Color figure online)
10457_2022_771_Fig4_HTML.jpg
PMC9550154_01_10457_2022_771_Fig4_HTML.jpg
Fig4
Regarding regional outcomes, "helped combating wildfires" was agreed with by the most respondents (Fig. 4a). "Increased local ecological knowledge" was second, very closely followed by "increased biodiversity" and "increased sustainable land management." Over 80% agreed or strongly agreed with four statements above, and only 2% strongly disagreed. "Counteracted abandonment," "improved the regional economy," and "improved the well-being of locals" were agreed with by more than half of the land managers, while only 2 to 4% strongly disagreed with them. The rate of agreement about personal outcomes was more differentiated (Fig. 4b). The majority (over 60%) of land managers perceived all the suggested success factors as very important (Fig. 4c). All options received strong support from land managers (Fig. 4d).