Agroforestry as a Tool for Restoring Degraded Agricultural Landscapes in Ukraine: From EU Policy to Practical Solutions
Key Takeaway
Agroforestry and protective forest plantations can play an important role in restoring Ukraine’s degraded agricultural landscapes, strengthening their resilience to climate change and conserving biodiversity. This is why EU-LANDLINK combines the study of European Union policies with practical issues of land restoration, the establishment and conservation of protective forest plantations, and sustainable agricultural landscape management.
This approach is grounded in the European Green Deal and the EU Forest Strategy for 2030. Together, they provide a European framework in which climate neutrality, ecosystem restoration, biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of natural resources are treated as interconnected objectives.
Why Is This Topic Important?
This issue is particularly important for Ukraine, given the impacts of climate change and land degradation. In this context, shelterbelts should be viewed as elements of agricultural landscapes that support biodiversity, protect soils, influence water dynamics and provide ecological corridors.
Ukraine also has specific Rules for the Maintenance and Conservation of Field Shelterbelts Located on Agricultural Land, approved by Resolution No. 650 of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. The document regulates measures for maintaining these plantations and aims to sustain their resilience, productivity and protective functions.
European Policy Framework
The European Green Deal sets out the transition to a climate-neutral, resource-efficient and competitive economy. The European Union has established the goals of achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and reducing net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 compared with 1990 levels. Nature restoration and natural carbon sinks are important components of climate action within this framework.
The EU Forest Strategy for 2030 is particularly relevant to EU-LANDLINK. It aims to improve the quantity and quality of EU forests and strengthen their protection, restoration and resilience. The strategy is directly linked to the European Green Deal and the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, recognising the multifunctional role of forests in supporting climate, biodiversity, the economy and rural development.
Key priorities include restoring and expanding biodiverse forests, strategic monitoring, data collection, skills development and planting at least 3 billion additional trees in the EU by 2030 in accordance with ecological principles.
Current State of the Problem
The condition of agroforestry and protective woody landscape features in Ukraine’s agricultural landscapes is currently shaped by several interconnected challenges: climate stress, ageing and degradation of plantations, insufficient routine maintenance, landscape fragmentation, the impacts of hostilities and difficulties in managing these features over the long term.
A substantial proportion of Ukraine’s protective forest plantations are neglected. Some have already exceeded their optimal age, while certain shelterbelts are experiencing partial or complete dieback due to climate change and are losing their protective functions.
The problem extends beyond the condition of individual shelterbelts. Ukraine’s agricultural landscapes require a shift from piecemeal maintenance of trees and shrubs to systematic management, with protective plantations treated as part of the infrastructure for sustainable land use. The existing Rules for the Maintenance and Conservation of Field Shelterbelts, approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, provide a regulatory framework for their maintenance. In practice, however, regular inventories, condition assessments, restoration of degraded areas and long-term monitoring remain necessary.
Climate change is an additional systemic factor. In 2026, the State Forest Resources Agency of Ukraine reported that, as of 1 July, forest stands affected by dieback covered a total of 247,400 hectares within enterprises under its management. These figures do not directly represent all field shelterbelts in Ukraine, but they illustrate the overall scale of climatic and biotic risks facing woody vegetation.
The war further complicates the situation. According to the State Forest Resources Agency, almost one-third of Ukraine’s forests have suffered varying degrees of damage as a result of the full-scale aggression, while approximately 450,000 hectares of forest land remain contaminated with explosive ordnance. This restricts access, inventories, maintenance, monitoring and restoration work. Although these figures refer to forest land as a whole, they demonstrate the security context in which natural and agroforestry systems are currently being restored.
The current situation in Ukraine is also characterised by two contrasting processes. On the one hand, some protective plantations are degrading or losing their functionality. On the other, natural forest regeneration is occurring on abandoned agricultural land. In 2026, the Ministry of Economy and Environment reported more than 1 million hectares of naturally regenerated forests existing in a land-use “grey zone”. This offers potential for increasing forest cover and restoring ecosystems, while also requiring legal clarification and strategic planning.
The central problem therefore goes beyond an insufficient number of trees in agricultural landscapes. It concerns the loss of functionality in agroforestry systems: some existing plantations are ageing or degrading, new systems are being established without systematic planning, and management decisions often fail to integrate climate, soil, biodiversity and economic objectives.
What Does European Experience in Agroforestry Show?
European experience suggests that agroforestry should be viewed as a multifunctional land-use system combining agricultural production with ecological functions. European studies recognise a range of agroforestry practices, including field shelterbelts, hedgerows, windbreaks, riparian buffer strips, trees on pastures, alley cropping and silvopastoral systems. Linear woody landscape features—hedgerows, shelterbelts and windbreaks—are among the most extensively studied in Europe.
A systematic evidence map published in 2022 covered 585 primary studies from 31 countries. Within the European sample, research was most heavily concentrated on hedgerows, shelterbelts and windbreaks. Most of the evidence concerns regulating ecosystem services, including soil and water conditions, habitat provision for biodiversity, regulation of material flows and carbon storage. This means that the ecological benefits of agroforestry systems in Europe have a much broader evidence base than their direct effects on household income or social well-being.
European experience also challenges the simplistic assumption that introducing woody vegetation automatically produces positive outcomes. Results depend on the system type, spatial configuration, soil and climatic conditions, tree species, agricultural practices and the land user’s objectives. The AGFORWARD research project therefore worked with different types of agroforestry systems and more than 40 stakeholder groups across Europe, combining field trials with the involvement of farmers and practitioners. This approach demonstrated the importance of adapting solutions to local conditions rather than simply replicating a particular model.
Another lesson from the EU concerns barriers to adoption. Studies of agroforestry perceptions among European farmers, landowners, advisers, researchers and conservationists show that adoption decisions depend on more than anticipated environmental benefits. Economic viability, management complexity, long payback periods, access to knowledge, advisory support and predictable rules also matter. European practice is therefore increasingly shifting towards support systems that reduce risks for land users.
This is clearly reflected in the EU’s current Common Agricultural Policy. Under the CAP 2023–2027, agroforestry is explicitly included among the practices eligible for support through eco-schemes. The underlying principle is that farmers receive support for both agricultural production and the provision of public goods, including natural resource conservation and improvements in soil, water, landscapes and climate resilience.
This policy is particularly relevant to soils: the European Commission explicitly identifies agroforestry as a practice that can improve soil structure and increase soil organic matter. Agroforestry is also recognised as a practice that can enhance soil water retention and support more sustainable water use.
The European evidence base nevertheless reveals an important gap: biophysical and environmental outcomes are much better studied than long-term socioeconomic effects. A systematic review found that 98% of the included studies assessed ecosystem services, while aspects of human well-being received considerably less attention. This sends an important policy signal: an effective agroforestry programme should assess environmental impacts alongside farmers’ costs, payback periods, productivity, risks and organisational barriers.
Recent European research confirms another trend: interest in agroforestry is growing rapidly, but the economic and behavioural aspects of adoption remain less well studied than environmental outcomes. A review of EU literature covering 1984–2025 found that 42% of the publications analysed appeared in 2021–2025 alone, with research concentrated primarily in Spain, Italy, Portugal, Germany and France. Ecosystem services remain the main focus, while economic issues and stakeholder perspectives are less well represented.
European experience supports several analytical conclusions. Agroforestry is most effective when it is integrated into broader landscape planning; when environmental benefits are combined with economic incentives; when farmers have access to advice, forecasting and decision-support tools; and when outcomes are assessed over the long term. For Ukraine, this means that restoring field shelterbelts and developing agroforestry should form part of a broader policy for sustainable land management, climate adaptation and farmer support.
