Résumé
Afforestation following agricultural abandonment along with urbanization and agricultural intensification are dominant land use/cover changes (LUCC) long lasting and still ongoing today in Europe. They have major consequences on biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES). However, afforestation has interestingly many negative as well as positive impacts (Foote and Grogan, 2010; Lasanta et al., 2015; Ustaoglu and Collier, 2018). Our work focuses on a study zone in the Massif Central region of France which is undergoing those three LUCC. We aimed at mapping LUCC and evaluate the effects of afforestation on ecosystems and ES. Using historical areal orthophotos and data bases we mapped LUC in 1946 and in 2019. Data were subsequently obtained on field sites representing plots of various succession stages, from grasslands to mature forest. They characterize multiple parameters: vegetation (richness, abondance), soil (structure, composition) and carbon stock as a regulation ES. Comparison between 1946 and 1999 LUC maps confirmed the increase of wooded areas (19% in 1946 and 34% in 2019) and of urban areas (3% and 13%) and the decrease of agricultural lands (78% and 51%). Moreover, we observed a land-sparing trend with plain areas at low altitudes being dedicated to urbanization and intensified croplands while steep areas at higher altitude are much concerned by afforestation. Changes in vegetation composition will be discussed in parallel with soil data and carbon stock. Foote, R.L., Grogan, P., 2010. Soil Carbon Accumulation During Temperate Forest Succession on Abandoned Low Productivity Agricultural Lands. Ecosystems 13, 795–812.Lasanta, T., Nadal-Romero, E., Arnáez, J., 2015. Managing abandoned farmland to control the impact of re-vegetation on the environment. The state of the art in Europe. Environmental Science & Policy 52, 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.05.012Ustaoglu, E., Collier, M.J., 2018. Farmland abandonment in Europe: an overview of drivers, consequences, and assessment of the sustainability implications. Environ. Rev. 26, 396–416. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2018-0001