Kilian J Murphy1, Daire Ó hUallacháin 11 Teagasc – Crops, Environment and Land Use Programme, Johnstown Castle, Wexford, IrelandCorresponding author: kilian.murphy@teagasc.ieAbstract 1. Agricultural ecosystems are increasingly shaped by the introduction of intersectional environmental policies, many of which are designed to address pertinent issues such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and sustainable resource use. However, these policies can come into conflict with one another, creating unintended consequences for biodiversity and land management.2. This research examines the current policy landscape in European agriculture, focusing on the ways in which directives aimed at environmental improvements, such as nitrogen management and biofuel production, can inadvertently impact biodiversity conservation goals. Drawing on recent case studies, this paper explores how new policies can interact with existing strategies and we examine the outcomes for nature, stakeholders and policy-makers.3. A recurring theme across our case studies is the need for tailored, site-specific longitudinal research to unravel the complexities of policy conflicts and pave the way for innovative, evidence-based, synergistic solutions that promote sustainable agricultural productivity, biodiversity conservation, and environmental health.4. This research emphasises the need for comprehensive research programmes to guide future policy-making, such that research is undertaken to support novel policy, ensuring that environmental goals are met without compromising biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes.5. Practical Implication : Cross-cutting policies may become increasingly common in the future of agricultural sustainability, therefore it is crucial for policymakers and stakeholders to fully understand the potential impacts (synergies and trade-offs) of implemented measures. Through collecting the necessary data, policy-makers, scientists and stakeholders can collectively make informed decisions and effectively address potential conflicts in an evidence-based manner.Key Words: Policy, Land-use change, biodiversity, environment, stakeholders, agriculture.

Headwater streams can constitute up to 80% of river channel length and are vulnerable to anthropogenic pressures due to their high connectivity to adjacent land, large relative catchment size and low dilution capacity. In these environments unrestricted cattle access is a potential significant cause of water quality deterioration, resulting from increases in stream bank erosion, riparian damage and sediment deposition among others. Several studies have reported improvements in physico-chemical and hydromorphological conditions of streams following elimination of cattle access; few, however, have focussed on the ecological impacts of such management practices. Here, such impacts are assessed. We look at the short-term effects by comparing habitat condition, sediment deposition, and instream macroinvertebrate communities upstream and downstream of cattle access points prior to, and one year following exclusion via fencing. The long-term effects are also measured by reassessing a small stream catchment entirely fenced off from cattle access in 2008 under a concerted management effort. In the short term, cattle exclusion led to reduction in deposited sediment downstream of cattle access points and a related homogenisation of macroinvertebrate community structure between upstream and downstream sampling points. Increased abundances of specific indicator taxa ( Ancylus fluviatilis, Glossosomatidae and Elmidae) in the fenced catchment following 9 years of exclusion highlight the long-term ecological benefits of such mitigation practices. These findings highlight the importance of incentivised agri-environment schemes in reducing the negative impacts of cattle access to these vulnerable ecosystems.