Reframing the land-sparing/land-sharing debate for biodiversity conservation

Recent collapse of crop belts and declining diversity of US agriculture since 1840

Over the last century, US agriculture greatly intensified and became industrialized, increasing in inputs and yields while decreasing in total cropland area. In the industrial sector, spatial agglomeration effects are typical, but such changes in the patterns of crop types and diversity would have major implications for the resilience of food systems to global change. Here, we investigate the extent to which agricultural industrialization in the United States was accompanied by agglomeration of crop types, not just overall cropland area, as well as declines in crop diversity. Based on county-level analyses of individual crop land cover area in the conterminous United States from 1840 to 2017, we found a strong and abrupt spatial concentration of most crop types in very recent years. For 13 of the 18 major crops, the widespread belts that characterized early 20th century US agriculture have collapsed, with spatial concentration increasing 15-fold after 2002. The number of counties producing each crop declined from 1940 to 2017 by up to 97%, and their total area declined by up to 98%, despite increasing total production. Concomitantly, the diversity of crop types within counties plummeted: in 1940, 88% of counties grew >10 crops, but only 2% did so in 2017, and combinations of crop types that once characterized entire agricultural regions are lost. Importantly, declining crop diversity with increasing cropland area is a recent phenomenon, suggesting that corresponding environmental effects in agriculturally dominated counties have fundamentally changed. For example, the spatial concentration of agriculture has important consequences for the spread of crop pests, agrochemical use, and climate change. Ultimately, the recent collapse of most agricultural belts and the loss of crop diversity suggest greater vulnerability of US food systems to environmental and economic change, but the spatial concentration of agriculture may also offer environmental benefits in areas that are no longer farmed.

Perennial Staple Crops: Yields, Distribution, and Nutrition in the Global Food System

Staple crops, which have large amounts of carbohydrates, proteins, and/or fats, provide the bulk of calories in people's diets. Perennial plants, which can be productive for many years without the need for replanting, can produce staple foods and environmental benefits, but their agronomic and nutritional properties haven't been considered synthetically in comparison to annual staples. Here we offer a framework to classify perennial staple crops according to their nutritional categories and cultivation status. We assemble literature to report on the yield potential of 51 perennial staple crops, only 15 of which are well-characterized in existing global datasets. We show the extent and distribution of perennial staple crop production in relation to annual crop types, calculate the carbon stocks they hold, and analyze their nutritional content for three macronutrients and nine micronutrients. We found that most perennial staple crops are regional crops (not globally traded) that grow in the subtropics to tropics. At least one perennial staple crop in each of the five nutritional categories has yields over 2.5 t/ha, in some cases considerably higher, competitive with and in many cases exceeding those of nutritionally comparable annual staples. Perennial staple crops only comprise ~4.5% of total cropland. They hold a modest ~11.4 GtC above and below ground, less than one third of the anthropogenic carbon-equivalent emissions for the year 2018, but more than the ~9 GtC held by the same amount of annual cropland. If linear growth in land under perennial staple production continues to 2040, and replaces only annual cropland, an additional ~0.95 GtC could be sequestered. Many perennial crops also had competitive macronutrient density and yield (per unit area) compared to annual staples; moreover, specific perennial staples are abundant in specific micronutrients, indicating that they can be a nutrient-dense part of diets, unlike the most ubiquitous annual staple crops (corn, wheat, rice) that do not appear in the top 85th percentile for any of the nine micronutrients analyzed. Transition of land and diets to perennial staple crops, if judiciously managed, can provide win-win solutions for both food production and ecosystems.

Ecological intensification and diversification approaches to maintain biodiversity, ecosystem services and food production in a changing world

How do we redesign agricultural landscapes to maintain their productivity and profitability, while promoting rather than eradicating biodiversity, and regenerating rather than undermining the ecological processes that sustain food production and are vital for a liveable planet? Ecological intensification harnesses ecological processes to increase food production per area through management processes that often diversify croplands to support beneficial organisms supplying these services. By adding more diverse vegetation back into landscapes, the agricultural matrix can also become both more habitable and more permeable to biodiversity, aiding in conserving biodiversity over time. By reducing the need for costly inputs while maintaining productivity, ecological intensification methods can maintain or even enhance profitability. As shown with several examples, ecological intensification and diversification can assist in creating multifunctional landscapes that are more environmentally and economically sustainable. While single methods of ecological intensification can be incorporated into large-scale industrial farms and reduce negative impacts, complete redesign of such systems using multiple methods of ecological intensification and diversification can create truly regenerative systems with strong potential to promote food production and biodiversity. However, the broad adoption of these methods will require transformative socio-economic changes because many structural barriers continue to maintain the current agrichemical model of agriculture.

Land Sparing Can Maintain Bird Diversity in Northeastern Bangladesh

One of humanity’s most significant challenges in the process of attaining the established sustainability goals is balancing the growing human demand for food and the need to conserve biodiversity. This challenge requires appropriate land uses that are able to conserve biodiversity while ensuring ample food supply. This study compares bird species diversity and abundance in areas undergoing land sharing and land sparing in northeastern Bangladesh (West Bhanugach Reserved Forest). Birds serve as useful biologic indicators because of their presence within different trophic levels and their well-studied ecology. To survey birds, we selected a total of 66 sampling sites within land-sharing (33) and land-sparing (33) land-use areas. Between May and June 2017, we observed and recorded bird calls within a 50-m radius around each sampling site. We counted 541 individuals from 46 species of birds. The Shannon bird diversity was higher in the land-sparing sites (1.52) than in the land-sharing sites (1.23). We found approximately 30% more bird species (39 vs. 30) and 40% more individuals (318 vs. 223) in the land-sparing areas than land-sharing areas. Three bird species, Arachnothera longirostra, Micropternus brachyurus and Copsychus malabaricus, were significantly associated with the land-sparing sites. This study shows that land sharing negatively affects bird diversity, richness and abundance compared to land-sparing. The use of chemical fertilizers and the lack of food, such as insects, for birds can explain the lower diversity, richness and abundance of birds in the land-sharing areas. Although land sharing is an effective means of producing food, land sparing is the most effective land-use practice for preserving bird diversity in northeastern Bangladesh.

Infectious Diseases and Meat Production

Most infectious diseases in humans originate from animals. In this paper, we explore the role of animal farming and meat consumption in the emergence and amplification of infectious diseases. First, we discuss how meat production increases epidemic risks, either directly through increased contact with wild and farmed animals or indirectly through its impact on the environment (e.g., biodiversity loss, water use, climate change). Traditional food systems such as bushmeat and backyard farming increase the risks of disease transmission from wild animals, while intensive farming amplifies the impact of the disease due to the high density, genetic proximity, increased immunodeficiency, and live transport of farmed animals. Second, we describe the various direct and indirect costs of animal-based infectious diseases, and in particular, how these diseases can negatively impact the economy and the environment. Last, we discuss policies to reduce the social costs of infectious diseases. While existing regulatory frameworks such as the "One Health" approach focus on increasing farms' biosecurity and emergency preparedness, we emphasize the need to better align stakeholders' incentives and to reduce meat consumption. We discuss in particular the implementation of a "zoonotic" Pigouvian tax, and innovations such as insect-based food or cultured meat.

Examining Trajectories of Change for Prosperous Forest Landscapes in Cambodia

Tropical forest landscapes are undergoing rapid transition. Rural development aspirations are rising, and land use change is contributing to deforestation, degradation, and biodiversity loss, which threaten the future of tropical forests. Conservation initiatives must deal with complex social, political, and ecological decisions involving trade-offs between the extent of protected areas and quality of conservation. In Cambodia, smallholders and industrial economic land concessions drive deforestation and forest degradation. Rural economic benefits have not kept pace with development aspirations and smallholders are gradually expanding agriculture into protected forests. We examine the drivers and effects of rural forest landscape transitions in Cambodia to identify trade-offs between conservation and development. Using historical trends analysis and information gathered through key informant interviews, we describe how local communities perceive social and ecological changes, and examine the implications of local development aspirations for conservation. We explore three scenarios for the future of conservation in Cambodia, each with different conservation and community development outcomes. We contend that conservation efforts should focus on strengthening governance to meet social and environmental requirements for sustainable forest landscapes. We suggest potential entry points for governance improvements, including working with local decision-makers and fostering collaboration between stakeholders. There is a need for realistic priority setting in contested tropical forest landscapes. Prosperous rural economies are a necessary but not sufficient condition for conservation.

Biodiversity conservation through the lens of metacommunity ecology

Metacommunity ecology combines local (e.g., environmental filtering and biotic interactions) and regional (e.g., dispersal and heterogeneity) processes to understand patterns of species abundance, occurrence, composition, and diversity across scales of space and time. As such, it has a great potential to generalize and synthesize our understanding of many ecological problems. Here, we give an overview of how a metacommunity perspective can provide useful insights for conservation biology, which aims to understand and mitigate the effects of anthropogenic drivers that decrease population sizes, increase extinction probabilities, and threaten biodiversity. We review four general metacommunity processes-environmental filtering, biotic interactions, dispersal, and ecological drift-and discuss how key anthropogenic drivers (e.g., habitat loss and fragmentation, and nonnative species) can alter these processes. We next describe how the patterns of interest in metacommunities (abundance, occupancy, and diversity) map onto issues at the heart of conservation biology, and describe cases where conservation biology benefits by taking a scale-explicit metacommunity perspective. We conclude with some ways forward for including metacommunity perspectives into ideas of ecosystem functioning and services, as well as approaches to habitat management, preservation, and restoration.

Attractiveness of Cattle Dung to Coprophilous Beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea and Sphaeridiinae) and Their Segregation During the Initial Stages of the Heterotrophic Succession on a Pasture in Southeast Michigan

Only a few mostly older studies analyzed the heterotrophic succession of dung beetles in the Midwestern United States. Such studies are needed to track the impacts of the climate crisis on heterotrophic succession and the associated decomposition processes that are central to soil fertility and carbon sequestration. The current study closes this knowledge gap and provides an easy and efficient method to estimate the relative attractiveness of individual dung pads during heterotrophic succession. The dung beetle community of Carpenter Farm in Adrian, Southeast Michigan was sampled for an entire year, including the winter months, using 15 pitfall traps baited with fresh cow manure. Samples were collected after 48 h and again after 72 h exposure time from the bucket content while leaving the bait unhampered. Eighty-four percent of all beetles were caught in the early sample, but only 6 species were missing in the later sample. A cluster analysis based on Pianka's niche overlap identified a statistically higher mean overlap than expected by chance in a null model (model RA3) and divided the species community clearly into three clusters separating most relocators from most dwellers. Despite using a different method, my results confirmed the successional position of most previously described species and added data for several species with poor or unknown successional state. The successional segregation between dwellers and relocators discovered by the cluster analysis was paralleled by a significantly larger body size of relocators across taxonomic groups as compared to dwellers.

Land-sharing vs. land-sparing urban development modulate predator-prey interactions in Europe

Urban areas are expanding globally as a consequence of human population increases, with overall negative effects on biodiversity. To prevent the further loss of biodiversity, it is urgent to understand the mechanisms behind this loss to develop evidence-based sustainable solutions to preserve biodiversity in urban landscapes. The two extreme urban development types along a continuum, land-sparing (large, continuous green areas and high-density housing) and land-sharing (small, fragmented green areas and low-density housing) have been the recent focus of debates regarding the pattern of urban development. However, in this context, there is no information on the mechanisms behind the observed biodiversity changes. One of the main mechanisms proposed to explain urban biodiversity loss is the alteration of predator-prey interactions. Using ground-nesting birds as a model system and data from nine European cities, we experimentally tested the effects of these two extreme urban development types on artificial ground nest survival and whether nest survival correlates with the local abundance of ground-nesting birds and their nest predators. Nest survival (n = 554) was lower in land-sharing than in land-sparing urban areas. Nest survival decreased with increasing numbers of local predators (cats and corvids) and with nest visibility. Correspondingly, relative abundance of ground-nesting birds was greater in land-sparing than in land-sharing urban areas, though overall bird species richness was unaffected by the pattern of urban development. We provide the first evidence that predator-prey interactions differ between the two extreme urban development types. Changing interactions may explain the higher proportion of ground-nesting birds in land-sparing areas, and suggest a limitation of the land-sharing model. Nest predator control and the provision of more green-covered urban habitats may also improve conservation of sensitive birds in cities. Our findings provide information on how to further expand our cities without severe loss of urban-sensitive species and give support for land-sparing over land-sharing urban development.

Aligning biodiversity conservation and agricultural production in heterogeneous landscapes

Understanding the trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and agricultural production has become a fundamental question in sustainability science. Substantial research has focused on how species' populations respond to agricultural intensification, with the goal to understand whether conservation policies that spatially separate agriculture and conservation or, alternatively, integrate the two are more beneficial. Spatial heterogeneity in both species abundance and agricultural productivity have been largely left out of this discussion, although these patterns are ubiquitous from local to global scales due to varying land capacity. Here, we address the question of how to align agricultural production and biodiversity conservation in heterogeneous landscapes. Using model simulations of species abundance and agricultural yields, we show that trade-offs between agricultural production and species' abundance can be reduced by minimizing the cost (in terms of species abundance) of agricultural production. We find that when species' abundance and agricultural yields vary across landscapes, the optimal strategy to minimize trade-offs is rarely pure land sparing or land sharing. Instead, landscapes that combine elements of both strategies are optimal. Additionally, we show how the reference population of a species is defined has important influences on optimization results. Our findings suggest that in the real world, understanding the impact of heterogeneous land capacity on biodiversity and agricultural production is crucial to designing multi-use landscapes that jointly maximize conservation and agricultural benefits.

Intensive farming drives long-term shifts in avian community composition

Agricultural practices constitute both the greatest cause of biodiversity loss and the greatest opportunity for conservation^1,2, given the shrinking scope of protected areas in many regions. Recent studies have documented the high levels of biodiversity-across many taxa and biomes-that agricultural landscapes can support over the short term^1,3,4. However, little is known about the long-term effects of alternative agricultural practices on ecological communities^4,5 Here we document changes in bird communities in intensive-agriculture, diversified-agriculture and natural-forest habitats in 4 regions of Costa Rica over a period of 18 years. Long-term directional shifts in bird communities were evident in intensive- and diversified-agricultural habitats, but were strongest in intensive-agricultural habitats, where the number of endemic and International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List species fell over time. All major guilds, including those involved in pest control, pollination and seed dispersal, were affected. Bird communities in intensive-agricultural habitats proved more susceptible to changes in climate, with hotter and drier periods associated with greater changes in community composition in these settings. These findings demonstrate that diversified agriculture can help to alleviate the long-term loss of biodiversity outside natural protected areas¹.

Biodiversity within the city: Effects of land sharing and land sparing urban development on avian diversity

Urbanization, one of the most extreme human-induced environmental changes, is negatively affecting biodiversity worldwide, strongly suggesting that we should reconcile urban development with conservation. Urbanization can follow two extreme types of development within a continuum: land sharing (buildings mixed with dispersed green space) or land sparing (buildings interspersed with green patches that concentrate biodiversity-supporting vegetation). Recent local-scale studies indicate that biodiversity is typically favored by land sparing. We investigated which of these two types of urbanization is associated with a higher taxonomic (i.e. species richness), functional, and phylogenetic diversity of birds. To do so, we collected information on breeding and wintering bird assemblages in 45 land-sharing and 45 land-sparing areas in nine European cities, which provide the first attempt to explore this question using a large geographical scale and temporal replication. We found that land-sharing urban areas were significantly associated with a higher taxonomic and functional diversity of birds during winter, but not during the breeding season (with only a marginally significant effect for functional diversity). We found no association between the type of urban development and phylogenetic diversity. Our findings indicate that not all components of avian diversity are similarly affected by these two means of urban planning and highlight the importance of integrating the temporal perspective into this kind of studies. Our results also offer useful information to the current debate about the trade-off between biodiversity conservation and human well-being in the context of land sharing and sparing urban practices. In addition, we found that certain small-scale urban landscape characteristics (i.e. few impervious surfaces, high water or tree cover) and human practices (i.e. bird feeders or plants with berries) can help maintaining more diverse urban bird assemblages. We provide specific suggestions for both policymakers and citizens that hopefully will help to create more biodiversity-friendly cities in the future.

Highly diversified crop-livestock farming systems reshape wild bird communities

Agricultural intensification is a leading threat to bird conservation. Highly diversified farming systems that integrate livestock and crop production might promote a diversity of habitats useful to native birds foraging across otherwise-simplified landscapes. At the same time, these features might be attractive to nonnative birds linked to a broad range of disservices to both crop and livestock production. We evaluated the influence of crop-livestock integration on wild bird richness and density along a north-south transect spanning the U.S. West Coast. We surveyed birds on 52 farms that grew primarily mixed vegetables and fruits alone or integrated livestock into production. Crop-livestock systems harbored higher native bird density and richness relative to crop-only farms, a benefit more pronounced on farms embedded in nonnatural landscapes. Crop-livestock systems bolstered native insectivores linked to the suppression of agricultural pest insects but did not bolster native granivores that may be more likely to damage crops. Crop-livestock systems also significantly increased the density of nonnative birds, primarily European Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) and House Sparrows (Passer domesticus) that may compete with native birds for resources. Models supported a small, positive correlation between nonnative density and overall native bird density as well as between nonnative density and native granivore density. Relative to crop-only farms, on average, crop-livestock systems exhibited 1.5 times higher patch richness, 2.4 times higher density of farm structures, 7.3 times smaller field sizes, 2.4 times greater integration of woody crops, and 5.3 times greater integration of pasture/hay habitat on farm. Wild birds may have responded to this habitat diversity and/or associated food resources. Individual farm factors had significantly lower predictive power than farming system alone (change in C statistic information criterion (ΔCIC) = 80.2), suggesting crop-livestock systems may impact wild birds through a suite of factors that change with system conversion. Collectively, our findings suggest that farms that integrate livestock and crop production can attract robust native bird communities, especially within landscapes devoted to intensified food production. However, additional work is needed to demonstrate persistent farm bird communities through time, ecophysiological benefits to birds foraging on these farms, and net effects of both native and nonnative wild birds in agroecosystems.

Aligning Competing Risks? Global Food Security as a Trade-Offs-Based Approach to Risk and Food Policy

Since the 2008 food price crisis, many initiatives have emerged at the intersection between scientific, economic, humanitarian and political fields with a view to ‘feeding 9 billion human beings in 2050’ and to taking up the global food security challenge. Those initiatives have often been criticised for promoting a neo-productivist agenda. By studying the case of the UK Global Food Security programme, this article shows that ‘Global Food Security’ approaches not only re-legitimise production as such, but also looks to invent new ways of confronting production issues with health and/ or environmental issues, and thus of setting priorities. Potentially, this has major consequences for food policy and risk regulation. From this point of view, the UK GFS programme has become part of a movement which goes far beyond food security or agricultural issues as such. This movement includes balancing principles of protection with economic imperatives. Whilst other approaches (such as agroecology) look for integration between these different objectives, this approach is trying to achieve coexistence between objectives perceived to be contradictory. It assumes that sustainability can only be achieved at a global level, and that science must provide the right tools to constantly find the right trade-off between competing objectives. I conclude by discussing how this approach pertains to a re-structuring of capitalism towards an extractive economy, the related forms of regulation and the challenges of this approach for social critique.

Land sparing to make space for species dependent on natural habitats and high nature value farmland

Empirical evidence from four continents indicates that human food demand may be best reconciled with biodiversity conservation through sparing natural habitats by boosting agricultural yields. This runs counter to the conservation paradigm of wildlife-friendly farming, which is influential in Europe, where many species are dependent on low-yielding high nature value farmland threatened by both intensification and abandonment. In the first multi-taxon population-level test of land-sparing theory in Europe, we quantified how population densities of 175 bird and sedge species varied with farm yield across 26 squares (each with an area of 1 km²) in eastern Poland. We discovered that, as in previous studies elsewhere, simple land sparing, with only natural habitats on spared land, markedly out-performed land sharing in its effect on region-wide projected population sizes. However, a novel 'three-compartment' land-sparing approach, in which about one-third of spared land is assigned to very low-yield agriculture and the remainder to natural habitats, resulted in least-reduced projected future populations for more species. Implementing the three-compartment model would require significant reorganization of current subsidy regimes, but would mean high-yield farming could release sufficient land for species dependent on both natural and high nature value farmland to persist.

Developing stakeholder-driven scenarios on land sharing and land sparing - Insights from five European case studies

Empirical research on land sharing and land sparing has been criticized because preferences of local stakeholders, socio-economic aspects, a bundle of ecosystem services and the local context were only rarely integrated. Using storylines and scenarios is a common approach to include land use drivers and local contexts or to cope with the uncertainties of future developments. The objective of the presented research is to develop comparable participatory regional land use scenarios for the year 2030 reflecting land sharing, land sparing and more intermediate developments across five different European landscapes (Austria, Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands and Spain). In order to ensure methodological consistency among the five case studies, a hierarchical multi-scale scenario approach was developed, which consisted of i) the selection of a common global storyline to frame a common sphere of uncertainty for all case studies, ii) the definition of three contrasting qualitative European storylines (representing developments for land sharing, land sparing and a balanced storyline), and iii) the development of three explorative case study-specific land use scenarios with regional stakeholders in workshops. Land use transition rules defined by stakeholders were used to generate three different spatially-explicit scenarios for each case study by means of high-resolution land use maps. All scenarios incorporated various aspects of land use and management to allow subsequent quantification of multiple ecosystem services and biodiversity indicators. The comparison of the final scenarios showed both common as well as diverging trends among the case studies. For instance, stakeholders identified further possibilities to intensify land management in all case studies in the land sparing scenario. In addition, in most case studies stakeholders agreed on the most preferred scenario, i.e. either land sharing or balanced, and the most likely one, i.e. balanced. However, they expressed some skepticism regarding the general plausibility of land sparing in a European context. It can be concluded that stakeholder perceptions and the local context can be integrated in land sharing and land sparing contexts subject to particular process design principles.

Are Ecological Modernization Narratives Useful for Understanding and Steering Social-Ecological Change in the Argentine Chaco?

During the past decades, the Ecological Modernization Theory, and associated ideas such as the Forest Transition Theory and Land Sparing Hypothesis, have dominated the academic and policy arenas regarding the solutions to current environmental crises. However, critiques were raised as these theories, originally conceived for developed countries, started to be applied in developing countries for explaining and prescribing social-ecological transitions. Here, we assess the validity of five key assumptions of Ecological Modernization narratives as applied to the Argentine Chaco, a global deforestation hotspot. We reviewed existing literature and conducted straightforward analysis to disentangle relationships among key variables. Although agriculture intensified, there is no evidence that this intensification inhibited agricultural expansion. Rural depopulation took place between 2001 and 2010; however, deforestation rates did not decrease, and the quality of life of migrants did not increase compared to those that stayed in rural areas. Our review suggests that the consequences of agriculture intensification on biodiversity and the provision of multiple ecosystem services exceeds the area used. Therefore, available evidence does not support the assumed causal relationships of Ecological Modernization, and even contradicts most assumptions. We propose a series of analytical shifts to better capture the complexity of social-ecological transitions in modern commodity frontiers.

Proximity of restored hedgerows interacts with local floral diversity and species' traits to shape long-term pollinator metacommunity dynamics

Disconnected habitat fragments are poor at supporting population and community persistence; restoration ecologists, therefore, advocate for the establishment of habitat networks across landscapes. Few empirical studies, however, have considered how networks of restored habitat patches affect metacommunity dynamics. Here, using a 10-year study on restored hedgerows and unrestored field margins within an intensive agricultural landscape, we integrate occupancy modelling with network theory to examine the interaction between local and landscape characteristics, habitat selection and dispersal in shaping pollinator metacommunity dynamics. We show that surrounding hedgerows and remnant habitat patches interact with the local floral diversity, bee diet breadth and bee body size to influence site occupancy, via colonisation and persistence dynamics. Florally diverse sites and generalist, small-bodied species are most important for maintaining metacommunity connectivity. By providing the first in-depth assessment of how a network of restored habitat influences long-term population dynamics, we confirm the conservation benefit of hedgerows for pollinator populations and demonstrate the importance of restoring and maintaining habitat networks within an inhospitable matrix.

Tree diversity and its ecological importance value in organic and conventional cocoa agroforests in Ghana

Cocoa agroforestry systems have the potential to conserve biodiversity and provide environmental or ecological benefits at various nested scales ranging from the plot to ecoregion. While integrating organic practices into cocoa agroforestry may further enhance these potentials, empirical and robust data to support this claim is lacking, and mechanisms for biodiversity conservation and the provision of environmental and ecological benefits are poorly understood. A field study was conducted in the Eastern Region of Ghana to evaluate the potential of organic cocoa agroforests to conserve native floristic diversity in comparison with conventional cocoa agroforests. Shade tree species richness, Shannon, Simpson’s reciprocal and Margalef diversity indices were estimated from 84 organic and conventional cocoa agroforestry plots. Species importance value index, a measure of how dominant a species is in a given ecosystem, and conservation status were used to evaluate the conservation potential of shade trees on studied cocoa farms. Organic farms recorded higher mean shade tree species richness (5.10 ± 0.38) compared to conventional farms (3.48 ± 0.39). Similarly, mean Shannon diversity index, Simpson’s reciprocal diversity index and Margalef diversity index were significantly higher on organic farms compared to conventional farms. According to the importance value index, fruit and native shade tree species were the most important on both organic and conventional farms for all the cocoa age groups but more so on organic farms. Organic farms maintained 14 native tree species facing a conservation issue compared to 10 on conventional cocoa farms. The results suggest that diversified organic cocoa farms can serve as reservoirs of native tree species, including those currently facing conservation concerns thereby providing support and contributing to the conservation of tree species in the landscape.

Conserving Himalayan birds in highly seasonal forested and agricultural landscapes

The Himalayas are a global biodiversity hotspot threatened by widespread agriculture and pasture expansion. To determine the impact of these threats on biodiversity and to formulate appropriate conservation strategies, we surveyed birds along elevational gradients in primary forest and in human-dominated lands spanning a gradient of habitat alteration, including forest-agriculture mosaics, mixed agriculture mosaics, and pasture. We surveyed birds during the breeding season and in winter to account for pronounced seasonal migrations. Bird abundance and richness in forest-agriculture and mixed agriculture mosaics were equal to or greater than in primary forest and greater than in pasture at local and landscape scales during both seasons. Pasture had greater abundance and richness of birds in winter than primary forest, but richness was greater in primary forest at the landscape scale during the breeding season. All 4 land-use types held unique species, suggesting that all must be retained in the landscape to conserve the entire avifauna. Our results suggest forest-agriculture and mixed agriculture mosaics are particularly important for sustaining Himalayan bird communities during winter and primary forests are vital for sustaining Himalayan bird communities during the breeding season. Further conversion of forest-agriculture and mixed agriculture mosaics to pasture would likely result in significant biodiversity losses that would disproportionately affect breeding species. To ensure comprehensive conservation, strategies in the western Himalayas must balance the protection of intact primary forest with the minimization of pasture expansion.

Landscapes that work for biodiversity and people

How can we manage farmlands, forests, and rangelands to respond to the triple challenge of the Anthropocene—biodiversity loss, climate change, and unsustainable land use? When managed by using biodiversity-based techniques such as agroforestry, silvopasture, diversified farming, and ecosystem-based forest management, these socioeconomic systems can help maintain biodiversity and provide habitat connectivity, thereby complementing protected areas and providing greater resilience to climate change. Simultaneously, the use of these management techniques can improve yields and profitability more sustainably, enhancing livelihoods and food security. This approach to “working lands conservation” can create landscapes that work for nature and people. However, many socioeconomic challenges impede the uptake of biodiversity-based land management practices. Although improving voluntary incentives, market instruments, environmental regulations, and governance is essential to support working lands conservation, it is community action, social movements, and broad coalitions among citizens, businesses, nonprofits, and government agencies that have the power to transform how we manage land and protect the environment.

Linkages between measures of biodiversity and community resilience in Pacific Island agroforests

Designing agroecosystems that are compatible with the conservation of biodiversity is a top conservation priority. However, the social variables that drive native biodiversity conservation in these systems are poorly understood. We devised a new approach to identify social-ecological linkages that affect conservation outcomes in agroecosystems and in social-ecological systems more broadly. We focused on coastal agroforests in Fiji, which, like agroforests across other small Pacific Islands, are critical to food security, contain much of the country's remaining lowland forests, and have rapidly declining levels of native biodiversity. We tested the relationships among social variables and native tree species richness in agroforests with structural equation models. The models were built with data from ecological and social surveys in 100 agroforests and associated households. The agroforests hosted 95 native tree species of which almost one-third were endemic. Fifty-eight percent of farms had at least one species considered threatened at the national or international level. The best-fit structural equation model (R² = 47.8%) showed that social variables important for community resilience-local ecological knowledge, social network connectivity, and livelihood diversity-had direct and indirect positive effects on native tree species richness. Cash-crop intensification, a driver of biodiversity loss elsewhere, did not negatively affect native tree richness within parcels. Joining efforts to build community resilience, specifically by increasing livelihood diversity, local ecological knowledge, and social network connectivity, may help conservation agencies conserve the rapidly declining biodiversity in the region.

Modelling Land Sharing and Land Sparing Relationship with Rural Population in the Cerrado

Agricultural expansion and intensification enabled growth of food production but resulted in serious environmental changes. In light of that, debates concerning sustainability in agriculture arises on scientific literature. Land sharing and land sparing are two opposite models for framing agricultural sustainability. The first aims to integrate agricultural activities with biodiversity conservation by means of enhancing the quality of the agricultural matrix in the landscape towards a wildlife friendly matrix. The other model aims to spare natural habitats from agriculture for conservation. This work aimed to explore spatial evidences of land sharing/sparing and its relationship with rural population in the Brazilian Cerrado. A Land Sharing/Sparing Index based on TerraClass Cerrado map was proposed. Spatial analysis based on Global and Local Moran statistics and Geographically Weighted Regression were made in order to explore the influence of local rural population on the probability of spatial land sharing/sparing clusters occurrence. Spatial patterns of land sharing were found in the Cerrado and a positive association with rural population was found in some regions, such as in its northern portion. Land use policies should consider regional infrastructural and participative governance potentialities. The results suggests possible areas where joint agricultural activities and human presence may be favourable for biodiversity conservation.

Pasture intensification is insufficient to relieve pressure on conservation priority areas in open agricultural markets

Agricultural expansion is a leading driver of biodiversity loss across the world, but little is known on how future land-use change may encroach on remaining natural vegetation. This uncertainty is, in part, due to unknown levels of future agricultural intensification and international trade. Using an economic land-use model, we assessed potential future losses of natural vegetation with a focus on how these may threaten biodiversity hotspots and intact forest landscapes. We analysed agricultural expansion under proactive and reactive biodiversity protection scenarios, and for different rates of pasture intensification. We found growing food demand to lead to a significant expansion of cropland at the expense of pastures and natural vegetation. In our reference scenario, global cropland area increased by more than 400 Mha between 2015 and 2050, mostly in Africa and Latin America. Grazing intensification was a main determinant of future land-use change. In Africa, higher rates of pasture intensification resulted in smaller losses of natural vegetation, and reduced pressure on biodiversity hotspots and intact forest landscapes. Investments into raising pasture productivity in conjunction with proactive land-use planning appear essential in Africa to reduce further losses of areas with high conservation value. In Latin America, in contrast, higher pasture productivity resulted in increased livestock exports, highlighting that unchecked trade can reduce the land savings of pasture intensification. Reactive protection of sensitive areas significantly reduced the conversion of natural ecosystems in Latin America. We conclude that protection strategies need to adapt to region-specific trade positions. In regions with a high involvement in international trade, area-based conservation measures should be preferred over strategies aimed at increasing pasture productivity, which by themselves might not be sufficient to protect biodiversity effectively.

The governance of land use strategies: Institutional and social dimensions of land sparing and land sharing

Agricultural land use is a key interface between the goals of ensuring food security and protecting biodiversity. "Land sparing" supports intensive agriculture to save land for conservation, whereas "land sharing" integrates production and conservation on the same land. The framing around sparing versus sharing has been extensively debated. Here, we focused on a frequently missing yet crucial component, namely the governance dimension. Through a case-study in Ethiopia, we uncovered stakeholder preferences for sparing versus sharing, the underlying rationale, and implementation capacity challenges. Policy stakeholders preferred sparing whereas implementation stakeholders preferred sharing, which aligned with existing informal institutions. Implementation of both strategies was limited by social, biophysical, and institutional factors. Land use policies need to account for both ecological patterns and social context. The findings from simple analytical frameworks (e.g., sparing vs. sharing) therefore need to be interpreted carefully, and in a social-ecological context, to generate meaningful recommendations for conservation practice.