Deciphering the Biodiversity-Production Mutualism in the Global Food Security Debate

Assessing the contribution of nonmarket factors to the market value generated by cow-calf operations in rangelands of the western USA: A true cost accounting approach

Food system transformation requires a better understanding of the negative and positive externalities involved in food production and consumption. Although negative externalities have received substantial attention, positive externalities have been largely overlooked. True Cost Accounting (TCA) is an economic assessment aimed at accounting for externalities in food systems. The beef industry is an important part of the US food system. In the western USA, beef cattle production is a major land use and economic activity that involves direct links among the cattle, range ecosystems, range management, climate, and ranchers' decisions and welfare. We present a case study based on a TCA assessment to quantify and monetize the contribution of human, social, natural, and produced capitals, as well as farm structure, to the market value generated by cow-calf operations, a key component of the USA beef industry. We estimated an Ordinary Least Square regression model based on indicators of these capitals and of farm structure derived from publicly available data sources at the county level. From model coefficients, we estimated the marginal revenue product of these factors. Results show that nonmarket factors linked with human and social capitals support market performance by contributing to the market value of cow-calf production. These factors operate at scales above the ranch, usually remain hidden, and seldomly are considered in policy decision-making which can lead to policies that inadvertently hamper or eliminate these positive externalities.

Biodiversity-production feedback effects lead to intensification traps in agricultural landscapes

Intensive agriculture with high reliance on pesticides and fertilizers constitutes a major strategy for 'feeding the world'. However, such conventional intensification is linked to diminishing returns and can result in 'intensification traps'-production declines triggered by the negative feedback of biodiversity loss at high input levels. Here we developed a novel framework that accounts for biodiversity feedback on crop yields to evaluate the risk and magnitude of intensification traps. Simulations grounded in systematic literature reviews showed that intensification traps emerge in most landscape types, but to a lesser extent in major cereal production systems. Furthermore, small reductions in maximal production (5-10%) could be frequently transmitted into substantial biodiversity gains, resulting in small-loss large-gain trade-offs prevailing across landscape types. However, sensitivity analyses revealed a strong context dependence of trap emergence, inducing substantial uncertainty in the identification of optimal management at the field scale. Hence, we recommend the development of case-specific safety margins for intensification preventing double losses in biodiversity and food security associated with intensification traps.

Quantifying potential trade-offs and win-wins between arthropod diversity and yield on cropland under agri-environment schemes-A meta-analysis

In Europe, agri-environment schemes (AES) are a key instrument to combat the ongoing decline of farmland biodiversity. AES aim is to support biodiversity and maintain ecosystem services, such as pollination or pest control. To what extent AES affect crop yield is still poorly understood. We performed a systematic review, including hierarchical meta-analyses, to investigate potential trade-offs and win-wins between the effectiveness of AES for arthropod diversity and agricultural yield on European croplands. Altogether, we found 26 studies with a total of 125 data points that fulfilled our study inclusion criteria. From each study, we extracted data on biodiversity (arthropod species richness and abundance) and yield for fields with AES management and control fields without AES. The majority of the studies reported significantly higher species richness and abundance of arthropods (especially wild pollinators) in fields with AES (31 % increase), but yields were at the same time significantly lower on fields with AES compared to control fields (21 % decrease). Aside from the opportunity costs, AES that promote out-of-production elements (e.g. wildflower strips), supported biodiversity (29-32 % increase) without significantly compromising yield (2-5 % increase). Farmers can get an even higher yield in these situations than in current conventional agricultural production systems without AES. Thus, our study is useful to identify AES demonstrating benefits for arthropod biodiversity with negligible or relatively low costs regarding yield losses. Further optimization of the design and management of AES is needed to improve their effectiveness in promoting both biodiversity and minimizing crop yield losses.

Recent Developments and Challenges in Projecting the Impact of Crop Productivity Growth on Biodiversity Considering Market-Mediated Effects

The effect of an increase in crop productivity (output per unit of inputs) on biodiversity is hitherto poorly understood. This is because increased productivity of a crop in particular regions leads to increased profit that can encourage expansion of its cultivated area causing land use change and ultimately biodiversity loss, a phenomenon also known as "Jevons paradox" or the "rebound effect". Modeling such consequences in an interconnected and globalized world considering such rebound effects is challenging. Here, we discuss the use of computable general equilibrium (CGE) and other economic models in combination with ecological models to project consequences of crop productivity improvements for biodiversity globally. While these economic models have the advantage of taking into account market-mediated responses, resource constraints, endogenous price responses, and dynamic bilateral patterns of trade, there remain a number of important research and data gaps in these models which must be addressed to improve their performance in assessment of the link between local crop productivity changes and global biodiversity. To this end, we call for breaking the silos and building interdisciplinary networks across the globe to facilitate data sharing and knowledge exchange in order to improve global-to-local-to-global analysis of land, biodiversity, and ecosystem sustainability.

The water-energy-food nexus in biodiversity conservation: A systematic review around sustainability transitions of agricultural systems

The Water Energy Food nexus is a powerful topic in agricultural systems to elucidate threats to biodiversity conservation and culture. This paper aimed to recapitulate nexus thinking research, focusing on social-ecological transitions of agriculture systems and biodiversity management within the Water-Energy-Food nexus. We developed a systematic review and a bibliometric analysis derived from 529 documents in the Scopus database. The ToS method identified a total of 81 relevant information in the sample of documents (529) categorised into roots (10), trunks (9) and leaves (62). This review paper situates types, focus, and highlights regarding biodiversity and prevalent thematic research areas such as "Food Nexus", "Environmental Flows", "Sustainability", "Transitions", and "Governance". Our results suggest that future research should focus on the nexus of "Water-Energy-Food-Biodiversity" and propose a transdisciplinary approach to elucidate the state of sustainability transitions in the agricultural systems at the landscape level. It could increase stakeholder interest in conservation, and sustainability management, to reverse biodiversity losses in ecosystems.

Can agricultural trade improve total factor productivity? Empirical evidence from G20 countries

Improving agricultural total factor productivity is essential to achieving the high-quality and sustainable development of agriculture. As major global agricultural producers, the G20 countries play an important role in agricultural product trade and development. As such, it is well-positioned to play a positive role in improving agricultural total factor productivity. This paper uses the DEA-Malmquist index method to measure agricultural total factor productivity (TFP) in G20 countries from 2010 to 2019, and analyzes the impact of agricultural trade on TFP using the two-way fixed effects model. It finds that (1) the main source of agricultural TFP growth in G20 countries is technical progress, while the effect of technical efficiency on agricultural TFP is not obvious. (2) Agricultural trade can significantly improve agricultural TFP growth in G20 countries, and the effect is more obvious in developed countries. From the perspective of trade flow, the positive effect of export trade on agricultural TFP is stronger. (3) The institutional environment strengthens the improvement effect of agricultural trade on agricultural TFP. Thus, this study not only provides valuable insight into the relationship between agricultural trade and agricultural productivity, but also offers a strong argument in favor of the formulation of relevant policies to improve agricultural productivity and promote a more sustainable agricultural sector.

Archetype models upscale understanding of natural pest control response to land-use change

Control of crop pests by shifting host plant availability and natural enemy activity at landscape scales has great potential to enhance the sustainability of agriculture. However, mainstreaming natural pest control requires improved understanding of how its benefits can be realized across a variety of agroecological contexts. Empirical studies suggest significant but highly variable responses of natural pest control to land-use change. Current ecological models are either too specific to provide insight across agroecosystems or too generic to guide management with actionable predictions. We suggest obtaining the full benefit of available empirical, theoretical, and methodological knowledge by combining trait-mediated understanding from correlative studies with the explicit representation of causal relationships achieved by mechanistic modeling. To link these frameworks, we adapt the concept of archetypes, or context-specific generalizations, from sustainability science. Similar responses of natural pest control to land-use gradients across cases that share key attributes, such as functional traits of focal organisms, indicate general processes that drive system behavior in a context-sensitive manner. Based on such observations of natural pest control, a systematic definition of archetypes can provide the basis for mechanistic models of intermediate generality that cover all major agroecosystems worldwide. Example applications demonstrate the potential for upscaling understanding and improving predictions of natural pest control, based on knowledge transfer and scientific synthesis. A broader application of this mechanistic archetype approach promises to enhance ecology's contribution to natural resource management across diverse regions and social-ecological contexts.

The triple benefits of slimming and greening the Chinese food system

The Chinese food system has undergone a transition of unprecedented speed, leading to complex interactions with China's economy, health and environment. Structural changes experienced by the country over the past few decades have boosted economic development but have worsened the mismatch between food supply and demand, deteriorated the environment, driven obesity and overnutrition levels up, and increased the risk for pathogen spread. Here we propose a strategy for slimming and greening the Chinese food system towards sustainability targets. This strategy takes into account the interlinkages between agricultural production and food consumption across the food system, going beyond agriculture-focused perspectives. We call for a food-system approach with integrated analysis of potential triple benefits for the economy, health and the environment, as well as multisector collaboration in support of evidence-based policymaking.

Biodiversity and yield trade-offs for organic farming

Organic farming supports higher biodiversity than conventional farming, but at the cost of lower yields. We conducted a meta-analysis quantifying the trade-off between biodiversity and yield, comparing conventional and organic farming. We developed a compatibility index to assess whether biodiversity gains from organic farming exceed yield losses, and a substitution index to assess whether organic farming would increase biodiversity in an area if maintaining total production under organic farming would require cultivating more land at the expense of nature. Overall, organic farming had 23% gain in biodiversity with a similar cost of yield decline. Biodiversity gain is negatively correlated to yield loss for microbes and plants, but no correlation was found for other taxa. The biodiversity and yield trade-off varies under different contexts of organic farming. The overall compatibility index value was close to zero, with negative values for cereal crops, positive for non-cereal crops, and varies across taxa. Our results indicate that, on average, the proportion of biodiversity gain is similar to the proportion of yield loss for paired field studies. For some taxa in non-cereal crops, switching to organic farming can lead to a biodiversity gain without yield loss. We calculated the overall value of substitution index and further discussed the application of this index to evaluate when the biodiversity of less intensified farming system is advantageous.

Distinguishing anthropogenic and natural contributions to coproduction of national crop yields globally

Crop production is a crucial ecosystem service that requires a combination of natural and anthropogenic contributions to high and stable yields, which is a coproduction process. We analysed this coproduction based on nationally aggregated data for 15 major crops for 67 countries and the European Union with data for four time steps (2000, 2006, 2010, 2014). We found strong increases in fertilizer use, net capital stock and manure use intensity for lower-middle-income countries and stagnation or decrease of these for high-income countries. We used a multiple linear regression model predicting yield to distinguish the effect of anthropogenic contributions (crop-specific fertilizer use intensity, net capital stock intensity, manure use intensity) and natural contributions (crop-specific agricultural suitability, including soil characteristics, topography and climate). We found that in particular fertilizer use intensity, manure use intensity and agricultural suitability explained variation in yields to a considerable degree (R² = 0.62).