Search

• There is high consistency in the extent of land degradation. • There are consistent hydrothermal change characteristics in the land degradation hotspots area. Land degradation is a major impediment to achieving sustainable development. However, there is currently no harmonized global map of land degradation status and hotspots. This paper aims to obtain the status and hotspots map of global land degradation by multiple methods and indicators to give essential references for land degradation neutrality. The results show that there are significant differences in the distribution and degree of land degradation between the different methods and indicators. Validation through observation points reveals that most of the methods and indicators can reflect land degradation in arid and semi-arid areas, while there are suitable methods or indicators in tropical and high-latitude areas. The degree of degradation has a large difference after overlay analysis, which shows that there are shortcomings of different methods and indicators for monitoring the degree of land degradation. However, the overlay of land degradation extent displays a high consistency, reflecting the current state of global land degradation to a certain extent. These areas with high overlay value can be recognized as hotspots of land degradation. It is also found there are consistent water-energy change characteristics in the hotspot area, such as increased land surface temperature and air temperature and decreased soil moisture and precipitation. These results conclude that studies on the degree of land degradation need to be considered in an integrated manner about the regional background. The combination of multiple methods and indicators is recommended for land degradation extent studies in large areas. Comparison of different methods and indicators is important guidance for global land degradation research. Accelerating ecological monitoring and restoration of land degradation hotspots is the first step towards land degradation neutrality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We reviewed the progress, indicators, and methods of agroecosystem services. • Agroecosystem services are closely related to agroecosystem functions and human agricultural practices. • Multi-source data fusion for integrated model will be the tendency for agroecosystem service assessment. • Agricultural landscape planning and governance can help to improve agroecosystem services and achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs). Agroecosystems benefit from many ecosystem services and are frequently managed to increase productivity. In recent years, agricultural industrialization has caused the loss of some important ecosystem services in agroecosystems, hindering some sustainable development goals (SDGs). In order to promote sustainable agricultural development, it is necessary to restore the damaged agroecosystems and improve agroecosystem services (AES). However, there are relatively few studies on AES, and fewer studies concerning the definition or connotation of AES. Therefore, this paper reviews current AES research, indicators, and assessment methods, as well as directions for future research. AES are determined by agroecosystem functions and human agricultural practices, with both positive and negative effects, scale effects, and trade-offs and synergies between AES. AES indicators can be classified as provisioning services, regulating services, and cultural services, with a few studies including supporting services. Currently, the main AES assessment methods include public participation, empirical model, mechanism model, and value estimation. Multi-source data fusion for integrated models to assess multiple AES will be the future research trend. In addition, AES research should develop additional promising topics, including considering both AES and agroecosystem disservices (AEDS); assessing AES supply, demand, and flow; and analyzing AES trade-offs and synergies comprehensively. This will extend the research field to the links between AES and SDGs and their applications in agricultural landscape planning and governance. This review highlights the importance of AES research to more effectively manage agroecosystems and promote sustainable agricultural development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]