Search

There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as "land challenges"). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 Gt CO 2 eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing-up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges., (© 2019 The Authors. Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Supplying food for the anticipated global population of over 9 billion in 2050 under changing climate conditions is one of the major challenges of the 21st century. Agricultural expansion and intensification contributes to global environmental change and risks the long-term sustainability of the planet. It has been proposed that no more than 15% of the global ice-free land surface should be converted to cropland. Bioenergy production for land-based climate mitigation places additional pressure on limited land resources. Here we test normative targets of food supply and bioenergy production within the cropland planetary boundary using a global land-use model. The results suggest supplying the global population with adequate food is possible without cropland expansion exceeding the planetary boundary. Yet this requires an increase in food production, especially in developing countries, as well as a decrease in global crop yield gaps. However, under current assumptions of future food requirements, it was not possible to also produce significant amounts of first generation bioenergy without cropland expansion. These results suggest that meeting food and bioenergy demands within the planetary boundaries would need a shift away from current trends, for example, requiring major change in the demand-side of the food system or advancing biotechnologies.

Perception-based typologies have been used to explore the decision making process of farmers and to inform policy design. These typologies have been criticised, however, for not fully capturing true farmer behaviour, and are consequently limited for supporting policy formulation. We present a method that develops a typology, using a social survey approach based on how farmers perceive their environment (e.g. birds and agri-environmental schemes). We then apply time-series census data on past farm strategies (i.e. land use allocation, management style and participation into agri-environmental schemes) to refine these typologies. Consequently, this offers an approach to improving the profiling of farmer types, and strengthens the validity of input into future agricultural policies. While the social survey highlights a certain degree of awareness towards birds with respect to farmer types, the analysis of past farm strategies indicated that farmers did not entirely follow their stated objectives. External factors such as input and output price signals and subsidy levels had a stronger influence on their strategies rather than stated environmental and social issues. Consequently, the refining of farmer types using this approach would aid the design of policy instruments, which integrate ecological issues within planning., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A key challenge for humanity is how a future global population of 9 billion can all be fed healthily and sustainably. Here, we review how competition for land is influenced by other drivers and pressures, examine land-use change over the past 20 years and consider future changes over the next 40 years. Competition for land, in itself, is not a driver affecting food and farming in the future, but is an emergent property of other drivers and pressures. Modelling studies suggest that future policy decisions in the agriculture, forestry, energy and conservation sectors could have profound effects, with different demands for land to supply multiple ecosystem services usually intensifying competition for land in the future. In addition to policies addressing agriculture and food production, further policies addressing the primary drivers of competition for land (population growth, dietary preference, protected areas, forest policy) could have significant impacts in reducing competition for land. Technologies for increasing per-area productivity of agricultural land will also be necessary. Key uncertainties in our projections of competition for land in the future relate predominantly to uncertainties in the drivers and pressures within the scenarios, in the models and data used in the projections and in the policy interventions assumed to affect the drivers and pressures in the future.

Summary: Controlling tick bites on farmers is important to the management of tick‐borne diseases and occupational health risks in agriculture. Based on an extensive household survey conducted between June and August 2015 with 219 farmers from western Hungary where tick‐borne diseases are endemic, we analysed the pattern of farmers' self‐reported contacts with ticks and investigated the potential interactions between farmers, landscape and the risk of exposure to tick bites. We developed a lifestyle typology based on farmers' socioeconomic profiles, farming objectives and time use patterns, and a habitat typology describing different configurations of tick habitats and agricultural areas in place of farming. We found no relationship between tick exposure risk and self‐prevention. The lifestyle typology could be used to classify the risk of tick bites and the adoption of prevention measures into different levels, the difference between which could further be modified by the habitat typology. Our results suggest that (i) farmers who are frequently engaged in outdoor recreations and (ii) part‐time and inexperienced farmers who have lower rate of preventive actions are likely to experience greater exposure to tick bites either in less cultivated, semi‐natural habitats or in agricultural landscape with highly diverse land uses. Future disease prevention practices should take into consideration the interaction of lifestyle and habitat and the need to associate different farmer groups with different landscape configurations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides an overview of the development of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ – a user friendly software tool designed to allow stakeholders to perform integrated assessments of the effects of climate and/or socio-economic change on the important sectors and resources of two contrasting UK regions. This includes the assessment of agriculture, water resources, biodiversity and coastal and river flooding. The tool arose from the need to further develop the methods applied in the earlier RegIS project, which was the first local to regional integrated assessment in the UK. The limitations of RegIS included very long run times, a limited number of simulations, incomplete linkages between models and no allowance for scenario uncertainty. Based upon the stakeholder needs identified within RegIS, a series of guiding principles were developed with Steering Committee stakeholders, which informed the concept of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ including functionality, appearance and complexity. An Integrated Assessment Methodology based upon the Drivers-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework facilitated the integration of multiple models, scenarios and datasets within the software interface. The development of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ provides a test-bed for further studies of stakeholder-led, regional, integrated assessment, and provides an opportunity to learn the many lessons in undertaking such studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]