Key tropical crops at risk from pollinator loss due to climate change and land use.

Insect pollinator biodiversity is changing rapidly, with potential consequences for the provision of crop pollination. However, the role of land use-climate interactions in pollinator biodiversity changes, as well as consequent economic effects via changes in crop pollination, remains poorly understood. We present a global assessment of the interactive effects of climate change and land use on pollinator abundance and richness and predictions of the risk to crop pollination from the inferred changes. Using a dataset containing 2673 sites and 3080 insect pollinator species, we show that the interactive combination of agriculture and climate change is associated with large reductions in insect pollinators. As a result, it is expected that the tropics will experience the greatest risk to crop production from pollinator losses. Localized risk is highest and predicted to increase most rapidly, in regions of sub-Saharan Africa, northern South America, and Southeast Asia. Via pollinator loss alone, climate change and agricultural land use could be a risk to human well-being.

Conventional land-use intensification reduces species richness and increases production: A global meta-analysis.

Most current research on land-use intensification addresses its potential to either threaten biodiversity or to boost agricultural production. However, little is known about the simultaneous effects of intensification on biodiversity and yield. To determine the responses of species richness and yield to conventional intensification, we conducted a global meta-analysis synthesizing 115 studies which collected data for both variables at the same locations. We extracted 449 cases that cover a variety of areas used for agricultural (crops, fodder) and silvicultural (wood) production. We found that, across all production systems and species groups, conventional intensification is successful in increasing yield (grand mean + 20.3%), but it also results in a loss of species richness (-8.9%). However, analysis of sub-groups revealed inconsistent results. For example, small intensification steps within low intensity systems did not affect yield or species richness. Within high-intensity systems species losses were non-significant but yield gains were substantial (+15.2%). Conventional intensification within medium intensity systems revealed the highest yield increase (+84.9%) and showed the largest loss in species richness (-22.9%). Production systems differed in their magnitude of richness response, with insignificant changes in silvicultural systems and substantial losses in crop systems (-21.2%). In addition, this meta-analysis identifies a lack of studies that collect robust biodiversity (i.e. beyond species richness) and yield data at the same sites and that provide quantitative information on land-use intensity. Our findings suggest that, in many cases, conventional land-use intensification drives a trade-off between species richness and production. However, species richness losses were often not significantly different from zero, suggesting even conventional intensification can result in yield increases without coming at the expense of biodiversity loss. These results should guide future research to close existing research gaps and to understand the circumstances required to achieve such win-win or win-no-harm situations in conventional agriculture.

Rewilding complex ecosystems.

The practice of rewilding has been both promoted and criticized in recent years. Benefits include flexibility to react to environmental change and the promotion of opportunities for society to reconnect with nature. Criticisms include the lack of a clear conceptualization of rewilding, insufficient knowledge about possible outcomes, and the perception that rewilding excludes people from landscapes. Here, we present a framework for rewilding that addresses these concerns. We suggest that rewilding efforts should target trophic complexity, natural disturbances, and dispersal as interacting processes that can improve ecosystem resilience and maintain biodiversity. We propose a structured approach to rewilding projects that includes assessment of the contributions of nature to people and the social-ecological constraints on restoration.

Mapping opportunities and challenges for rewilding in Europe.

Farmland abandonment takes place across the world due to socio-economic and ecological drivers. In Europe agricultural and environmental policies aim to prevent abandonment and halt ecological succession. Ecological rewilding has been recently proposed as an alternative strategy. We developed a framework to assess opportunities for rewilding across different dimensions of wilderness in Europe. We mapped artificial light, human accessibility based on transport infrastructure, proportion of harvested primary productivity (i.e., ecosystem productivity appropriated by humans through agriculture or forestry), and deviation from potential natural vegetation in areas projected to be abandoned by 2040. At the continental level, the levels of artificial light were low and the deviation from potential natural vegetation was high in areas of abandonment. The relative importance of wilderness metrics differed regionally and was strongly connected to local environmental and socio-economic contexts. Large areas of projected abandonment were often located in or around Natura 2000 sites. Based on these results, we argue that management should be tailored to restore the aspects of wilderness that are lacking in each region. There are many remaining challenges regarding biodiversity in Europe, but megafauna species are already recovering. To further potentiate large-scale rewilding, Natura 2000 management would need to incorporate rewilding approaches. Our framework can be applied to assessing rewilding opportunities and challenges in other world regions, and our results could guide redirection of subsidies to manage social-ecological systems.

Mapeo de Oportunidades y Retos para el Retorno de la Vida Silvestre Resumen El abandono de tierras agrícolas ocurre en todo el mundo debido a factores socio-económicos y ecológicos. En Europa, las políticas ambientales y agrícolas tienen el objetivo de prevenir el abandono y frenar la sucesión ecológica. La reintroducción o el retorno de la vida silvestre ("rewilding") representa una estrategia alternativa a esto. Desarrollamos un marco de trabajo para evaluar las oportunidades de reintroducción en diferentes dimensiones de naturaleza a lo largo de Europa. Mapeamos la luz artificial, la accesibilidad para humanos con base en la infraestructura de transporte, la proporción de productividad primaria (es decir, la productividad del ecosistema incautado por los humanos por medio de la agricultura o la silvicultura) y la divergencia de vegetación natural potencial en áreas que se proyecta estarán abandonadas para el 2040. A nivel continental, los niveles de luz artificial fueron bajos y la divergencia de vegetación natural potencial fue alta en las áreas de abandono. La importancia relativa de las medidas de naturaleza difirió regionalmente y estuvieron conectadas fuertemente a los contextos ambientales y socio-económicos locales. Las grandes áreas de abandono proyectado estuvieron localizadas frecuentemente en o alrededor de sitios Natura 2000. Con base en estos resultados, argumentamos que el manejo debería ser fabricado para restaurar los aspectos de la naturaleza que son carentes en cada región. Todavía quedan muchos obstáculos con respecto a la biodiversidad en Europa, pero las especies de megafauna ya se están recuperando. Para potenciar aún más la reintroducción a gran escala, el manejo de Natura 2000 necesitaría incorporar estrategias de reintroducción. Nuestro marco de trabajo puede aplicarse a la evaluación de las oportunidades de reintroducción y a los obstáculos en otras regiones del mundo, y nuestros resultados pueden guiar la redirección de los subsidios para manejar los sistemas socio-ecológicos.