An assessment of the state of conservation planning in Europe.

Expanding and managing current habitat and species protection measures is at the heart of the European biodiversity strategy. A structured approach is needed to gain insights into such issues is systematic conservation planning, which uses techniques from decision theory to identify places and actions that contribute most effectively to policy objectives given a set of constraints. Yet culturally and historically determined European landscapes make the implementation of any conservation plans challenging, requiring an analysis of synergies and trade-offs before implementation. In this work, we review the scientific literature for evidence of previous conservation planning approaches, highlighting recent advances and success stories. We find that the conceptual characteristics of European conservation planning studies likely reduced their potential in contributing to better-informed decisions. We outline pathways towards improving the uptake of decision theory and multi-criteria conservation planning at various scales, particularly highlighting the need for (a) open data and intuitive tools, (b) the integration of biodiversity-focused conservation planning with multiple objectives, (c) accounting of dynamic ecological processes and functions, and (d) better facilitation of entry-points and co-design practices of conservation planning scenarios with stakeholders. By adopting and improving these practices, European conservation planning might become more actionable and adaptable towards implementable policy outcomes. This article is part of the theme issue 'Ecological novelty and planetary stewardship: biodiversity dynamics in a transforming biosphere'.

Land-use intensity influences European tetrapod food webs.

Land use intensification favours particular trophic groups which can induce architectural changes in food webs. These changes can impact ecosystem functions, services, stability and resilience. However, the imprint of land management intensity on food-web architecture has rarely been characterized across large spatial extent and various land uses. We investigated the influence of land management intensity on six facets of food-web architecture, namely apex and basal species proportions, connectance, omnivory, trophic chain lengths and compartmentalization, for 67,051 European terrestrial vertebrate communities. We also assessed the dependency of this influence of intensification on land use and climate. In addition to more commonly considered climatic factors, the architecture of food webs was notably influenced by land use and management intensity. Intensification tended to strongly lower the proportion of apex predators consistently across contexts. In general, intensification also tended to lower proportions of basal species, favoured mesopredators, decreased food webs compartmentalization whereas it increased their connectance. However, the response of food webs to intensification was different for some contexts. Intensification sharply decreased connectance in Mediterranean and Alpine settlements, and it increased basal tetrapod proportions and compartmentalization in Mediterranean forest and Atlantic croplands. Besides, intensive urbanization especially favoured longer trophic chains and lower omnivory. By favouring mesopredators in most contexts, intensification could undermine basal tetrapods, the cascading effects of which need to be assessed. Our results support the importance of protecting top predators where possible and raise questions about the long-term stability of food webs in the face of human-induced pressures.

Transnational conservation to anticipate future plant shifts in Europe.

To meet the COP15 biodiversity framework in the European Union (EU), one target is to protect 30% of its land by 2030 through a resilient transnational conservation network. The European Alps are a key hub of this network hosting some of the most extensive natural areas and biodiversity hotspots in Europe. Here we assess the robustness of the current European reserve network to safeguard the European Alps' flora by 2080 using semi-mechanistic simulations. We first highlight that the current network needs strong readjustments as it does not capture biodiversity patterns as well as our conservation simulations. Overall, we predict a strong shift in conservation need through time along latitudes, and from lower to higher elevations as plants migrate upslope and shrink their distribution. While increasing species, trait and evolutionary diversity, migration could also threaten 70% of the resident flora. In the face of global changes, the future European reserve network will need to ensure strong elevation and latitudinal connections to complementarily protect multifaceted biodiversity beyond national borders.

Why has farming in Europe changed? A farmers' perspective on the development since the 1960s.

Farming in Europe has been the scene of several important socio-economic and environmental developments and crises throughout the last century. Therefore, an understanding of the historical driving forces of farm change helps identifying potentials for navigating future pathways of agricultural development. However, long-term driving forces have so far been studied, e.g. in anecdotal local case studies or in systematic literature reviews, which often lack context dependency. In this study, we bridged local and continental scales by conducting 123 oral history interviews (OHIs) with elderly farmers across 13 study sites in 10 European countries. We applied a driving forces framework to systematically analyse the OHIs. We find that the most prevalent driving forces were the introduction of new technologies, developments in agricultural markets that pushed farmers for farm size enlargement and technological optimisation, agricultural policies, but also cultural aspects such as cooperation and intergenerational arrangements. However, we find considerable heterogeneity in the specific influence of individual driving forces across the study sites, implying that generic assumptions about the dynamics and impacts of European agricultural change drivers hold limited explanatory power on the local scale. Our results suggest that site-specific factors and their historical development will need to be considered when addressing the future of agriculture in Europe in a scientific or policy context. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10113-023-02150-y.

Avoiding an unjust transition to sustainability: An equity metric for spatial conservation planning.

The need for rapid and ambitious conservation and restoration is widely acknowledged, yet concern exists that the widespread reallocation of land to nature would disproportionately affect the world's poor. Conservation and restoration may limit nutrition and livelihood options and thus negatively affect social development objectives. Although much research looks into global-scale scenarios and planning of conservation and restoration, spatial evaluations of these trade-offs in terms of equity remain limited. We fill this gap by identifying areas where conservation or restoration under different future scenarios and prioritization maps expand nature into landscapes that likely support land-dependent communities in their local food security. By contrasting the expansion of nature into areas supporting land-dependent communities vs. places where the food system is supported by regional to global markets, we highlight the need for disaggregated indicators that reflect the diversity of human land-use needs in order to identify more equitable pathways. Conservation prioritizations were found to result in more equitable land-use outcomes than the land-use outcomes of widely used socioeconomic scenarios. Accounting for differentiated social impacts in model-based conservation and restoration planning and global scale scenario assessment can help achieve a more inclusive transition to sustainability as well as reduce barriers to meaningful change.

Projecting global oil palm expansion under zero-deforestation commitments: Direct and indirect land use change impacts.

In the last three decades, global production of oil palm has boomed, which has partly come at the expense of tropical rainforests. Recognizing this, many companies operating in the palm oil industry have committed to eliminate deforestation from their operations, often referred to as zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs). Here, we estimate that if ZDCs are fully adopted and enforced across all sectors and geographies, the global extent of oil palm plantations may be 11 M ha or 40% smaller in 2030 than in a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario that assumes no compliance with ZDCs. As a result of such land-sparing effects, we estimate that 96 M ha of forests are saved from conversion, of which, 17% would otherwise have been converted (directly or indirectly) due to expanding oil palm plantations. Overall, these figures suggest that ZDCs have the potential to deliver major environmental benefits if they are fully adopted and enforced.

Safe and just Earth system boundaries.

The stability and resilience of the Earth system and human well-being are inseparably linked1-3, yet their interdependencies are generally under-recognized; consequently, they are often treated independently4,5. Here, we use modelling and literature assessment to quantify safe and just Earth system boundaries (ESBs) for climate, the biosphere, water and nutrient cycles, and aerosols at global and subglobal scales. We propose ESBs for maintaining the resilience and stability of the Earth system (safe ESBs) and minimizing exposure to significant harm to humans from Earth system change (a necessary but not sufficient condition for justice)4. The stricter of the safe or just boundaries sets the integrated safe and just ESB. Our findings show that justice considerations constrain the integrated ESBs more than safety considerations for climate and atmospheric aerosol loading. Seven of eight globally quantified safe and just ESBs and at least two regional safe and just ESBs in over half of global land area are already exceeded. We propose that our assessment provides a quantitative foundation for safeguarding the global commons for all people now and into the future.

Mapping the consumer foodshed of the Kampala city region shows the importance of urban agriculture.

Due to rapid urbanisation, food systems in sub-Saharan African cities are increasingly under pressure. Through the lens of a foodshed, this paper quantitatively analyses the spatial extent of the food provisioning area for consumers of different socio-economic status in Kampala (Uganda). Based on a primary dataset of surveys with households and food vendors, we map the foodshed by registering where consumers obtain their food, and the origin of where it is grown. We show that 50% of the food consumed in the city originates from within a 120 km proximity to Kampala, including 10% from within the city itself. At present, urban agricultural activities are twice as important as international imports for the urban food provision. Established, high-income urban dwellers have a more local foodshed due to their broad participation in urban agriculture, while low-income newcomers rely heavily on retailers who source food from rural Uganda.

Protected area planning to conserve biodiversity in an uncertain future.

Protected areas are a key instrument for conservation. Despite this, they are vulnerable to risks associated with weak governance, land-use intensification, and climate change. We used a novel hierarchical optimization approach to identify priority areas for expanding the global protected area system that explicitly accounted for such risks while maximizing protection of all known terrestrial vertebrate species. To incorporate risk categories, we built on the minimum set problem, where the objective is to reach species distribution protection targets while accounting for 1 constraint, such as land cost or area. We expanded this approach to include multiple objectives accounting for risk in the problem formulation by treating each risk layer as a separate objective in the problem formulation. Reducing exposure to these risks required expanding the area of the global protected area system by 1.6% while still meeting conservation targets. Incorporating risks from weak governance drove the greatest changes in spatial priorities for protection, and incorporating risks from climate change required the largest increase (2.52%) in global protected area. Conserving wide-ranging species required countries with relatively strong governance to protect more land when they bordered nations with comparatively weak governance. Our results underscore the need for cross-jurisdictional coordination and demonstrate how risk can be efficiently incorporated into conservation planning. Planeación de las áreas protegidas para conservar la biodiversidad en un futuro incierto.

Aunque las áreas protegidas son un instrumento clave para la conservación, no dejan de ser vulnerables a los riesgos asociados a una gestión pobre, la intensificación del uso de suelo y al cambio climático. Usamos una estrategia novedosa de optimización jerárquica para identificar las áreas prioritarias para la expansión del sistema global de áreas protegidas. La estrategia consideró de manera explícita los riesgos mencionados y también maximizó la protección de todas las especies conocidas de vertebrados terrestres. Para incorporar a las categorías de riesgo partimos del mínimo problema establecido, en donde el objetivo es lograr los objetivos de protección de la distribución de especies mientras se considera sólo una restricción, como el costo o área del suelo. Expandimos esta estrategia para que incluyera varios objetivos que consideraran el riesgo desde la formulación del problema mediante el manejo de cada nivel de riesgo como un objetivo aparte durante la formulación del problema. La reducción de la exposición a estos riesgos requirió que se expandiera el área total del sistema global de áreas protegidas en un 1.6% y así todavía cumplir con los objetivos de conservación. La incorporación de riesgos a partir de una gestión pobre fue el principal impulsor de cambios en las prioridades espaciales para la protección, mientras que la incorporación de riesgos a partir del cambio climático requirió el mayor incremento (2.52%) del área protegida a nivel mundial. La conservación de especies con distribución amplia requirió que los países con una gestión relativamente fuerte protegieran más suelo al tener fronteras con países con una gestión pobre en comparación son la suya. Nuestros resultados destacan la necesidad de una coordinación entre jurisdicciones y demuestran cómo puede incorporarse el riesgo de manera exitosa a la planeación de la conservación.

Farmer surveys in Europe suggest that specialized, intensive farms were more likely to perceive negative impacts from COVID-19.

It has been shown that the COVID-19 pandemic affected some agricultural systems more than others, and even within geographic regions, not all farms were affected to the same extent. To build resilience of agricultural systems to future shocks, it is key to understand which farms were affected and why. In this study, we examined farmers' perceived robustness to COVID-19, a key resilience capacity. We conducted standardized farmer interviews (n = 257) in 15 case study areas across Europe, covering a large range of socio-ecological contexts and farm types. Interviews targeted perceived livelihood impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on productivity, sales, price, labor availability, and supply chains in 2020, as well as farm(er) characteristics and farm management. Our study corroborates earlier evidence that most farms were not or only slightly affected by the first wave(s) of the pandemic in 2020, and that impacts varied widely by study region. However, a significant minority of farmers across Europe reported that the pandemic was "the worst crisis in a lifetime" (3%) or "the worst crisis in a decade" (7%). Statistical analysis showed that more specialized and intensive farms were more likely to have perceived negative impacts. From a societal perspective, this suggests that highly specialized, intensive farms face higher vulnerability to shocks that affect regional to global supply chains. Supporting farmers in the diversification of their production systems while decreasing dependence on service suppliers and supply chain actors may increase their robustness to future disruptions. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13593-022-00820-5.

Socioeconomic outcomes of agricultural land use change in Southeast Asia.

Agricultural land use is transforming rapidly in Southeast Asia, often supported by development policies aiming primarily at economic growth. However, the socioeconomic outcomes of these changes for smallholder farmers remain unclear. Here, we systematically review cases of agricultural land use change in Southeast Asia to assess their socioeconomic outcomes and potential trade-off and synergies in these outcomes. Of the 126 reviewed cases, we find mostly positive outcomes for income (SDG 1, 100 cases) and employment (SDG 8, 11 cases), while outcomes on health (SDG 3, 9 cases) were mixed, and outcomes for food security (SDG 2, 44 cases), gender equality (SDG 5, 13 cases), and economic equality (SDG 10, 14 cases) were mostly negative. Studies describing multiple outcomes show indications of synergies between income and food security, and between income and employment, but also potential trade-offs between income and economic equality. In addition, we find that economic land concessions result in multiple negative outcomes more often than other types of land governance regimes. The results provide evidence that economic gains from agricultural land use change often come at a cost of other dimensions of sustainable development.

Ten facts about land systems for sustainability.

Land use is central to addressing sustainability issues, including biodiversity conservation, climate change, food security, poverty alleviation, and sustainable energy. In this paper, we synthesize knowledge accumulated in land system science, the integrated study of terrestrial social-ecological systems, into 10 hard truths that have strong, general, empirical support. These facts help to explain the challenges of achieving sustainability in land use and thus also point toward solutions. The 10 facts are as follows: 1) Meanings and values of land are socially constructed and contested; 2) land systems exhibit complex behaviors with abrupt, hard-to-predict changes; 3) irreversible changes and path dependence are common features of land systems; 4) some land uses have a small footprint but very large impacts; 5) drivers and impacts of land-use change are globally interconnected and spill over to distant locations; 6) humanity lives on a used planet where all land provides benefits to societies; 7) land-use change usually entails trade-offs between different benefits-"win-wins" are thus rare; 8) land tenure and land-use claims are often unclear, overlapping, and contested; 9) the benefits and burdens from land are unequally distributed; and 10) land users have multiple, sometimes conflicting, ideas of what social and environmental justice entails. The facts have implications for governance, but do not provide fixed answers. Instead they constitute a set of core principles which can guide scientists, policy makers, and practitioners toward meeting sustainability challenges in land use.

Accounting for land use changes beyond the farm-level in sustainability assessments: The impact of cocoa production.

Impact assessments are used to raise evidence and guide the implementation of sustainability strategies in commodity value chains. Due to methodological and data difficulties, most assessments of agricultural commodities capture the impacts occurring at the farm-level but often dismiss or oversimplify the impacts caused by land use dynamics at larger geographic scale. In this study we analyzed the impacts of two cocoa production systems, full-sun and agroforestry, at the farm-level and beyond the farm-level. We used life cycle assessment to calculate the impacts at the farm-level and a combination of land use modelling with spatial analysis to calculate the impacts beyond the farm-level. We applied this to three different future cocoa production scenarios. The impacts at the farm-level showed that, due to lower yields, cocoa agroforestry performs worse than cocoa full-sun for most impact indicators. However, the impacts beyond the farm-level showed that promoting cocoa agroforestry in the landscape can bring the largest gains in carbon and biodiversity. A scenario analysis of the impacts at the landscape-level showed large nuances depending on the cocoa farming system adopted, market dynamics, and nature conservation policies. The analysis indicated that increasing cocoa demand does not necessarily result in negative impacts for carbon stocks and biodiversity, if sustainable land management and sustainable intensification are adopted. Landscape-level impacts can be larger than farm-level impacts or show completely opposite direction, which highlights the need to complement farm-level assessments with assessments accounting for land use dynamics beyond the farm-level.

An approach for comparing agricultural development to societal visions.

There is broad agreement that agriculture has to become more sustainable in order to provide enough affordable, healthy food at minimal environmental and social costs. But what is "more sustainable"? More often than not, different stakeholders have opposing opinions on what a more sustainable future should look like. This normative dimension is rarely explicitly addressed in sustainability assessments. In this study, we present an approach to assess the sustainability of agricultural development that explicitly accounts for the normative dimension by comparing observed development with various societal visions. We illustrate the approach by analyzing farm- and landscape-scale development as well as sustainability outcomes in a Swiss case study landscape. Observed changes were juxtaposed with desired changes by Avenir Suisse, a liberal think tank representing free-market interests; the Swiss Farmers Association, representing a conservative force; and Landwirtschaft mit Zukunft, an exponent of the Swiss agroecological movement. Overall, the observed developments aligned most closely with desired developments of the liberal think-tank (72%). Farmer interviews revealed that in the case study area farms increased in size (+ 57%) and became more specialized and more productive (+ 223%) over the past 20 years. In addition, interpretation of aerial photographs indicated that farming became more rationalized at the landscape level, with increasing field sizes (+ 34%) and removal of solitary field trees (- 18%). The case study example highlights the varying degrees to which current developments in agriculture align with societal visions. By using societal visions as benchmarks to track the progress of agricultural development, while explicitly addressing their narratives and respective systems of values and norms, this approach offers opportunities to inform also the wider public on the extent to which current developments are consistent with different visions. This could help identify mismatches between desired and actual development and pave the way for designing new policies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13593-021-00739-3.

Assessing the contribution of mobility in the European Union to rubber expansion.

Nearly three-quarters of global natural rubber production is used to produce tyres, supporting mobility around the globe. The projected increase in mobility could contribute to further expansion of rubber plantations and impact tropical ecosystems. We quantified the use of natural rubber in tyres in the European Union (EU), the corresponding land footprint, and explored drivers of tyre use using country-specific transport statistics and trade registers of rubber goods. Five percent of the world's natural rubber is consumed in tyres used in the EU, using up to a quarter of the area under rubber plantations in some producing countries. Car use is responsible for 58% of this consumption, due to car-dependent lifestyles that are associated with economic prosperity and spatial planning paradigms. While the EU's transport policy focuses on reducing dependence on fossil-fuels, cross-cutting policies are needed to address car-dependency and reduce the EU's land footprint in tropical landscapes without compromising progress towards decarbonisation.

Landscape products for sustainable agricultural landscapes.

Landscape products link to low-input practices and traditional ecological knowledge, and have multiple functions supporting human well-being and sustainability. Here we explore seven landscape products worldwide to identify these multiple functions in the context of food commodification and landscape sustainability. We show that a landscape products lens can improve food systems by fostering sustainability strategies and standards that are place-sensitive, and as such can mitigate conflicts related to food production, social justice and the environment. Co-management strategies and information policies, such as certification, labelling, product information and raising of awareness could accelerate, incentivize and catalyse actions to support landscape products in the context of sustainability strategies.

Balancing conservation priorities for nature and for people in Europe.

There is an urgent need to protect key areas for biodiversity and nature's contributions to people (NCP). However, different values of nature are rarely considered together in conservation planning. Here, we explore potential priority areas in Europe for biodiversity (all terrestrial vertebrates) and a set of cultural and regulating NCP while considering demand for these NCP. We quantify the spatial overlap between these priorities and their performance in representing different values of nature. We show that different priorities rarely coincide, except in certain irreplaceable ecosystems. Notably, priorities for biodiversity better represent NCP than the reverse. Theoretically, protecting an extra 5% of land has the potential to double conservation gains for biodiversity while also maintaining some essential NCP, leading to co-benefits for both nature and people.