Does aquaculture add resilience to the global food system?

Aquaculture is the fastest growing food sector and continues to expand alongside terrestrial crop and livestock production. Using portfolio theory as a conceptual framework, we explore how current interconnections between the aquaculture, crop, livestock, and fisheries sectors act as an impediment to, or an opportunity for, enhanced resilience in the global food system given increased resource scarcity and climate change. Aquaculture can potentially enhance resilience through improved resource use efficiencies and increased diversification of farmed species, locales of production, and feeding strategies. However, aquaculture's reliance on terrestrial crops and wild fish for feeds, its dependence on freshwater and land for culture sites, and its broad array of environmental impacts diminishes its ability to add resilience. Feeds for livestock and farmed fish that are fed rely largely on the same crops, although the fraction destined for aquaculture is presently small (∼4%). As demand for high-value fed aquaculture products grows, competition for these crops will also rise, as will the demand for wild fish as feed inputs. Many of these crops and forage fish are also consumed directly by humans and provide essential nutrition for low-income households. Their rising use in aquafeeds has the potential to increase price levels and volatility, worsening food insecurity among the most vulnerable populations. Although the diversification of global food production systems that includes aquaculture offers promise for enhanced resilience, such promise will not be realized if government policies fail to provide adequate incentives for resource efficiency, equity, and environmental protection.

Our future in the Anthropocene biosphere.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed an interconnected and tightly coupled globalized world in rapid change. This article sets the scientific stage for understanding and responding to such change for global sustainability and resilient societies. We provide a systemic overview of the current situation where people and nature are dynamically intertwined and embedded in the biosphere, placing shocks and extreme events as part of this dynamic; humanity has become the major force in shaping the future of the Earth system as a whole; and the scale and pace of the human dimension have caused climate change, rapid loss of biodiversity, growing inequalities, and loss of resilience to deal with uncertainty and surprise. Taken together, human actions are challenging the biosphere foundation for a prosperous development of civilizations. The Anthropocene reality-of rising system-wide turbulence-calls for transformative change towards sustainable futures. Emerging technologies, social innovations, broader shifts in cultural repertoires, as well as a diverse portfolio of active stewardship of human actions in support of a resilient biosphere are highlighted as essential parts of such transformations.

Transnational corporations and the challenge of biosphere stewardship.

Sustainability within planetary boundaries requires concerted action by individuals, governments, civil society and private actors. For the private sector, there is concern that the power exercised by transnational corporations generates, and is even central to, global environmental change. Here, we ask under which conditions transnational corporations could either hinder or promote a global shift towards sustainability. We show that a handful of transnational corporations have become a major force shaping the global intertwined system of people and planet. Transnational corporations in agriculture, forestry, seafood, cement, minerals and fossil energy cause environmental impacts and possess the ability to influence critical functions of the biosphere. We review evidence of current practices and identify six observed features of change towards 'corporate biosphere stewardship', with significant potential for upscaling. Actions by transnational corporations, if combined with effective public policies and improved governmental regulations, could substantially accelerate sustainability efforts.

Rangelands, pastoralists and governments: interlinked systems of people and nature.

We analyse commercially operated rangelands as coupled systems of people and nature. The biophysical components include: (i) the reduction and recovery of potential primary production, reflected as changes in grass production per unit of rainfall; (ii) changes in woody plants dependent on the grazing and fire regimes; and (iii) livestock and wool dynamics influenced by season, condition of the rangeland and numbers of wild and feral animals. The social components include the managers, who vary with regard to a range of cognitive abilities and lifestyle choices, and the regulators who vary in regard to policy goals. We compare agent-based and optimization models of a rangeland system. The agent-based model leads to recognition that policies select for certain management practices by creating a template that governs the trajectories of the behaviour of individuals, learning, and overall system dynamics. Conservative regulations reduce short-term loss in production but also restrict learning. A free-market environment leads to severe degradation but the surviving pastoralists perform well under subsequent variable conditions. The challenge for policy makers is to balance the needs for learning and for preventing excessive degradation. A genetic algorithm model optimizing for net discounted income and based on a population of management solutions (stocking rate, how much to suppress fire, etc.) indicates that robust solutions lead to a loss of about 40% compared with solutions where the sequence of rainfall was known in advance: this is a similar figure to that obtained from the agent-based model. We conclude that, on the basis of Levin's three criteria, rangelands with their livestock and human managers do constitute complex adaptive systems. If this is so, then command-and-control approaches to rangeland policy and management are bound to fail.

Conserving tropical nature: current challenges for ecologists.

Tropical biodiversity continues to erode unabated, which calls for ecologists to address the problem directly, placing less reliance on indirect interventions, such as community-based development schemes. Ecologists must become more assertive in providing scientifically formulated and adaptively managed interventions, involving biodiversity payments, to serve local, regional and global interests in tropical nature. Priorities for tropical ecologists thus include the identification of key thresholds to ecological resilience, and the formulation of clear monitoring protocols and management strategies for implementation by local resource managers. A particular challenge is to demonstrate how nature reserves contribute to the adaptive capacity of regional land-use matrices and, hence, to the provision of sustainable benefits at multiple spatial and temporal scales.