Pasture intensification is insufficient to relieve pressure on conservation priority areas in open agricultural markets

Agricultural expansion is a leading driver of biodiversity loss across the world, but little is known on how future land‐use change may encroach on remaining natural vegetation. This uncertainty is, in part, due to unknown levels of future agricultural intensification and international trade. Using an economic land‐use model, we assessed potential future losses of natural vegetation with a focus on how these may threaten biodiversity hotspots and intact forest landscapes. We analysed agricultural expansion under proactive and reactive biodiversity protection scenarios, and for different rates of pasture intensification. We found growing food demand to lead to a significant expansion of cropland at the expense of pastures and natural vegetation. In our reference scenario, global cropland area increased by more than 400 Mha between 2015 and 2050, mostly in Africa and Latin America. Grazing intensification was a main determinant of future land‐use change. In Africa, higher rates of pasture intensification resulted in smaller losses of natural vegetation, and reduced pressure on biodiversity hotspots and intact forest landscapes. Investments into raising pasture productivity in conjunction with proactive land‐use planning appear essential in Africa to reduce further losses of areas with high conservation value. In Latin America, in contrast, higher pasture productivity resulted in increased livestock exports, highlighting that unchecked trade can reduce the land savings of pasture intensification. Reactive protection of sensitive areas significantly reduced the conversion of natural ecosystems in Latin America. We conclude that protection strategies need to adapt to region‐specific trade positions. In regions with a high involvement in international trade, area‐based conservation measures should be preferred over strategies aimed at increasing pasture productivity, which by themselves might not be sufficient to protect biodiversity effectively.     

Projecting terrestrial biodiversity intactness with GLOBIO 4

Scenario‐based biodiversity modelling is a powerful approach to evaluate how possible future socio‐economic developments may affect biodiversity. Here, we evaluated the changes in terrestrial biodiversity intactness, expressed by the mean species abundance (MSA) metric, resulting from three of the shared socio‐economic pathways (SSPs) combined with different levels of climate change (according to representative concentration pathways [RCPs]): a future oriented towards sustainability (SSP1xRCP2.6), a future determined by a politically divided world (SSP3xRCP6.0) and a future with continued global dependency on fossil fuels (SSP5xRCP8.5). To this end, we first updated the GLOBIO model, which now runs at a spatial resolution of 10 arc‐seconds (~300 m), contains new modules for downscaling land use and for quantifying impacts of hunting in the tropics, and updated modules to quantify impacts of climate change, land use, habitat fragmentation and nitrogen pollution. We then used the updated model to project terrestrial biodiversity intactness from 2015 to 2050 as a function of land use and climate changes corresponding with the selected scenarios. We estimated a global area‐weighted mean MSA of 0.56 for 2015. Biodiversity intactness declined in all three scenarios, yet the decline was smaller in the sustainability scenario (?0.02) than the regional rivalry and fossil‐fuelled development scenarios (?0.06 and ?0.05 respectively). We further found considerable variation in projected biodiversity change among different world regions, with large future losses particularly for sub‐Saharan Africa. In some scenario‐region combinations, we projected future biodiversity recovery due to reduced demands for agricultural land, yet this recovery was counteracted by increased impacts of other pressures (notably climate change and road disturbance). Effective measures to halt or reverse the decline of terrestrial biodiversity should not only reduce land demand (e.g. by increasing agricultural productivity and dietary changes) but also focus on reducing or mitigating the impacts of other pressures.     

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.     

Projecting impacts of global climate and land‐use scenarios on plant biodiversity using compositional‐turnover modelling

Nations have committed to ambitious conservation targets in response to accelerating rates of global biodiversity loss. Anticipating future impacts is essential to inform policy decisions for achieving these targets, but predictions need to be of sufficiently high spatial resolution to forecast the local effects of global change. As part of the intercomparison of biodiversity and ecosystem services models of the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, we present a fine‐resolution assessment of trends in the persistence of global plant biodiversity. We coupled generalized dissimilarity models, fitted to >52 million records of >254 thousand plant species, with the species–area relationship, to estimate the effect of land‐use and climate change on global biodiversity persistence. We estimated that the number of plant species committed to extinction over the long term has increased by 60% globally between 1900 and 2015 (from ~10,000 to ~16,000). This number is projected to decrease slightly by 2050 under the most optimistic scenario of land‐use change and to substantially increase (to ~18,000) under the most pessimistic scenario. This means that, in the absence of climate change, scenarios of sustainable socio‐economic development can potentially bring extinction risk back to pre‐2000 levels. Alarmingly, under all scenarios, the additional impact from climate change might largely surpass that of land‐use change. In this case, the estimated number of species committed to extinction increases by 3.7–4.5 times compared to land‐use‐only projections. African regions (especially central and southern) are expected to suffer some of the highest impacts into the future, while biodiversity decline in Southeast Asia (which has previously been among the highest globally) is projected to slow down. Our results suggest that environmentally sustainable land‐use planning alone might not be sufficient to prevent potentially dramatic biodiversity loss, unless a stabilization of climate to pre‐industrial times is observed.     

“保护兼容”理念源起、实践与发展

以国内外文献、报告、规划为原始材料,以"保护兼容"一词为核心,结合其使用语境,系统阐述在自然保护话语由"堡垒式"转向"社区保护"时,随着自然保护地功能与管理发生变化,人类活动的保护兼容性如何被重新发现并在自然保护实践中助力生物多样性保护。研究发现,"保护兼容"理念充分体现在景观尺度的土地利用连续体上;在生产性景观视角下乡村土地利用和传统农业系统进入自然保护领域;"保护兼容"理念以土地利用为基础下沉到乡村社区的资源管理、生计发展等多类型活动,以各种保护倡议和项目实现,并在发展中国家和发达国家呈现出不同特征。"保护兼容"理念既进行尺度扩展,探索区域内、跨行政区域乃至国家间多利益相关方参与、多类型土地利用贡献于自然保护扩展,也进行尺度下沉,倡导基于本土价值实现全球价值的保护理念。研究提出,全球在生物多样性保护中要进一步重视生产性景观和农业生物多样性保护,而发展中国家面对全球生物多样性保护紧迫目标时,需要坚持社区主体性和在保护实践中的主动性。     

Forest bees are replaced in agricultural and urban landscapes by native species with different phenologies and life‐history traits

Anthropogenic landscapes are associated with biodiversity loss and large shifts in species composition and traits. These changes predict the identities of winners and losers of future global change, and also reveal which environmental variables drive a taxon's response to land use change. We explored how the biodiversity of native bee species changes across forested, agricultural, and urban landscapes. We collected bee community data from 36 sites across a 75,000 km² region, and analyzed bee abundance, species richness, composition, and life‐history traits. Season‐long bee abundance and richness were not detectably different between natural and anthropogenic landscapes, but community phenologies differed strongly, with an early spring peak followed by decline in forests, and a more extended summer season in agricultural and urban habitats. Bee community composition differed significantly between all three land use types, as did phylogenetic composition. Anthropogenic land use had negative effects on the persistence of several life‐history strategies, including early spring flight season and brood parasitism, which may indicate adaptation to conditions in forest habitat. Overall, anthropogenic communities are not diminished subsets of contemporary natural communities. Rather, forest species do not persist in anthropogenic habitats, but are replaced by different native species and phylogenetic lineages preadapted to open habitats. Characterizing compositional and functional differences is crucial for understanding land use as a global change driver across large regional scales.     

Land use intensification alters ecosystem multifunctionality via loss of biodiversity and changes to functional composition

Global change, especially land‐use intensification, affects human well‐being by impacting the delivery of multiple ecosystem services (multifunctionality). However, whether biodiversity loss is a major component of global change effects on multifunctionality in real‐world ecosystems, as in experimental ones, remains unclear. Therefore, we assessed biodiversity, functional composition and 14 ecosystem services on 150 agricultural grasslands differing in land‐use intensity. We also introduce five multifunctionality measures in which ecosystem services were weighted according to realistic land‐use objectives. We found that indirect land‐use effects, i.e. those mediated by biodiversity loss and by changes to functional composition, were as strong as direct effects on average. Their strength varied with land‐use objectives and regional context. Biodiversity loss explained indirect effects in a region of intermediate productivity and was most damaging when land‐use objectives favoured supporting and cultural services. In contrast, functional composition shifts, towards fast‐growing plant species, strongly increased provisioning services in more inherently unproductive grasslands.     

Land‐use change affects water recycling in Brazil's last agricultural frontier

Historically, conservation‐oriented research and policy in Brazil have focused on Amazon deforestation, but a majority of Brazil's deforestation and agricultural expansion has occurred in the neighboring Cerrado biome, a biodiversity hotspot comprised of dry forests, woodland savannas, and grasslands. Resilience of rainfed agriculture in both biomes likely depends on water recycling in undisturbed Cerrado vegetation; yet little is known about how changes in land‐use and land‐cover affect regional climate feedbacks in the Cerrado. We used remote sensing techniques to map land‐use change across the Cerrado from 2003 to 2013. During this period, cropland agriculture more than doubled in area from 1.2 to 2.5 million ha, with 74% of new croplands sourced from previously intact Cerrado vegetation. We find that these changes have decreased the amount of water recycled to the atmosphere via evapotranspiration (ET) each year. In 2013 alone, cropland areas recycled 14 km³ less (?3%) water than if the land cover had been native Cerrado vegetation. ET from single‐cropping systems (e.g., soybeans) is less than from natural vegetation in all years, except in the months of January and February, the height of the growing season. In double‐cropping systems (e.g., soybeans followed by corn), ET is similar to or greater than natural vegetation throughout a majority of the wet season (December–May). As intensification and extensification of agricultural production continue in the region, the impacts on the water cycle and opportunities for mitigation warrant consideration. For example, if an environmental goal is to minimize impacts on the water cycle, double cropping (intensification) might be emphasized over extensification to maintain a landscape that behaves more akin to the natural system.     

Optimizing carbon storage and biodiversity protection in tropical agricultural landscapes

With the rapidly expanding ecological footprint of agriculture, the design of farmed landscapes will play an increasingly important role for both carbon storage and biodiversity protection. Carbon and biodiversity can be enhanced by integrating natural habitats into agricultural lands, but a key question is whether benefits are maximized by including many small features throughout the landscape (‘land‐sharing’ agriculture) or a few large contiguous blocks alongside intensive farmland (‘land‐sparing’ agriculture). In this study, we are the first to integrate carbon storage alongside multi‐taxa biodiversity assessments to compare land‐sparing and land‐sharing frameworks. We do so by sampling carbon stocks and biodiversity (birds and dung beetles) in landscapes containing agriculture and forest within the Colombian Chocó‐Andes, a zone of high global conservation priority. We show that woodland fragments embedded within a matrix of cattle pasture hold less carbon per unit area than contiguous primary or advanced secondary forests (>15 years). Farmland sites also support less diverse bird and dung beetle communities than contiguous forests, even when farmland retains high levels of woodland habitat cover. Landscape simulations based on these data suggest that land‐sparing strategies would be more beneficial for both carbon storage and biodiversity than land‐sharing strategies across a range of production levels. Biodiversity benefits of land‐sparing are predicted to be similar whether spared lands protect primary or advanced secondary forests, owing to the close similarity of bird and dung beetle communities between the two forest classes. Land‐sparing schemes that encourage the protection and regeneration of natural forest blocks thus provide a synergy between carbon and biodiversity conservation, and represent a promising strategy for reducing the negative impacts of agriculture on tropical ecosystems. However, further studies examining a wider range of ecosystem services will be necessary to fully understand the links between land‐allocation strategies and long‐term ecosystem service provision.     

Rapid redistribution of agricultural land alters avian richness,abundance, and functional diversity

The conversion of natural, or seminatural, habitats to agricultural land and changes in agricultural land use are significant drivers of biodiversity loss. Within the context of land‐sharing versus land‐sparing debates, large‐scale commercial agriculture is known to be detrimental to biodiversity, but the effects of small‐scale subsistence farming on biodiversity are disputed. This poses a problem for sustainable land‐use management in the Global South, where approximately 30% of farmland is small‐scale. Following a rapid land redistribution program in Zimbabwe, we evaluated changes in avian biodiversity by examining richness, abundance, and functional diversity. Rapid land redistribution has, in the near term, resulted in increased avian abundance in newly farmed areas containing miombo woodland and open habitat. Conversion of seminatural ranched land to small‐scale farms had a negative impact on larger‐bodied birds, but species richness increased, and birds in some feeding guilds maintained or increased abundance. We found evidence that land‐use change caused a shift in the functional traits of the communities present. However, functional analyses may not have adequately reflected the trait filtering effect of land redistribution on large species. Whether newly farmed landscapes in Zimbabwe can deliver multiple benefits in terms of food production and habitat for biodiversity in the longer term is an open question. When managing agricultural land transitions, relying on taxonomic measures of diversity, or abundance‐weighted measures of function diversity, may obscure important information. If the value of smallholder‐farmed land for birds is to be maintained or improved, it will be essential to ensure that a wide array of habitat types is retained alongside efforts to reduce hunting and persecution of large bird species.     

Agricultural intensification in Brazil and its effects on land‐use patterns: an analysis of the 1975–2006 period

Does agricultural intensification reduce the area used for agricultural production in Brazil? Census and other data for time periods 1975–1996 and 1996–2006 were processed and analyzed using Geographic Information System and statistical tools to investigate whether and if so, how, changes in yield and stocking rate coincide with changes in cropland and pasture area. Complementary medium‐resolution data on total farmland area changes were used in a spatially explicit assessment of the land‐use transitions that occurred in Brazil during 1960–2006. The analyses show that in agriculturally consolidated areas (mainly southern and southeastern Brazil), land‐use intensification (both on cropland and pastures) coincided with either contraction of both cropland and pasture areas, or cropland expansion at the expense of pastures, both cases resulting in farmland stability or contraction. In contrast, in agricultural frontier areas (i.e., the deforestation zones in central and northern Brazil), land‐use intensification coincided with expansion of agricultural lands. These observations provide support for the thesis that (i) technological improvements create incentives for expansion in agricultural frontier areas; and (ii) farmers are likely to reduce their managed acreage only if land becomes a scarce resource. The spatially explicit examination of land‐use transitions since 1960 reveals an expansion and gradual movement of the agricultural frontier toward the interior (center‐western Cerrado) of Brazil. It also indicates a possible initiation of a reversed trend in line with the forest transition theory, i.e., agricultural contraction and recurring forests in marginally suitable areas in southeastern Brazil, mainly within the Atlantic Forest biome. The significant reduction in deforestation that has taken place in recent years, despite rising food commodity prices, indicates that policies put in place to curb conversion of native vegetation to agriculture land might be effective. This can improve the prospects for protecting native vegetation by investing in agricultural intensification.     

Forest fragmentation in China and its effect on biodiversity

Land‐use change is fragmenting natural ecosystems, with major consequences for biodiversity. This paper reviews fragmentation trends – historical and current – in China, the fourth largest country on Earth, and explores its consequences. Remote sensing makes it possible to track land‐use change at a global scale and monitor fragmentation of dwindling natural landscapes. Yet few studies have linked fragmentation mapped remotely with impacts on biodiversity within human‐modified landscapes. Recent reforestation programs have caused substantial increases in forest cover but have not stopped fragmentation, because the new forests are mostly monocultures that further fragment China's remnant old‐growth lowland forests that harbour the highest levels of biodiversity. Fragmentation – and associated biodiversity declines – is unevenly distributed in China's forests, being most problematic where agricultural expansion is occurring in the southwest and northeast, serious in the densely populated eastern regions where urbanisation and transport infrastructure are modifying landscapes, but less of a problem in other regions. Analyses of temporal trends show that the drivers of forest fragmentation are shifting from mainly agricultural expansion to urbanisation and infrastructure development. Most of China's old‐growth forests persist in small, isolated fragments from which many native species have disappeared, on land unsuitable for human utilisation. Fragmentation throughout China is likely to have major consequences on biodiversity conservation, but few studies have considered these large‐scale processes at the national level. Our review fills this research gap and puts forward a systematic perspective relevant to China and beyond.     

Global change pressures on soils from land use and management

Soils are subject to varying degrees of direct or indirect human disturbance, constituting a major global change driver. Factoring out natural from direct and indirect human influence is not always straightforward, but some human activities have clear impacts. These include land‐use change, land management and land degradation (erosion, compaction, sealing and salinization). The intensity of land use also exerts a great impact on soils, and soils are also subject to indirect impacts arising from human activity, such as acid deposition (sulphur and nitrogen) and heavy metal pollution. In this critical review, we report the state‐of‐the‐art understanding of these global change pressures on soils, identify knowledge gaps and research challenges and highlight actions and policies to minimize adverse environmental impacts arising from these global change drivers. Soils are central to considerations of what constitutes sustainable intensification. Therefore, ensuring that vulnerable and high environmental value soils are considered when protecting important habitats and ecosystems, will help to reduce the pressure on land from global change drivers. To ensure that soils are protected as part of wider environmental efforts, a global soil resilience programme should be considered, to monitor, recover or sustain soil fertility and function, and to enhance the ecosystem services provided by soils. Soils cannot, and should not, be considered in isolation of the ecosystems that they underpin and vice versa. The role of soils in supporting ecosystems and natural capital needs greater recognition. The lasting legacy of the International Year of Soils in 2015 should be to put soils at the centre of policy supporting environmental protection and sustainable development.     

Spatial co‐localisation of extreme weather events: a clear and present danger

Extreme weather events have become a dominant feature of the narrative surrounding changes in global climate with large impacts on ecosystem stability, functioning and resilience; however, understanding of their risk of co‐occurrence at the regional scale is lacking. Based on the UK Met Office’s long‐term temperature and rainfall records, we present the first evidence demonstrating significant increases in the magnitude, direction of change and spatial co‐localisation of extreme weather events since 1961. Combining this new understanding with land‐use data sets allowed us to assess the likely consequences on future agricultural production and conservation priority areas. All land‐uses are impacted by the increasing risk of at least one extreme event and conservation areas were identified as the hotspots of risk for the co‐occurrence of multiple event types. Our findings provide a basis to regionally guide land‐use optimisation, land management practices and regulatory actions preserving ecosystem services against multiple climate threats.     

Intransitive competition is widespread in plant communities and maintains their species richness

Intransitive competition networks, those in which there is no single best competitor, may ensure species coexistence. However, their frequency and importance in maintaining diversity in real‐world ecosystems remain unclear. We used two large data sets from drylands and agricultural grasslands to assess: (1) the generality of intransitive competition, (2) intransitivity–richness relationships and (3) effects of two major drivers of biodiversity loss (aridity and land‐use intensification) on intransitivity and species richness. Intransitive competition occurred in > 65% of sites and was associated with higher species richness. Intransitivity increased with aridity, partly buffering its negative effects on diversity, but was decreased by intensive land use, enhancing its negative effects on diversity. These contrasting responses likely arise because intransitivity is promoted by temporal heterogeneity, which is enhanced by aridity but may decline with land‐use intensity. We show that intransitivity is widespread in nature and increases diversity, but it can be lost with environmental homogenisation.     

Anthropogenic transformation of the biomes, 1700 to 2000

Aim To map and characterize anthropogenic transformation of the terrestrial biosphere before and during the Industrial Revolution, from 1700 to 2000. Location Global. Methods Anthropogenic biomes (anthromes) were mapped for 1700, 1800, 1900 and 2000 using a rule‐based anthrome classification model applied to gridded global data for human population density and land use. Anthropogenic transformation of terrestrial biomes was then characterized by map comparisons at century intervals. Results In 1700, nearly half of the terrestrial biosphere was wild, without human settlements or substantial land use. Most of the remainder was in a seminatural state (45%) having only minor use for agriculture and settlements. By 2000, the opposite was true, with the majority of the biosphere in agricultural and settled anthromes, less than 20% seminatural and only a quarter left wild. Anthropogenic transformation of the biosphere during the Industrial Revolution resulted about equally from land‐use expansion into wildlands and intensification of land use within seminatural anthromes. Transformation pathways differed strongly between biomes and regions, with some remaining mostly wild but with the majority almost completely transformed into rangelands, croplands and villages. In the process of transforming almost 39% of earth's total ice‐free surface into agricultural land and settlements, an additional 37% of global land without such use has become embedded within agricultural and settled anthromes. Main conclusions Between 1700 and 2000, the terrestrial biosphere made the critical transition from mostly wild to mostly anthropogenic, passing the 50% mark early in the 20th century. At present, and ever more in the future, the form and process of terrestrial ecosystems in most biomes will be predominantly anthropogenic, the product of land use and other direct human interactions with ecosystems. Ecological research and conservation efforts in all but a few biomes would benefit from a primary focus on the novel remnant, recovering and managed ecosystems embedded within used lands.     

Land‐sparing agriculture sustains higher levels of avian functional diversity than land sharing

The ecological impacts of meeting rising demands for food production can potentially be mitigated by two competing land‐use strategies: off‐setting natural habitats through intensification of existing farmland (land sparing), or elevating biodiversity within the agricultural matrix via the integration of “wildlife‐friendly” habitat features (land sharing). However, a key unanswered question is whether sparing or sharing farming would best conserve functional diversity, which can promote ecosystem stability and resilience to future land‐use change. Focusing on bird communities in tropical cloud forests of the Colombian Andes, we test the performance of each strategy in conserving functional diversity. We show that multiple components of avian functional diversity in farmland are positively related to the proximity and extent of natural forest. Using landscape and community simulations, we also show that land‐sparing agriculture conserves greater functional diversity and predicts higher abundance of species supplying key ecological functions than land sharing, with sharing becoming progressively inferior with increasing isolation from remnant forest. These results suggest low‐intensity agriculture is likely to conserve little functional diversity unless large blocks of adjacent natural habitat are protected, consistent with land sparing. To ensure the retention of functionally diverse ecosystems, we urgently need to implement mechanisms for increasing farmland productivity whilst protecting spared land.     

Land suitability for energy crops under scenarios of climate change and land‐use

Bioenergy is expected to play a critical role in climate change mitigation. Most integrated assessment models assume an expansion of agricultural land for cultivation of energy crops. This study examines the suitability of land for growing a range of energy crops on areas that are not required for food production, accounting for climate change impacts and conservation requirements. A global fuzzy logic model is employed to ascertain the suitable cropping areas for a number of sugar, starch and oil crops, energy grasses and short rotation tree species that could be grown specifically for energy. Two climate change scenarios are modelled (RCP2.6 and RCP8.5), along with two scenarios representing the land which cannot be used for energy crops due to forest and biodiversity conservation, food agriculture and urban areas. Results indicate that 40% of the global area currently suitable for energy crops overlaps with food land and 31% overlaps with forested or protected areas, highlighting hotspots of potential land competition risks. Approximately 18.8 million km² is suitable for energy crops, to some degree, and does not overlap with protected, forested, urban or food agricultural land. Under the climate change scenario RCP8.5, this increases to 19.6 million km² by the end of the century. Broadly, climate change is projected to decrease suitable areas in southern regions and increase them in northern regions, most notably for grass crops in Russia and China, indicating that potential production areas will shift northwards which could potentially affect domestic use and trade of biomass significantly. The majority of the land which becomes suitable is in current grasslands and is just marginally or moderately suitable. This study therefore highlights the vital importance of further studies examining the carbon and ecosystem balance of this potential land‐use change, energy crop yields in sub‐optimal soil and climatic conditions and potential impacts on livelihoods.     

Patterns of land use,extensification, and intensification of Brazilian agriculture

Sustainable intensification of agriculture is one of the main strategies to provide global food security. However, its implementation raises enormous political, technological, and social challenges. Meeting these challenges will require, among other things, accurate information on the spatial and temporal patterns of agricultural land use and yield. Here, we investigate historical patterns of agricultural land use (1940–2012) and productivity (1990–2012) in Brazil using a new high‐resolution (approximately 1 km²) spatially explicit reconstruction. Although Brazilian agriculture has been historically known for its extensification over natural vegetation (Amazon and Cerrado), data from recent years indicate that extensification has slowed down and was replaced by a strong trend of intensification. Our results provide the first comprehensive historical overview of agricultural land use and productivity in Brazil, providing clear insights to guide future territorial planning, sustainable agriculture, policy, and decision‐making.     

Adaptation of global land use and management intensity to changes in climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide

Land use contributes to environmental change, but is also influenced by such changes. Climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) levels’ changes alter agricultural crop productivity, plant water requirements and irrigation water availability. The global food system needs to respond and adapt to these changes, for example, by altering agricultural practices, including the crop types or intensity of management, or shifting cultivated areas within and between countries. As impacts and associated adaptation responses are spatially specific, understanding the land use adaptation to environmental changes requires crop productivity representations that capture spatial variations. The impact of variation in management practices, including fertiliser and irrigation rates, also needs to be considered. To date, models of global land use have selected agricultural expansion or intensification levels using relatively aggregate spatial representations, typically at a regional level, that are not able to characterise the details of these spatially differentiated responses. Here, we show results from a novel global modelling approach using more detailed biophysically derived yield responses to inputs with greater spatial specificity than previously possible. The approach couples a dynamic global vegetative model (LPJ‐GUESS) with a new land use and food system model (PLUMv2), with results benchmarked against historical land use change from 1970. Land use outcomes to 2100 were explored, suggesting that increased intensity of climate forcing reduces the inputs required for food production, due to the fertilisation and enhanced water use efficiency effects of elevated atmospheric CO₂ concentrations, but requiring substantial shifts in the global and local patterns of production. The results suggest that adaptation in the global agriculture and food system has substantial capacity to diminish the negative impacts and gain greater benefits from positive outcomes of climate change. Consequently, agricultural expansion and intensification may be lower than found in previous studies where spatial details and processes consideration were more constrained.