Biodiversity conservation and agricultural sustainability: towards a new paradigm of 'ecoagriculture' landscapes

The dominant late twentieth century model of land use segregated agricultural production from areas managed for biodiversity conservation. This module is no longer adequate in much of the world. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment confirmed that agriculture has dramatically increased its ecological footprint. Rural communities depend on key components of biodiversity and ecosystem services that are found in non-domestic habitats. Fortunately, agricultural landscapes can be designed and managed to host wild biodiversity of many types, with neutral or even positive effects on agricultural production and livelihoods. Innovative practitioners, scientists and indigenous land managers are adapting, designing and managing diverse types of 'ecoagriculture' landscapes to generate positive co-benefits for production, biodiversity and local people. We assess the potentials and limitations for successful conservation of biodiversity in productive agricultural landscapes, the feasibility of making such approaches financially viable, and the organizational, governance and policy frameworks needed to enable ecoagriculture planning and implementation at a globally significant scale. We conclude that effectively conserving wild biodiversity in agricultural landscapes will require increased research, policy coordination and strategic support to agricultural communities and conservationists.     

Development and implementation of a high nature value (HNV) farming indicator for Denmark

During the latest decades, conservation awareness have increased and conservation of biodiversity is no longer an agenda restricted to pristine natural areas of high value but is being integrated in cultivated landscapes characterized by increasing fragmentation and anthropogenic pressures. Conservation of species has become relevant even in agricultural areas especially in countries heavily influenced by intensive farming and ubiquitous infrastructure. Based on the UN biodiversity convention all EU membership countries are obliged to develop a high nature value (HNV) farming indicator. The purpose of such an indicator is to provide a basis for informed decisions in prioritizing agricultural subsidies allocating these to high nature value areas. Here, the development of a national HNV farming indicator for Denmark is presented and its application in the Danish government-controlled agricultural subsidy system is outlined. The Danish HNV farming indicator is based on landscape structural parameters, known occurrences of natural and semi-natural habitats, current land use and the distributions of rare and threatened species. It covers all agricultural areas as well as Natura 2000 areas and nationally protected sites in Denmark, ranking them on a 0–13 point scale from low to high nature value according to their estimated value for threatened and rare biodiversity. The Danish government recognizes areas reaching at least 5 points as HNV farming areas eligible to subsidy and from 2015 and onwards the HNV farming indicator will be implemented for allocating part of the agricultural subsidies under the Rural Development Program in Denmark. The indicator will be updated annually to include the growing knowledge of species occurrence and land use changes.     

Priorities for conserving global species richness and endemism

The Convention on Biological Diversity aims to encourage and enable countries to conserve biological diversity, to use its components sustainably and to share benefits equitably. Species richness and endemism are two key attributes of biodiversity that reflect the complexity and uniqueness of natural ecosystems. National data on vertebrates and higher plants indicate global concentrations of biodiversity and can assist in defining priorities for action. Projections indicate that species and ecosystems will be at maximum risk from human activities during the next few decades. Prompt action by the world community can minimise the eventual loss of species. Highest priorities should be to: (i) strengthen the management of ecosystems containing a large proportion of global biodiversity; (ii) help developing countries complete their biodiversity strategies and action plans, monitor their own biodiversity, and establish and maintain adequate national systems of conservation areas; (iii) support actions at the global level, providing benefit to all countries in managing their own biodiversity. Generally, resources will best be spent in safeguarding ecosystems and habitats that are viable and important for global biodiversity, and which are threatened by factors that can be controlled cost-effectively. Other important criteria are representativeness, complementarity and insurance.     

Measuring biodiversity and sustainable management in forests and agricultural landscapes

Most of the world's biodiversity will continue to exist outside protected areas and there are also managed lands within many protected areas. In the assessment of millennium targets, there is therefore a need for indicators to measure biodiversity and suitability of habitats for biodiversity both across the whole landscape/seascape and in specific managed habitats. The two predominant land uses in many inhabited areas are forestry and agriculture and these are examined. Many national-level criteria and indicator systems already exist that attempt to assess biodiversity in forests and the impacts of forest management, but there is generally less experience in measuring these values in agricultural landscapes. Existing systems are reviewed, both for their usefulness in providing indicators and to assess the extent to which they have been applied. This preliminary gap analysis is used in the development of a set of indicators suitable for measuring progress towards the conservation of biodiversity in managed forests and agriculture. The paper concludes with a draft set of indicators for discussion, with suggestions including proportion of land under sustainable management, amount of produce from such land, area of natural or high quality semi-natural land within landscapes under sustainable management and key indicator species.     

Conservation of Scops Owl Otus scops in the Alps: relationships with grassland management, predation risk and wider biodiversity

The Scops Owl Otus scops is the most endangered and least studied owl in Europe, with widespread declines reported throughout Europe. The species is qualitatively associated with two threats: changes in agricultural practices and predation by Tawny Owls Strix aluco . We investigated these two threats to a population in the Alps, where land abandonment is causing widespread woodland expansion with unknown consequences. Predation risk and environmental indicators of the degree of agricultural change both predicted Scops Owl distribution. Furthermore, agricultural change also affected broader biodiversity, as estimated by the richness and diversity of bird and diurnal butterfly species. This resulted in a strong association between Scops Owl presence and wider biodiversity, which held at different spatial scales and justified a conservation focus on a single, threatened species. The persistence of Scops Owls in the Alps could be promoted through subsidies halting land abandonment and promoting extensive grassland management practices. Such interventions would have the additional advantage of yielding broader biodiversity benefits.     

Selection and application of spatial indicators for nature conservation at different institutional levels

As European integration increasingly affects pan-European nature conservation, indicators for the assessment of habitats are urgently needed to support ecosystem integrity monitoring as well as the target of halting biodiversity loss by 2010. The Natura 2000 network of protected sites with a strong focus on the protection of habitat types and strict monitoring obligations is now legally binding for all Member States. From a set of indicators that have been proposed for habitat monitoring by the SPIN project (Spatial Indicators for European Nature Conservation) we describe measures of landscape structure and soil function and their potential for the monitoring and management of protected areas and the surrounding landscape. In a case study from Austria, we show that structure-related indicators hold potential for the documentation of local-scale changes on a degraded raised bog Natura 2000 site. In a regional scale case study in northern Germany, we show how landscape metrics relate agricultural statistics, e.g. farm size and livestock density to landscape structure. In a third case study from Slovenia, we show how coarse-scale soil data can be disaggregated to finer scale by integrating topographic information and additional parameters for modelling, and production of soil-related habitat suitability maps. From these case studies we provide an overview of some of the critical issues affecting the selection and application of spatial indicators for nature conservation monitoring tasks. End users of spatial indicators work at different scales and in different biogeographical regions. The indicator selection and application demonstrated in our three case studies reveals the capability to contribute to a more quantitative evidence base for monitoring and management of biodiversity in Europe.     

Winners and losers of national and global efforts to reconcile agricultural intensification and biodiversity conservation

Closing yield gaps within existing croplands, and thereby avoiding further habitat conversions, is a prominently and controversially discussed strategy to meet the rising demand for agricultural products, while minimizing biodiversity impacts. The agricultural intensification associated with such a strategy poses additional threats to biodiversity within agricultural landscapes. The uneven spatial distribution of both yield gaps and biodiversity provides opportunities for reconciling agricultural intensification and biodiversity conservation through spatially optimized intensification. Here, we integrate distribution and habitat information for almost 20,000 vertebrate species with land‐cover and land‐use datasets. We estimate that projected agricultural intensification between 2000 and 2040 would reduce the global biodiversity value of agricultural lands by 11%, relative to 2000. Contrasting these projections with spatial land‐use optimization scenarios reveals that 88% of projected biodiversity loss could be avoided through globally coordinated land‐use planning, implying huge efficiency gains through international cooperation. However, global‐scale optimization also implies a highly uneven distribution of costs and benefits, resulting in distinct “winners and losers” in terms of national economic development, food security, food sovereignty or conservation. Given conflicting national interests and lacking effective governance mechanisms to guarantee equitable compensation of losers, multinational land‐use optimization seems politically unlikely. In turn, 61% of projected biodiversity loss could be avoided through nationally focused optimization, and 33% through optimization within just 10 countries. Targeted efforts to improve the capacity for integrated land‐use planning for sustainable intensification especially in these countries, including the strengthening of institutions that can arbitrate subnational land‐use conflicts, may offer an effective, yet politically feasible, avenue to better reconcile future trade‐offs between agriculture and conservation. The efficiency gains of optimization remained robust when assuming that yields could only be increased to 80% of their potential. Our results highlight the need to better integrate real‐world governance, political and economic challenges into sustainable development and global change mitigation research.     

The role of natural habitats in agricultural systems for bird conservation: the case of the threatened Lesser Grey Shrike

Birds of agricultural systems are one of the most threatened groups of birds in Europe mainly due to their sharp population decline in recent decades. Habitat intensification resulting from more productive agricultural practices has been proposed as a major cause for these declines. However, especially in some regions such as Eastern European and Mediterranean countries, little is known about the ultimate factors linked to habitat intensification that drive population declines for different species. The Lesser Grey Shrike is a good study species for a better understanding of such processes since it is closely related to agricultural habitats in Europe and has suffered a strong decline in range and population size across the western half of the continent. In this study, we explored variations in breeding parameters of this shrike related to habitat composition and food supply at the territory level. We found that fledgling success of early breeders was related to the presence of natural (shrub lands) and semi-natural (fallows) habitats in the predominantly agricultural matrix that dominated breeding territories. Their influence on fledgling success appeared to be mediated by a higher arthropod availability on these habitats. Indeed, Lesser Grey Shrike showed a strong preference for these habitats as hunting locations. Our results highlight the importance of natural habitats in intensified agricultural land mosaics for the conservation of bird species. We suggest that management plans should pay special attention to the availability of habitats which serve as high quality food reservoirs and can potentially contribute to enhance the species population viability in an area. Finally, we discuss the possible link between agricultural intensification and Lesser Grey Shrike population declines in Western Europe.     

“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。     

Agroforestry: a refuge for tropical biodiversity?

As rates of deforestation continue to rise in many parts of the tropics, the international conservation community is faced with the challenge of finding approaches which can reduce deforestation and provide rural livelihoods in addition to conserving biodiversity. Much of modern-day conservation is motivated by a desire to conserve 'pristine nature' in protected areas, while there is growing recognition of the long-term human involvement in forest dynamics and of the importance of conservation outside protected areas. Agroforestry -- intentional management of shade trees with agricultural crops -- has the potential for providing habitats outside formally protected land, connecting nature reserves and alleviating resource-use pressure on conservation areas. Here we examine the role of agroforestry systems in maintaining species diversity and conclude that these systems can play an important role in biodiversity conservation in human-dominated landscapes.     

Changes of traditional agrarian landscapes and their conservation implications: a case study of butterflies in Romania

Global biodiversity is decreasing as a result of human activities. In many parts of the world, this decrease is due to the destruction of natural habitats. The European perspective is different. Here, traditional agricultural landscapes developed into species-rich habitats. However, the European biodiversity heritage is strongly endangered. One of the countries where this biodiversity is best preserved is Romania. We analyse the possible changes in Romania's land-use patterns and their possible benefits and hazards with respect to biodiversity. As model group, we used butterflies, whose habitat requirements are well understood. We determined the ecological importance of different land-use types for the conservation of butterflies, underlining the special importance of Romania's semi-natural grasslands for nature conservation. We found that increasing modern agriculture and abandonment of less productive sites both affect biodiversity negatively — the former immediately and the latter after a lag phase of several years. These perspectives are discussed in the light of the integration of Romania into the European Union.     

Amazonian countryside habitats provide limited avian conservation value

Balancing ever-increasing agricultural and biofuel needs with biodiversity conservation is one of the greatest challenges facing conservation biologists in the 21st century. The conversion of >75 million hectares of forests in Brazilian Amazonia over four decades for agropastoral uses has resulted in the ‘creation’ of a similar-sized amount of non-forest ‘agricultural matrix’ habitats. Despite extensive research on the effects of forest loss and fragmentation on the Amazonian biota, the value of increasingly larger areas of non-forest habitat for forest wildlife remains poorly understood. We conducted 325 fixed-radius point counts of the avifaunal assemblage of non-forest vegetation within a 1200-km² region along the Amazonian ‘Arc of Deforestation’ in Northern Mato Grosso, Brazil. Our sampling included 2,814 records of 164 species, 15 and 54% of which were recorded in more than 10% and fewer than 2% of all sampling sites, respectively. In particular, nearly 70% of the regional scale avifauna of 560 species failed to use the agricultural matrix, regardless of the persistence of ameliorating structural features, such as isolated trees. At the local scale, higher species richness in the agricultural matrix was best predicted by the presence of relictual trees, and to a lesser extent by standing water and scrubby habitats. The presence of relictual trees, rather than scrub, predicted the occurrence of those forest-dependent species that did use the agricultural matrix. Our results indicate that intensive agricultural production coupled with land sparing would better suit conservation of vulnerable forest species than more extensive ‘wildlife friendly’ agricultural practices that require more land under production to produce the same yield.     

Integrating biodiversity and conservation with modern agricultural landscapes

To achieve food security and meet the demands of the ever-growing human populations, farming systems have assumed unsustainable practices to produce more from a finite land area. This has been cause for concern mainly due to the often-irreversible damage done to the otherwise productive agricultural landscapes. Agro-ecology is proclaimed to be deteriorating due to eroding integrity of connected ecological mosaics and vulnerability to climate change. This has contributed to declining species diversity, loss of buffer vegetation, fragmentation of habitats, and loss of natural pollinators or predators, which eventually leads to decline in ecosystem services. Currently, a hierarchy of conservation initiatives is being considered to restore ecological integrity of agricultural landscapes. However, the challenge of identifying a suitable conservation strategy is a daunting task in view of socio-ecological factors that may constrain the choice of available strategies. One way to mitigate this situation and integrate biodiversity with agricultural landscapes is to implement offset mechanisms, which are compensatory and balancing approaches to restore the ecological health and function of an ecosystem. This needs to be tailored to the history of location specific agricultural practices, and the social, ecological and environmental conditions. The offset mechanisms can complement other initiatives through which farmers are insured against landscape-level risks such as droughts, fire and floods. For countries in the developing world with significant biodiversity and extensive agriculture, we should promote a comprehensive model of sustainable agricultural landscapes and ecosystem services, replicable at landscape to regional scales. Arguably, the model can be a potential option to sustain the integrity of biodiversity mosaic in agricultural landscapes.     

Biodiversity conservation in cocoa production landscapes: an overview

Cocoa agroforests that retain a floristically diverse and structurally complex shade canopy have the potential to harbour significant levels of biodiversity, yet few studies have documented the plant and animal species occurring within these systems or within landscapes dominated by cocoa production. In this special issue, we bring together nine studies from Latin America, Africa and Asia that document the contribution of cocoa agroforestry systems to biodiversity conservation, and explore how the design, management and location of these systems within the broader landscape influence their value as habitats, resources and biological corridors. Tree diversity within the cocoa production systems is variable, depending on management, cultural differences, location and farm history, among other factors. Animal diversity is typically highest in those cocoa agroforests that have high plant diversity, structurally complex canopies, and abundant surrounding forest cover. In general, both plant and animal diversity within cocoa agroforests is greater than those of other agricultural land uses, but lower than in the original forest habitat. There are several emerging threats to biodiversity conservation within cocoa production landscapes, including the loss of remaining forest cover, the simplification of cocoa shade canopies and the conversion of cocoa agroforestry systems to other agricultural land uses with lower biodiversity value. To counter these threats and conserve biodiversity over the long-term, land management should focus on conserving native forest habitat within cocoa production landscapes, maintaining or restoring floristically diverse and structurally complex shade canopies within cocoa agroforests, and retaining other types of on-farm tree cover to enhance landscape connectivity and habitat availability.     

Developing indicators for European birds

The global pledge to deliver 'a significant reduction in the current rate of biodiversity loss by 2010' is echoed in a number of regional and national level targets. There is broad consensus, however, that in the absence of conservation action, biodiversity will continue to be lost at a rate unprecedented in the recent era. Remarkably, we lack a basic system to measure progress towards these targets and, in particular, we lack standard measures of biodiversity and procedures to construct and assess summary statistics. Here, we develop a simple classification of biodiversity indicators to assist their development and clarify purpose. We use European birds, as example taxa, to show how robust indicators can be constructed and how they can be interpreted. We have developed statistical methods to calculate supranational, multi-species indices using population data from national annual breeding bird surveys in Europe. Skilled volunteers using standardized field methods undertake data collection where methods and survey designs differ slightly across countries. Survey plots tend to be widely distributed at a national level, covering many bird species and habitats with reasonable representation. National species' indices are calculated using log-linear regression, which allows for plot turnover. Supranational species' indices are constructed by combining the national species' indices weighted by national population sizes of each species. Supranational, multi-species indicators are calculated by averaging the resulting indices. We show that common farmland birds in Europe have declined steeply over the last two decades, whereas woodland birds have not. Evidence elsewhere shows that the main driver of farmland bird declines is increased agricultural intensification. We argue that the farmland bird indicator is a useful surrogate for trends in other elements of biodiversity in this habitat.     

The potential of military training areas for bird conservation in a central European landscape

European biodiversity has suffered from serious declines during the past few decades, with alterations of land use practices resulting in a loss of fine-scale habitat heterogeneity being a dominant driver. This heterogeneity was maintained by extensive landscape management, which has gradually been replaced by either intensive exploitation or land abandonment. It has been suggested that military training can generate habitat heterogeneity that may support the existence of species of conservation concern, but studies rigorously testing the real importance of military training areas for biodiversity are lacking. Here we address this issue by analyses of two datasets. First, we compared land cover classes between all large military training areas (MTAs) and surrounding control areas (CAs) of the same size in the Czech Republic using multivariate redundancy analysis. We found that the difference in land cover between MTAs and CAs was significant and represented the strongest gradient in land cover classes: from various farmland and artificial habitats typical for CAs to forest and scrubland-grassland mosaic typical for MTAs. Second, we selected one of these areas and compared bird species richness between the MTA and the nearby CA using generalized linear mixed effects models. We found that the number of species of conservation concern was significantly higher in the MTA than in the CA. With respect to habitats, bird species richness was significantly higher in the MTA than in the CA for open habitats, but not for forest habitats. Our results are thus consistent with the view that military training creates areas that are different from the surrounding landscape in terms of land cover, and that this difference translates to a suitability for species of conservation concern. It is remarkable that the positive influence of military training is confined to open habitats, which are subject to the most intensive military activities and also suffer the highest degree of deterioration in European landscapes.     

Dung Beetle and Terrestrial Mammal Diversity in Forests, Indigenous Agroforestry Systems and Plantain Monocultures in Talamanca, Costa Rica

In order to explore the importance of indigenous agroforestry systems for biodiversity conservation, we compared the abundance, species richness and diversity of dung beetles and terrestrial mammals across a gradient of different land use types from agricultural monocultures (plantains) to agroforestry systems (cocoa and banana) and forests in the BriBri and Cabécar indigenous reserves in Talamanca, Costa Rica. A total of 132,460 dung beetles of 52 species and 913 tracks of 27 terrestrial mammal species were registered. Dung beetle species richness and diversity were greatest in the forests, intermediate in the agroforestry systems and lowest in the plantain monocultures, while dung beetle abundance was greatest in the plantain monocultures. The number of mammal tracks per plot was significantly higher in forests than in plantain monocultures, whereas mammal species richness was higher in forests than in either cocoa agroforestry systems or plantain monocultures. Species composition of both terrestrial mammals and dung beetles also varied across the different land use types. Our study indicates that indigenous cocoa and banana agroforestry systems maintain an intermediate level of biodiversity (which is less than that of the original forest but significantly greater than that of plantain monocultures) and provide suitable habitat for a number of forest-dependent species. Although the agroforestry systems appear to serve as favorable habitats for many terrestrial mammal species, their potential positive contribution to mammal conservation is being offset by heavy hunting pressure in the reserves. As in other agricultural landscapes, the conservation of biodiversity in Talamanca will depend not only on maintaining the existing forest patches and reducing the conversion of traditional agroforestry systems to monocultures, but also on reducing hunting pressure.     

Restoration of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on Agricultural Land

Cultivation and cropping are major causes of destruction and degradation of natural ecosystems throughout the world. We face the challenge of maintaining provisioning services while conserving or enhancing other ecosystem services and biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. There is a range of possibilities within two types of intervention, namely “land sharing” and “land separation”; the former advocates the enhancement of the farmed environment, but the latter a separation between land designated for farming versus conservation. Land sharing may involve biodiversity-based agricultural practices, learning from traditional farming, changing from conventional to organic agriculture and from “simple” crops and pastures to agro-forestry systems, and restoring or creating specific elements to benefit wildlife and particular services without decreasing agricultural production. Land separation in the farmland context involves restoring or creating non-farmland habitat at the expense of field-level agricultural production—for example, woodland on arable land. Restoration by land sharing has the potential to enhance agricultural production, other ecosystem services and biodiversity at both the field and landscape scale; however, restoration by land separation would provide these benefits only at the landscape scale. Although recent debate has contrasted these approaches, we suggest they should be used in combination to maximize benefits. Furthermore, we suggest “woodland islets”, an intermediate approach between land abandonment and farmland afforestation, for ecological restoration in extensive agricultural landscapes. This approach allows reconciliation of farmland production, conservation of values linked to cultural landscapes, enhancement of biodiversity, and provision of a range of ecosystem services. Beyond academic research, restoration projects within agricultural landscapes are essential if we want to halt environmental degradation and biodiversity loss.     

Identifying habitat conservation priorities and gaps for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl in California

Conservation of migratory shorebirds and waterfowl presents unique challenges due to extensive historic loss of wetland habitats, and current reliance on managed landscapes for wintering and migratory passage. We developed a spatially-explicit approach to estimate potential shorebird and waterfowl densities in California by integrating mapped habitat layers and statewide bird survey data with expert-based habitat rankings. Using these density estimates as inputs, we used the Marxan site-selection program to identify priority shorebird and waterfowl areas at the ecoregional level. We identified 3.7 million ha of habitat for shorebirds and waterfowl, of which 1.4 million ha would be required to conserve 50% of wintering populations. To achieve a conservation goal of 75%, more than twice as much habitat (3.1 million ha) would be necessary. Agricultural habitats comprised a substantial portion of priority areas, especially at the 75% level, suggesting that under current management conditions, large areas of agricultural land, much of it formerly wetland, are needed to provide the habitat availability and landscape connectivity required by shorebird and waterfowl populations. These habitats were found to be largely lacking recognized conservation status in California (96% un-conserved), with only slightly higher levels of conservation for priority shorebird and waterfowl areas. Freshwater habitats, including wetlands and ponds, were also found to have low levels of conservation (67% un-conserved), although priority shorebird and waterfowl areas had somewhat higher levels of conservation than the state as a whole. Conserving migratory waterfowl and shorebirds will require a diversity of conservation strategies executed at a variety of scales. Our modeled results are complementary with other approaches and can help prioritize areas for protection, restoration and other actions. Traditional habitat protection strategies such as conservation easements and fee acquisitions may be of limited utility for protecting and managing significant areas of agricultural lands. Instead, conservation strategies focused on incentive-based programs to support wildlife friendly management practices in agricultural settings may have greater utility and conservation effectiveness.     

Cotton expansion and biodiversity loss in African savannahs, opportunities and challenges for conservation agriculture: a review paper based on two case studies

We review agricultural impacts on biodiversity and the potential of conservation agriculture in developing productive and environment-friendly cropping systems. We then analyse experiences from two African landscapes of global importance for conservation: the Mid Zambezi Valley in Southern Africa and the periphery of the “W-Arly-Penjari” complex in West Africa. In both areas, expansion of cotton farming, considered as one of the most polluting forms of agriculture in the world, drives major land use change and loss of biodiversity. In both areas, various forms of conservation agriculture have been developed and tested. We highlight the potential benefit of conservation agriculture in controlling negative environmental effects traditionally associated with agriculture and reducing the need for land conversion through increased biophysical resource use efficiency, turning agriculture from a threat to an opportunity for conservation. Finally, we raise a number of issues that constitute challenges for the widespread adoption of these technologies by resource-poor farmers, and formulate recommendations for the development, evaluation and diffusion of conservation agriculture technologies for smallholders in semi-arid Africa.