Organic Farming in the Nordic Countries – Animal Health and Production

Organic farming (or ecological agriculture) is of growing importance in the agricultural sector worldwide. In the Nordic countries, 1–10% of the arable land was in organic production in 1999. Organic farming can be seen as an approach to agriculture where the aim is to create integrated, humane, environmentally and economically sustainable agricultural production systems. Principles like nutrient recycling, prevention rather than treatment and the precautionary principle are included in aims and standards. Animal welfare is another hallmark of organic livestock production but despite this, several studies have indicated severe health problems e.g. in organic poultry production in Denmark. Also the quality of animal food products in relation to human health, particularly the risk of zoonotic infections, has been debated. For these reasons there is a need for improvement of production methods and animal health status. Vets play an important role in this development through work in clinical practice and in research. On-farm consultancy should be tailored to the individual farmers needs, and the practitioner should be willing to take up new ideas and when needed, to enter a critical dialogue in relation to animal welfare. Better base line data on animal health and food safety in organic food systems are needed.     

Defining a land boundary for sustainable livestock consumption

The need for more sustainable production and consumption of animal source food (ASF) is central to the achievement of the sustainable development goals: within this context, wise use of land is a core challenge and concern. A key question in feeding the future world is: how much ASF should we eat? We demonstrate that livestock raised under the circular economy concept could provide a significant, nonnegligible part (9–23 g/per capita) of our daily protein needs (~50–60 g/per capita). This livestock then would not consume human‐edible biomass, such as grains, but mainly convert leftovers from arable land and grass resources into valuable food, implying that production of livestock feed is largely decoupled from arable land. The availability of these biomass streams for livestock then determines the boundaries for livestock production and consumption. Under this concept, the competition for land for feed or food would be minimized and compared to no ASF, including some ASF in the human diet could free up about one quarter of global arable land. Our results also demonstrate that restricted growth in consumption of ASF in Africa and Asia would be feasible under these boundary conditions, while reductions in the rest of the world would be necessary to meet land use sustainability criteria. Managing this expansion and contraction of future consumption of ASF is essential for achieving sustainable nutrition security.     

Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects

The livestock sector globally is highly dynamic. In developing countries, it is evolving in response to rapidly increasing demand for livestock products. In developed countries, demand for livestock products is stagnating, while many production systems are increasing their efficiency and environmental sustainability. Historical changes in the demand for livestock products have been largely driven by human population growth, income growth and urbanization and the production response in different livestock systems has been associated with science and technology as well as increases in animal numbers. In the future, production will increasingly be affected by competition for natural resources, particularly land and water, competition between food and feed and by the need to operate in a carbon-constrained economy. Developments in breeding, nutrition and animal health will continue to contribute to increasing potential production and further efficiency and genetic gains. Livestock production is likely to be increasingly affected by carbon constraints and environmental and animal welfare legislation. Demand for livestock products in the future could be heavily moderated by socio-economic factors such as human health concerns and changing socio-cultural values. There is considerable uncertainty as to how these factors will play out in different regions of the world in the coming decades.     

生物多样性控制作物病害研究进展

自然资源的合理利用和生态环境保护是人类实现可持续发展的基础, 生物多样性的研究和保护已成为世界各国普遍关注的重大问题。农作物病害是农业生产上重要的生物灾害, 是制约农业可持续发展的主要因素之一, 抗病品种大面积单一化种植导致了农业生物多样性水平严重降低, 因而农业生物多样性的过度丧失已成为可持续农业所面临的主要难题。利用生物多样性持续控制作物病害能减轻作物病害发生和作物产量损失, 达到保护作物多样性, 减少农药过量施用给农业生态环境造成破坏的最终目的, 而揭示生物多样性控制作物病害的机制能有效地指导生产上对不同作物进行合理布局和轮换, 建立作物不同组合的优化搭配和种植模式。文章从分子、生理和生态水平研究农业生物多样性控制作物病害的机制、以及影响作物多样性控制病害的因素、覆盖作物等几方面对生物多样性控制作物病害的研究进展进行概述, 同时对今后生物多样性控制作物病害机制还需加强的研究部分进行了展望。     

利用农业生物多样性持续控制有害生物

农业生物多样性对保障全球粮食安全和农业可持续发展至关重要.人类在多样性的形成上发挥了关键作用,人类结合自然进化创造了遗传多样性、物种多样性和生态系统多样性.农业生物多样性发挥了很多社会经济和环境功能:保障粮食安全;维持农业生态系统可持续发展;赋予农村经济适变性.但当前人类毁灭农业生物多样性的速度更为惊人.在总结石油农业单一化种植的生态负效应、传统农业提倡“天人合一”的生态正效应的基础上,分析讨论了利用农业生物多样性持续控制有害生物的必要性和可行性,从生态系统多样性、物种多样性和种内遗传多样性3个层次,归纳了构建和恢复农田生物多样性的基本方法.基于病理学、生态学、营养学和生理学等学科领域,从群体异质效应、稀释效应、微生态效应、诱导抗性效应、物理阻隔效应、生理学效应和化感效应等7个方面,归纳了利用农业生物多样性持续控制有害生物的基础原理.寻求低投入、高效益、多样化和可持续的农业生产系统是当今世界许多科学家、决策者和生产者共同关心的问题.农业生物多样性具有重要的生态作用,在现代农业框架下,是合情合理构建持续、稳定、健康、高产的农田生态系统,持续控制有害生物的金钥匙.为此必须加强四方面的课题研究:各种作物之间的相生相克关系及其作用机理;各种有害生物的主要天敌种类、生物学、生态学特性及其适生环境;利用农业生物多样性全面、持续控制有害生物的农业生产模式;与其相配套的农艺措施与农业机械.     

Conserving livestock breed biodiversity

Growing awareness of the importance of conserving the biodiversity of livestock breeds is paralleled by genetic advances that will help objective planning of conservation. Inventories of breeds, long advocated, are now being established and concepts originally formulated for the quantification of species diversity are being applied. The breeds thus conserved will provide valuable resources for the future of agriculture, especially in the developing world.     

The sociocultural sustainability of livestock farming: an inquiry into social perceptions of dairy farming

Over the past 50 years, the scale and intensity of livestock farming have increased significantly. At the same time, Western societies have become more urbanised and fewer people have close relatives involved in farming. As a result, most citizens have little knowledge or direct experience of what farming entails. In addition, more people are expressing concerns over issues such as farm animal welfare. This has led to increasing public demand for more sustainable ways of livestock farming. To date, little research has been carried out on the social pillar of sustainable livestock farming. The aim of this study is to provide insights into the sociocultural sustainability of livestock farming systems. This study reviews the key findings of earlier published interdisciplinary research about the social perceptions of dairy farming in the Netherlands and Norway (Boogaard et al., 2006, 2008, 2010a and 2010b) and synthesises the implications for sociocultural sustainability of livestock farming. This study argues that the (sociocultural) sustainable development of livestock farming is not an objective concept, but that it is socially and culturally constructed by people in specific contexts. It explains the social pillar of the economics/ecological/social model sustainability in terms of the fields of tensions that exist between modernity, traditions and naturality - 'the MTN knot' - each of which has positive and negative faces. All three angles of vision can be seen in people's attitudes to dairy farming, but the weight given to each differs between individuals and cultures. Hence, sociocultural sustainability is context dependent and needs to be evaluated according to its local meaning. Moreover, sociocultural sustainability is about people's perceptions of livestock farming. Lay people might perceive livestock farming differently and ascribe different meanings to it than experts do, but their 'reality' is just as real. Finally, this study calls for an ongoing collaboration between social and animal scientists in order to develop livestock farming systems that are more socioculturally sustainable.     

Seasonality constraints to livestock grazing intensity

Increasing food production is essential to meet the future food demand of a growing world population. In light of pressing sustainability challenges such as climate change and the importance of the global livestock system for food security as well as GHG emissions, finding ways to increasing food production sustainably and without increasing competition for food crops is essential. Yet, many unknowns relate to livestock grazing, in particular grazing intensity, an essential variable to assess the sustainability of livestock systems. Here, we explore ecological limits to grazing intensity (GI; i.e. the fraction of net primary production consumed by grazing animals) by analysing the role of seasonality in natural grasslands. We estimate seasonal limitations to GI by combining monthly net primary production data and a map of global livestock distribution with assumptions on the length of nonfavourable periods that can be bridged by livestock (e.g. by browsing dead standing biomass, storage systems or biomass conservation). This allows us to derive a seasonality‐limited potential GI, which we compare with the GI prevailing in 2000. We find that GI in 2000 lies below its potential on 39% of the total global natural grasslands, which has a potential for increasing biomass extraction of up to 181 MtC/yr. In contrast, on 61% of the area GI exceeds the potential, made possible by management. Mobilizing this potential could increase milk production by 5%, meat production by 4% or contribute to free up to 2.8 Mio km² of grassland area at the global scale if the numerous socio‐ecological constraints can be overcome. We discuss socio‐ecological trade‐offs, which may reduce the estimated potential considerably and require the establishment of sound monitoring systems and an improved understanding of livestock system's role in the Earth system.     

Animal Board Invited Review: Comparing conventional and organic livestock production systems on different aspects of sustainability

To sustainably contribute to food security of a growing and richer world population, livestock production systems are challenged to increase production levels while reducing environmental impact, being economically viable, and socially responsible. Knowledge about the sustainability performance of current livestock production systems may help to formulate strategies for future systems. Our study provides a systematic overview of differences between conventional and organic livestock production systems on a broad range of sustainability aspects and animal species available in peer-reviewed literature. Systems were compared on economy, productivity, environmental impact, animal welfare and public health. The review was limited to dairy cattle, beef cattle, pigs, broilers and laying hens, and to Europe, North America and New Zealand. Results per indicators are presented as in the articles without performing additional calculations. Out of 4171 initial search hits, 179 articles were analysed. Studies varied widely in indicators, research design, sample size and location and context. Quite some studies used small samples. No study analysed all aspects of sustainability simultaneously. Conventional systems had lower labour requirements per unit product, lower income risk per animal, higher production per animal per time unit, higher reproduction numbers, lower feed conversion ratio, lower land use, generally lower acidification and eutrophication potential per unit product, equal or better udder health for cows and equal or lower microbiological contamination. Organic systems had higher income per animal or full time employee, lower impact on biodiversity, lower eutrophication and acidification potential per unit land, equal or lower likelihood of antibiotic resistance in bacteria and higher beneficial fatty acid levels in cow milk. For most sustainability aspects, sometimes conventional and sometimes organic systems performed better, except for productivity, which was consistently higher in conventional systems. For many aspects and animal species, more data are needed to conclude on a difference between organic and conventional livestock production systems.     

A method for assessing sustainability,with beef production as an example

A comprehensive approach to decisions about the use of land and other world resources, taking full account of biological and other scientific information, is crucial for good decisions to be made now and in future. The sustainability of systems for producing food and other products is sometimes assessed using too narrow a range of component factors. A production system might be unsustainable because of adverse effects on a wide range of aspects of human welfare, animal welfare, or the environment. All factors should be included in sustainability evaluation, otherwise products or actions might be avoided without adequate consideration of key factors or of the diversity of production systems. A scoring method that is based on scientific information and potentially of general relevance is presented here, using beef production as a example with a review of each of its sustainability components. This includes an overall combined score and specific factors that make the system unacceptable for some consumers. The results show that, in this example, the sustainability of the best systems is very much better than that of the worst systems. By taking account of scores for a wide range of components of sustainability in comparing beef-production systems, better quality policies about beef use can be formulated than when statements referring only to one system are considered. The least sustainable beef-production systems are extensive grazing that causes land degradation and the use of feedlots or indoor housing with grain feeding. Semi-intensive silvopastoral systems are the most sustainable beef-production systems, and well-managed pasture-fed beef from areas where crop production is uneconomic is also sustainable. This simple, scientifically based scoring system could be modified to use positive as well as negative scores and is of value for policy makers, researchers, producers, organisations aiming to improve sustainability, and the general public.     

Review: Associations among goods,impacts and ecosystem services provided by livestock farming

Livestock is a major driver in most rural landscapes and economics, but it also polarises debate over its environmental impacts, animal welfare and human health. Conversely, the various services that livestock farming systems provide to society are often overlooked and have rarely been quantified. The aim of analysing bundles of services is to chart the coexistence and interactions between the various services and impacts provided by livestock farming, and to identify sets of ecosystem services (ES) that appear together repeatedly across sites and through time. We review three types of approaches that analyse associations among impacts and services from local to global scales: (i) detecting ES associations at system or landscape scale, (ii) identifying and mapping bundles of ES and impacts and (iii) exploring potential drivers using prospective scenarios. At a local scale, farming practices interact with landscape heterogeneity in a multi-scale process to shape grassland biodiversity and ES. Production and various ES provided by grasslands to farmers, such as soil fertility, biological regulations and erosion control, benefit to some extent from the functional diversity of grassland species, and length of pasture phase in the crop rotation. Mapping ES from the landscape up to the EU-wide scale reveals a frequent trade-off between livestock production on one side and regulating and cultural services on the other. Maps allow the identification of target areas with higher ecological value or greater sensitivity to risks. Using two key factors (livestock density and the proportion of permanent grassland within utilised agricultural area), we identified six types of European livestock production areas characterised by contrasted bundles of services and impacts. Livestock management also appeared to be a key driver of bundles of services in prospective scenarios. These scenarios simulate a breakaway from current production, legislation (e.g. the use of food waste to fatten pigs) and consumption trends (e.g. halving animal protein consumption across Europe). Overall, strategies that combine a reduction of inputs, of the use of crops from arable land to feed livestock, of food waste and of meat consumption deliver a more sustainable food future. Livestock as part of this sustainable future requires further enhancement, quantification and communication of the services provided by livestock farming to society, which calls for the following: (i) a better targeting of public support, (ii) more precise quantification of bundles of services and (iii) better information to consumers and assessment of their willingness to pay for these services.     

International approaches to the concept of integrated control of nematode parasites of livestock

Livestock production systems throughout the world are under severe and sustained pressures. These are diverse and multi-factorial, ranging from the need to redress the oversupply of livestock commodities from the protected industries of the industrialised world, meeting animal welfare expectations, attempts to ease animal-induced land degradation and pollution, and competition with alternative products. As a consequence, funding for research to the ruminant livestock industries has been contracting universally. This applies particularly to research on those diseases of grazing livestock that are not zoonotic, threats to trade, or major "killer" diseases. Gastrointestinal helminths fall outside these priorities. The last decade has witnessed a major contraction throughout the world in the number of research centres and staff involved in applied veterinary parasitology research. This coincides with a time when these livestock industries need the most help. Resistance to anthelmintic drugs amongst the major nematode parasites of sheep and goats has now reached alarming proportions throughout the world and threatens the future viability of continued small ruminant production in many countries. Anthelmintic resistance is also increasing in the important nematode parasites of cattle. Also, this time coincides with the apparent reduction in the discovery and development of entirely new anthelmintic products by the pharmaceutical industry. As a consequence, those remaining researchers and extension personnel who have the responsibility of providing support to the ruminant livestock industry, are showing innovation and lateral thinking in ways to combat the perennial problem of internal parasites in grazing livestock. There are a number of excellent examples of parasite-control schemes, which do not rely entirely on anthelmintic treatment. These are now being supplemented with some exciting novel approaches to dealing with particularly pressing parasite problems. Also there is a move towards the development of true integrated approaches in the control of nematode parasites of livestock, which employ several of these methods when appropriate. This proves that as far as worm control in livestock is concerned, the old adage "necessity is the mother of invention", holds true.     

Animal Welfare and Livestock Production in a Postindustrial Milieu

Structural transformation, food safety, and environmental risks pose challenges to livestock producers. Adjustments to livestock production systems to improve animal welfare will be made in an economic and political milieu characterized by these challenges. However, competing assumptions about contemporary society provide different frameworks for formulating the problems faced by industry and government decision makers. The assumption that industrialization is the key problem in livestock production leads to an application of science that does not adequately address the role of public participation and trust.     

The greenhouse gas abatement potential of productivity improving measures applied to cattle systems in a developing region

Developing countries are experiencing an increase in total demand for livestock commodities, as populations and per capita demands increase. Increased production is therefore required to meet this demand and maintain food security. Production increases will lead to proportionate increases in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions unless offset by reductions in the emissions intensity (Ei) (i.e. the amount of GHG emitted per kg of commodity produced) of livestock production. It is therefore important to identify measures that can increase production whilst reducing Ei cost-effectively. This paper seeks to do this for smallholder agro-pastoral cattle systems in Senegal; ranging from low input to semi-intensified, they are representative of a large proportion of the national cattle production. Specifically, it identifies a shortlist of mitigation measures with potential for application to the various herd systems and estimates their GHG emissions abatement potential (using the Global Livestock Environmental Assessment Model) and cost-effectiveness. Limitations and future requirements are identified and discussed. This paper demonstrates that the Ei of meat and milk from livestock systems in a developing region can be reduced through measures that would also benefit food security, many of which are likely to be cost-beneficial. The ability to make such quantification can assist future sustainable development efforts.     

Optimizing nutrient management for farm systems

Increasing the inputs of nutrients has played a major role in increasing the supply of food to a continually growing world population. However, focusing attention on the most important nutrients, such as nitrogen (N), has in some cases led to nutrient imbalances, some excess applications especially of N, inefficient use and large losses to the environment with impacts on air and water quality, biodiversity and human health. In contrast, food exports from the developing to the developed world are depleting soils of nutrients in some countries. Better management of all essential nutrients is required that delivers sustainable agriculture and maintains the necessary increases in food production while minimizing waste, economic loss and environmental impacts. More extensive production systems typified by 'organic farming' may prove to be sustainable. However, for most of the developed world, and in the developing world where an ever-growing population demands more food, it will be essential to increase the efficiency of nutrient use in conventional systems. Nutrient management on farms is under the control of the land manger, the most effective of whom will already use various decision supports for calculating rates of application to achieve various production targets. Increasingly, land managers will need to conform to good practice to achieve production targets and to conform to environmental targets as well.     

Current available strategies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in livestock systems: an animal welfare perspective

Livestock production is a major contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, so will play a significant role in the mitigation effort. Recent literature highlights different strategies to mitigate GHG emissions in the livestock sector. Animal welfare is a criterion of sustainability and any strategy designed to reduce the carbon footprint of livestock production should consider animal welfare amongst other sustainability metrics. We discuss and tabulate the likely relationships and trade-offs between the GHG mitigation potential of mitigation strategies and their welfare consequences, focusing on ruminant species and on cattle in particular. The major livestock GHG mitigation strategies were classified according to their mitigation approach as reducing total emissions (inhibiting methane production in the rumen), or reducing emissions intensity (Ei; reducing CH₄ per output unit without directly targeting methanogenesis). Strategies classified as antimethanogenic included chemical inhibitors, electron acceptors (i.e. nitrates), ionophores (i.e. Monensin) and dietary lipids. Increasing diet digestibility, intensive housing, improving health and welfare, increasing reproductive efficiency and breeding for higher productivity were categorized as strategies that reduce Ei. Strategies that increase productivity are very promising ways to reduce the livestock carbon footprint, though in intensive systems this is likely to be achieved at the cost of welfare. Other strategies can effectively reduce GHG emissions whilst simultaneously improving animal welfare (e.g. feed supplementation or improving health). These win–win strategies should be strongly supported as they address both environmental and ethical sustainability. In order to identify the most cost-effective measures for improving environmental sustainability of livestock production, the consequences of current and future strategies for animal welfare must be scrutinized and contrasted against their effectiveness in mitigating climate change.     

Land‐use strategies to balance livestock production,biodiversity conservation and carbon storage in Yucatán,Mexico

Balancing the production of food, particularly meat, with preserving biodiversity and maintaining ecosystem services is a major societal challenge. Research into the contrasting strategies of land sparing and land sharing has suggested that land sparing—combining high‐yield agriculture with the protection or restoration of natural habitats on nonfarmed land—will have lower environmental impacts than other strategies. Ecosystems with long histories of habitat disturbance, however, could be resilient to low‐yield agriculture and thus fare better under land sharing. Using a wider suite of species (birds, dung beetles and trees) and a wider range of livestock‐production systems than previous studies, we investigated the probable impacts of different land‐use strategies on biodiversity and aboveground carbon stocks in the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico—a region with a long history of habitat disturbance. By modelling the production of multiple products from interdependent land uses, we found that land sparing would allow larger estimated populations of most species and larger carbon stocks to persist than would land sharing or any intermediate strategy. This result held across all agricultural production targets despite the history of disturbance and despite species richness in low‐ and medium‐yielding agriculture being not much lower than that in natural habitats. This highlights the importance, in evaluating the biodiversity impacts of land use, of measuring population densities of individual species, rather than simple species richness. The benefits of land sparing for both biodiversity and carbon storage suggest that safeguarding natural habitats for biodiversity protection and carbon storage alongside promoting areas of high‐yield cattle production would be desirable. However, delivering such landscapes will probably require the explicit linkage of livestock yield increases with habitat protection or restoration, as well as a deeper understanding of the long‐term sustainability of yields, and research into how other societal outcomes vary across land‐use strategies.     

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.     

生态功益:自然生态过程对人类的贡献

大自然是维系人类社会生存和维持文明发展的生命之舟,为人们的物质和精神生活提供必不可少的资源和环境条件及生态服务。生态功益是这些由自然生物过程产生和维持的环境资源方面的条件和服务的统称。本文从自然生产,维持生物多样性,调节气象过程、气候变化和地球化学物质循环,调节水循环和减缓旱涝灾害,改善与保持土壤,净化环境,为作物与自然植物传粉播种,控制病虫害,维护改善人的身心健康和激发人的精神文化追求等方面探讨和介绍生态功益及生态功益的经济评价。迅猛的人口增长、社会变化和技术发展已使承载人类社会的生命之舟受到严重破坏和巨大威胁。减少这些破坏和威胁是整个社会,特别是生态学エ作者面临的重大挑战.     

Biotic and Human Vulnerability to Projected Changes in Ocean Biogeochemistry over the 21st Century

Ongoing greenhouse gas emissions can modify climate processes and induce shifts in ocean temperature, pH, oxygen concentration, and productivity, which in turn could alter biological and social systems. Here, we provide a synoptic global assessment of the simultaneous changes in future ocean biogeochemical variables over marine biota and their broader implications for people. We analyzed modern Earth System Models forced by greenhouse gas concentration pathways until 2100 and showed that the entire world''s ocean surface will be simultaneously impacted by varying intensities of ocean warming, acidification, oxygen depletion, or shortfalls in productivity. In contrast, only a small fraction of the world''s ocean surface, mostly in polar regions, will experience increased oxygenation and productivity, while almost nowhere will there be ocean cooling or pH elevation. We compiled the global distribution of 32 marine habitats and biodiversity hotspots and found that they would all experience simultaneous exposure to changes in multiple biogeochemical variables. This superposition highlights the high risk for synergistic ecosystem responses, the suite of physiological adaptations needed to cope with future climate change, and the potential for reorganization of global biodiversity patterns. If co-occurring biogeochemical changes influence the delivery of ocean goods and services, then they could also have a considerable effect on human welfare. Approximately 470 to 870 million of the poorest people in the world rely heavily on the ocean for food, jobs, and revenues and live in countries that will be most affected by simultaneous changes in ocean biogeochemistry. These results highlight the high risk of degradation of marine ecosystems and associated human hardship expected in a future following current trends in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.