Login

GPC Members Login
If you have any problems or have forgotten your login please contact [email protected]


A global conflict: agricultural production vs. biodiversity

Smart land-use planning could ease the conflict between agricultural production and nature conservation. A team of researchers from the University of Göttingen, the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ) and the University of Münster integrated global datasets on the geographical distributions and ecological requirements of thousands of animal species with detailed information on the production of the world’s major agricultural crops. The results were published in Global Change Biology.

Increasing agricultural production usually leads to various negative side effects in agricultural landscapes, such as local decline in wildlife and loss of ecosystem functions. But what would happen if agricultural growth would be focused on areas of the world where only a few animal species would be affected? The researchers evaluated how far global biodiversity loss could be minimized by such planning. They found that 88 percent of the biodiversity that is expected to be lost under future agricultural intensification could be avoided if global land use was spatially optimized.

“However, global optimization implies that species-rich countries, mainly in the tropics, would be more responsible for safeguarding the world’s natural resources – at the expense of their own production opportunities and economic development,” says lead author Lukas Egli of Göttingen University and UFZ. This applies mainly to countries that are highly dependent on agriculture. “Unless such conflicting national interests can be somehow accommodated in international sustainability policies, global cooperation seems unlikely and might generate new socioeconomic dependencies.”

Ten countries could already reduce the expected global biodiversity loss by one third if they followed the researchers’ suggestions on the national level. If every country followed, as much as 61 percent of the expected global biodiversity loss could be avoided. “A few tropical countries including India, Brazil, or Indonesia would have by far the greatest leverage for making global agricultural production more sustainable”, says Carsten Meyer of iDiv and Leipzig University. “Unfortunately, these countries are also often characterized by domestic land-use conflicts as well as by relatively weak land-governing institutions, both of which currently inhibits land-use optimization. Targeted efforts are needed to improve these countries’ capacities for integrated and sustainable land-use planning.”

Read the paper: Winners and losers of national and global efforts to reconcile agricultural intensification and biodiversity conservation.

Article source: Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research.

Image credit: Christoph Scherber

News

Envisioning a future where all the trees in Europe disappear

Vegetation plays an important role in shaping local climate: just think of the cool shade provided by a forest or the grinding heat of the open desert.


360 degrees, 180 seconds: Technique speeds analysis of crop traits

A potted nine-leaf corn plant sits on a Frisbee-sized plate. The tandem begins rotating like the centerpiece atop a giant music box, three degrees per second, and after two minutes the plant has pirouetted to its original position.


Blue gene regulation helps plants respond properly to light

Researchers at the RIKEN Center for Sustainable Resource Science (CSRS) have discovered a process through which gene expression in plants is regulated by light. Published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, the study found that blue light triggers a shift in which portion of a gene is ultimately expressed.