Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?
- Autores
- Smith, Pete; Calvin, Katherine; Nkem, Johnson; Campbell, Donovan; Cherubini, Francesco; Grassi, Giacomo; Korotkov, Vladimir; Le Hoang, Anh; Lwasa, Shuaib; McElwee, Pamela; Nkonya, Ephraim; Saigusa, Nobuko; Soussana, Jean?Francois; Taboada, Miguel Angel; Manning, Frances C.; Nampanzira, Dorothy; Arias Navarro, Cristina; Vizzarri, Matteo; House, Jo; Roe, Stephanie; Cowie, Annette; Rounsevell, Mark; Arneth, Almut
- Año de publicación
- 2019
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as “land challenges”). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing-up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.
Fil: Smith, Pete. University of Aberdeen; Reino Unido
Fil: Calvin, Katherine. Joint Global Change Research Institute; Estados Unidos
Fil: Nkem, Johnson. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa; Etiopía
Fil: Campbell, Donovan. The University of the West Indies; Jamaica
Fil: Cherubini, Francesco. Norwegian University of Science and Technology; Noruega
Fil: Grassi, Giacomo. Joint Research Centre; Italia
Fil: Korotkov, Vladimir. Izrael Institute of Global Climate and Ecology; Rusia
Fil: Le Hoang, Anh. Ministry Of Agriculture And Rural Development ; Vietnam
Fil: Lwasa, Shuaib. Makerere University; Uganda
Fil: McElwee, Pamela. Rutgers University; Estados Unidos
Fil: Nkonya, Ephraim. International Food Policy Research Institute; Estados Unidos
Fil: Saigusa, Nobuko. Center For Global Environmental Research; Japón
Fil: Soussana, Jean?Francois. French National Institute For Agricultural; Francia
Fil: Taboada, Miguel Angel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro de Investigación de Recursos Naturales. Instituto de Suelos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Manning, Frances C.. University of Aberdeen; Reino Unido
Fil: Nampanzira, Dorothy. Makerere University; Uganda
Fil: Arias Navarro, Cristina. French National Institute for Agricultural, Environment and Food Research; Francia
Fil: Vizzarri, Matteo. European Commission; Italia
Fil: House, Jo. University of Bristol; Reino Unido
Fil: Roe, Stephanie. University of Virginia; Estados Unidos
Fil: Cowie, Annette. University of New England; Australia
Fil: Rounsevell, Mark. University of Edinburgh; Reino Unido
Fil: Arneth, Almut. Karlsruhe Institute Of Technology; Alemania - Materia
-
ADAPTATION
ADVERSE SIDE EFFECTS
CO-BENEFITS
DEMAND MANAGEMENT
DESERTIFICATION
FOOD SECURITY
LAND DEGRADATION
LAND MANAGEMENT
MITIGATION
PRACTICE
RISK MANAGEMENT - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
.jpg)
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/175487
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
| id |
CONICETDig_f993b95aca13d336c78ee9d07e9aef88 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/175487 |
| network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
| repository_id_str |
3498 |
| network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
| spelling |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?Smith, PeteCalvin, KatherineNkem, JohnsonCampbell, DonovanCherubini, FrancescoGrassi, GiacomoKorotkov, VladimirLe Hoang, AnhLwasa, ShuaibMcElwee, PamelaNkonya, EphraimSaigusa, NobukoSoussana, Jean?FrancoisTaboada, Miguel AngelManning, Frances C.Nampanzira, DorothyArias Navarro, CristinaVizzarri, MatteoHouse, JoRoe, StephanieCowie, AnnetteRounsevell, MarkArneth, AlmutADAPTATIONADVERSE SIDE EFFECTSCO-BENEFITSDEMAND MANAGEMENTDESERTIFICATIONFOOD SECURITYLAND DEGRADATIONLAND MANAGEMENTMITIGATIONPRACTICERISK MANAGEMENThttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.5https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as “land challenges”). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing-up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.Fil: Smith, Pete. University of Aberdeen; Reino UnidoFil: Calvin, Katherine. Joint Global Change Research Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Nkem, Johnson. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa; EtiopíaFil: Campbell, Donovan. The University of the West Indies; JamaicaFil: Cherubini, Francesco. Norwegian University of Science and Technology; NoruegaFil: Grassi, Giacomo. Joint Research Centre; ItaliaFil: Korotkov, Vladimir. Izrael Institute of Global Climate and Ecology; RusiaFil: Le Hoang, Anh. Ministry Of Agriculture And Rural Development ; VietnamFil: Lwasa, Shuaib. Makerere University; UgandaFil: McElwee, Pamela. Rutgers University; Estados UnidosFil: Nkonya, Ephraim. International Food Policy Research Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Saigusa, Nobuko. Center For Global Environmental Research; JapónFil: Soussana, Jean?Francois. French National Institute For Agricultural; FranciaFil: Taboada, Miguel Angel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro de Investigación de Recursos Naturales. Instituto de Suelos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Manning, Frances C.. University of Aberdeen; Reino UnidoFil: Nampanzira, Dorothy. Makerere University; UgandaFil: Arias Navarro, Cristina. French National Institute for Agricultural, Environment and Food Research; FranciaFil: Vizzarri, Matteo. European Commission; ItaliaFil: House, Jo. University of Bristol; Reino UnidoFil: Roe, Stephanie. University of Virginia; Estados UnidosFil: Cowie, Annette. University of New England; AustraliaFil: Rounsevell, Mark. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Arneth, Almut. Karlsruhe Institute Of Technology; AlemaniaWiley Blackwell Publishing, Inc2019-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/175487Smith, Pete; Calvin, Katherine; Nkem, Johnson; Campbell, Donovan; Cherubini, Francesco; et al.; Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?; Wiley Blackwell Publishing, Inc; Global Change Biology; 26; 3; 12-2019; 1532-15751354-1013CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.14878info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1111/gcb.14878info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:42:21Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/175487instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:42:21.918CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? |
| title |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? |
| spellingShingle |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? Smith, Pete ADAPTATION ADVERSE SIDE EFFECTS CO-BENEFITS DEMAND MANAGEMENT DESERTIFICATION FOOD SECURITY LAND DEGRADATION LAND MANAGEMENT MITIGATION PRACTICE RISK MANAGEMENT |
| title_short |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? |
| title_full |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? |
| title_fullStr |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? |
| title_sort |
Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? |
| dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Smith, Pete Calvin, Katherine Nkem, Johnson Campbell, Donovan Cherubini, Francesco Grassi, Giacomo Korotkov, Vladimir Le Hoang, Anh Lwasa, Shuaib McElwee, Pamela Nkonya, Ephraim Saigusa, Nobuko Soussana, Jean?Francois Taboada, Miguel Angel Manning, Frances C. Nampanzira, Dorothy Arias Navarro, Cristina Vizzarri, Matteo House, Jo Roe, Stephanie Cowie, Annette Rounsevell, Mark Arneth, Almut |
| author |
Smith, Pete |
| author_facet |
Smith, Pete Calvin, Katherine Nkem, Johnson Campbell, Donovan Cherubini, Francesco Grassi, Giacomo Korotkov, Vladimir Le Hoang, Anh Lwasa, Shuaib McElwee, Pamela Nkonya, Ephraim Saigusa, Nobuko Soussana, Jean?Francois Taboada, Miguel Angel Manning, Frances C. Nampanzira, Dorothy Arias Navarro, Cristina Vizzarri, Matteo House, Jo Roe, Stephanie Cowie, Annette Rounsevell, Mark Arneth, Almut |
| author_role |
author |
| author2 |
Calvin, Katherine Nkem, Johnson Campbell, Donovan Cherubini, Francesco Grassi, Giacomo Korotkov, Vladimir Le Hoang, Anh Lwasa, Shuaib McElwee, Pamela Nkonya, Ephraim Saigusa, Nobuko Soussana, Jean?Francois Taboada, Miguel Angel Manning, Frances C. Nampanzira, Dorothy Arias Navarro, Cristina Vizzarri, Matteo House, Jo Roe, Stephanie Cowie, Annette Rounsevell, Mark Arneth, Almut |
| author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author |
| dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
ADAPTATION ADVERSE SIDE EFFECTS CO-BENEFITS DEMAND MANAGEMENT DESERTIFICATION FOOD SECURITY LAND DEGRADATION LAND MANAGEMENT MITIGATION PRACTICE RISK MANAGEMENT |
| topic |
ADAPTATION ADVERSE SIDE EFFECTS CO-BENEFITS DEMAND MANAGEMENT DESERTIFICATION FOOD SECURITY LAND DEGRADATION LAND MANAGEMENT MITIGATION PRACTICE RISK MANAGEMENT |
| purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.5 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1 |
| dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as “land challenges”). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing-up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges. Fil: Smith, Pete. University of Aberdeen; Reino Unido Fil: Calvin, Katherine. Joint Global Change Research Institute; Estados Unidos Fil: Nkem, Johnson. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa; Etiopía Fil: Campbell, Donovan. The University of the West Indies; Jamaica Fil: Cherubini, Francesco. Norwegian University of Science and Technology; Noruega Fil: Grassi, Giacomo. Joint Research Centre; Italia Fil: Korotkov, Vladimir. Izrael Institute of Global Climate and Ecology; Rusia Fil: Le Hoang, Anh. Ministry Of Agriculture And Rural Development ; Vietnam Fil: Lwasa, Shuaib. Makerere University; Uganda Fil: McElwee, Pamela. Rutgers University; Estados Unidos Fil: Nkonya, Ephraim. International Food Policy Research Institute; Estados Unidos Fil: Saigusa, Nobuko. Center For Global Environmental Research; Japón Fil: Soussana, Jean?Francois. French National Institute For Agricultural; Francia Fil: Taboada, Miguel Angel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro de Investigación de Recursos Naturales. Instituto de Suelos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina Fil: Manning, Frances C.. University of Aberdeen; Reino Unido Fil: Nampanzira, Dorothy. Makerere University; Uganda Fil: Arias Navarro, Cristina. French National Institute for Agricultural, Environment and Food Research; Francia Fil: Vizzarri, Matteo. European Commission; Italia Fil: House, Jo. University of Bristol; Reino Unido Fil: Roe, Stephanie. University of Virginia; Estados Unidos Fil: Cowie, Annette. University of New England; Australia Fil: Rounsevell, Mark. University of Edinburgh; Reino Unido Fil: Arneth, Almut. Karlsruhe Institute Of Technology; Alemania |
| description |
There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as “land challenges”). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing-up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges. |
| publishDate |
2019 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-12 |
| dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
| format |
article |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/175487 Smith, Pete; Calvin, Katherine; Nkem, Johnson; Campbell, Donovan; Cherubini, Francesco; et al.; Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?; Wiley Blackwell Publishing, Inc; Global Change Biology; 26; 3; 12-2019; 1532-1575 1354-1013 CONICET Digital CONICET |
| url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/175487 |
| identifier_str_mv |
Smith, Pete; Calvin, Katherine; Nkem, Johnson; Campbell, Donovan; Cherubini, Francesco; et al.; Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?; Wiley Blackwell Publishing, Inc; Global Change Biology; 26; 3; 12-2019; 1532-1575 1354-1013 CONICET Digital CONICET |
| dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
| language |
eng |
| dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.14878 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1111/gcb.14878 |
| dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/ |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/ |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Wiley Blackwell Publishing, Inc |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Wiley Blackwell Publishing, Inc |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
| reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
| collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
| instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
| _version_ |
1844613334930817024 |
| score |
13.070432 |