| Literature DB >> 30450426 |
Andrew Balmford1, Tatsuya Amano1,2, Harriet Bartlett1, Dave Chadwick3, Adrian Collins4, David Edwards5, Rob Field6, Philip Garnsworthy7, Rhys Green1, Pete Smith8, Helen Waters1, Andrew Whitmore9, Donald M Broom10, Julian Chara11, Tom Finch1,6, Emma Garnett1, Alfred Gathorne-Hardy12,13,14, Juan Hernandez-Medrano15, Mario Herrero16, Fangyuan Hua1, Agnieszka Latawiec17,18, Tom Misselbrook4, Ben Phalan1,19, Benno I Simmons1, Taro Takahashi4,20, James Vause21, Erasmus Zu Ermgassen1, Rowan Eisner1.
Abstract
How we manage farming and food systems to meet rising demand is pivotal to the future of biodiversity. Extensive field data suggest impacts on wild populations would be greatly reduced through boosting yields on existing farmland so as to spare remaining natural habitats. High-yield farming raises other concerns because expressed per unit area it can generate high levels of externalities such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and nutrient losses. However, such metrics underestimate the overall impacts of lower-yield systems, so here we develop a framework that instead compares externality and land costs per unit production. Applying this to diverse datasets describing the externalities of four major farm sectors reveals that, rather than involving trade-offs, the externality and land costs of alternative production systems can co-vary positively: per unit production, land-efficient systems often produce lower externalities. For GHG emissions these associations become more strongly positive once forgone sequestration is included. Our conclusions are limited: remarkably few studies report externalities alongside yields; many important externalities and farming systems are inadequately measured; and realising the environmental benefits of high-yield systems typically requires additional measures to limit farmland expansion. Yet our results nevertheless suggest that trade-offs among key cost metrics are not as ubiquitous as sometimes perceived.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30450426 PMCID: PMC6237269
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Sustain ISSN: 2398-9629