Sustainibility Intensification
Sustainibility Intensification
Sustainibility Intensification
DOI 10.1007/s13280-016-0793-6
PERSPECTIVE
Abstract There is an ongoing debate on what constitutes attain human development (UN GSP 2012) at all scales,
sustainable intensification of agriculture (SIA). In this paper, from local farming communities to cities, nations, and the
we propose that a paradigm for sustainable intensification world (Folke et al. 2005). The reason is that we have entered
can be defined and translated into an operational framework a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene, where human
for agricultural development. We argue that this paradigm pressures are causing rising global environmental risks and
must now be defined—at all scales—in the context of rapidly for the first time constitute the largest driver of planetary
rising global environmental changes in the Anthropocene, change (Steffen et al. 2007, 2015b). Agriculture is at the
while focusing on eradicating poverty and hunger and heart of this challenge. It is the world’s single largest driver
contributing to human wellbeing. The criteria and approach of global environmental change (Tilman et al. 2001; Foley
we propose, for a paradigm shift towards sustainable et al. 2005; Godfray and Garnett 2014; Kuyper and Struik
intensification of agriculture, integrates the dual and 2014) and, at the same time, is most affected by these
interdependent goals of using sustainable practices to meet changes (IPCC 2014). Agriculture is the key to attaining the
rising human needs while contributing to resilience and UN Sustainable Development Goals of eradicating hunger
sustainability of landscapes, the biosphere, and the Earth and securing food for a growing world population of
system. Both of these, in turn, are required to sustain the 9–10 billion by 2050, which may require an increase in
future viability of agriculture. This paradigm shift aims at global food production of between 60 and 110 % (Foley
repositioning world agriculture from its current role as the et al. 2005; IAASTD 2008; Tilman et al. 2011; Pardey et al.
world’s single largest driver of global environmental change, 2014) in a world of rising global environmental risks.
to becoming a key contributor of a global transition to a Agriculture is also the direct livelihood of 2.5 billion
sustainable world within a safe operating space on Earth. smallholder farmers (FAO 2013a), and the resilience of
these livelihoods to rising shocks and stresses is currently
Keywords Agriculture development Anthropocene gravely under-addressed (FAO 2013b).
Global sustainability Livelihoods Resilience Together, these insights provide a strong scientific justi-
Sustainable intensification fication for a shift from our current paradigm for agriculture
of focusing on productivity first and sustainability as a
question of reducing environmental impacts, to a paradigm
INTRODUCTION where sustainability constitutes the core strategy for agri-
cultural development. The planetary boundary definition of a
A global food revolution based on a new paradigm for safe operating space for a stable and resilient Earth system
agricultural development is urgently required. Without this provides an operational framework for defining what con-
shift, we are unlikely to attain the twin objectives of feeding stitutes sustainable agriculture. It has been proposed (Keat-
humanity and living within boundaries of biophysical pro- ing et al. 2014) that the ‘‘safe operating space’’ exploration of
cesses that define the safe operating space of a stable and food security (Beddington et al. 2012), based on these prin-
resilient Earth system (Steffen et al. 2015b). Global sus- ciples (Rockström et al. 2009), analytically frames the
tainability is increasingly understood as a prerequisite to problem and describes the interconnected forces of
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
www.kva.se/en 123
Ambio
population growth, consumption growth, environmental feedbacks, such as moisture feedback from forests gener-
change, and food security. ating downwind rainfall (Gordon et al. 2008) and carbon
The definition of a biophysical safe operating space of sinks in soils and biomass (Le Quéré et al. 2015).
the Earth system, within which it has a high likelihood of Incorporating ecological landscape approaches that
remaining in a stable inter-glacial state, emerges from the make smart use of the natural functionalities that ecosys-
advancements in Earth system science over the past dec- tems offer is now an important part of the development of
ades, providing evidence of interactions, feedbacks, and sustainable intensification of agriculture. The aim is to
thresholds among environmental processes that regulate design multi-functional agro-ecosystems that are both
the Earth system (Lenton et al. 2008), and the conclusion sustained by nature and sustainable in their nature (Tit-
that humanity has entered a new geological Epoch, the tonell 2014).
Anthropocene (Waters et al. 2016), where the world con- In this paper, we propose that a new paradigm for SIA can
stitutes the largest driver of change on Earth. be quantitatively defined from scientific advancements of the
Therefore, in the Anthropocene, humanity faces the Anthropocene and biosphere resilience and translated into an
imperative question of how to transform agriculture that operational framework for agricultural development. At its
feeds the world, contributes to eradicate poverty, and foundation, the new paradigm recognizes that the biophysi-
contributes to a stable planet. Given the decisive role of cal boundaries of Planet Earth impose a hierarchy of criteria
world agriculture on human development and on Earth on the definition of sustainability: sustainability is not a
system processes, we argue in this paper that sustainable relative concept or an act of balancing competing claims; it
agriculture is the only strategy that can deliver productivity sets absolute biophysical limits. It is only within such bio-
enhancements to meet rising food needs and enable an physically defined boundaries, such as operating within a
Earth system operating within planetary boundaries. 1.5 C global carbon budget or within environmental water
There is a well-documented debate (Garnett and God- flows for river basins, which—as far as our current scientific
fray 2012; Kuyper and Struik 2014) on what constitutes knowledge shows—we stand a high probability of avoiding
sustainable intensification of agriculture (SIA) (Garnett irreversible shifts in environmental conditions. The plane-
et al. 2013; Godfray and Garnett 2014; Struik et al. 2014), tary boundary analysis sets the boundary for a stable climate
its evolution (Kuyper and Struik 2014; Struik et al. 2014), system at 350 ppm of CO2 (uncertainty range of
and its role in addressing global food security (van 350–450 ppm) or maximum 1 W/m2 of climate forcing
Noordwijk and Brussaard 2014). (uncertainty range 1–1.5 W/m2), which translates to an
Here, SIA is largely on how to enhance agricultural pro- average global temperature rise of approximately 1.5 C
ductivity while reducing its environmental impacts (Conway (Rogelj et al. 2015; Steffen et al. 2015a). As has been sug-
1997; Godfray and Garnett 2014; Kuyper and Struik 2014). gested, only by defining development within such techni-
The task is how to produce more food with fewer resources. cally defined criteria or boundaries, social and economic
Sustainable intensification, in this context, seeks to increase trade-offs can be assessed (Fischer et al. 2007). Recent works
agricultural output while keeping the ecological footprint as (Jackson et al. 2012; Tittonell 2014; van Noordwijk and
small as possible. This is, in no doubt, a useful and relatively Brussaard 2014) signal mechanisms and demonstrate prin-
important feature of sustainable agriculture, particularly as ciples that suggest that such a transformative approach to SIA
mainstream agriculture development still concentrates on is possible and this paper presents examples of ways forward.
productivity and places limited focus on sustainability. It We suggest adding a new dimension to sustainable agri-
remains focused though on avenues for resource efficiency, cultural development, namely managing natural capital for
e.g., based on assumptions that efficiency in water and fer- long-term productivity and social–ecological resilience at field,
tilizer use represents the avenues towards sustainable agri- watershed, and regional scales, in agricultural systems that
culture. Particularly in agricultural development in poverty- operate within planetary boundaries to safeguard Earth system.
stricken regions, this ‘‘productivity first’’ paradigm, while Our approach builds on existing research and the current
potentially reducing environmental impacts, prevails. evolution of the frameworks for SIA giving further emphasis
There is an urgent need to shift this around and instead to land-use planning and management of natural capital in
use sustainable principles as the entry point for generating both agro-ecosystems and natural ecosystems across scales.
productivity enhancements, which fundamentally requires A resilience (capacity to deal with shocks and stress) and
real progress in increasing agricultural output by capital- Earth system (in the Anthropocene) focus is key to deal with
izing on ecological processes in agro-ecosystems (Struik a rising frequency of multiple shocks triggered by regional
et al. 2014; van Noordwijk and Brussaard 2014). This can and global changes unprecedented in human history.
be achieved by managing farmers’ fields, watersheds, Furthermore, such a comprehensive sustainability para-
landscapes, and regions using strategies and practices that digm, which not only minimizes environmental impacts but
maintain biophysical stability and uphold critical also uses sustainability as the strategy to raise productivity,
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
123 www.kva.se/en
Ambio
improve livelihoods, and build resilience and Earth system acknowledged as necessary to enable human development
stability, must meet the dramatic rise in food requirements within a functioning and healthy environment.
from a world population of nearly 10 billion by 2050, Agriculture is a primary driver of global change and is the
which most likely will reach 11 billion by the end of the single largest contributor to the rising environmental risks of
century (Gerland et al. 2014). Together, these challenges— the Anthropocene (Foley et al. 2011; Steffen et al. 2011; Struik
the social dimension of meeting rapidly rising food et al. 2014). It is also in the Anthropocene that the challenge of
requirements and the ecological dimension of building feeding humanity needs to be resolved. The number of hungry
agricultural resilience and Earth system stability—form a people in the world remains at approximately 900 million
social–ecological framework for sustainable intensification (FAO, Ifad and WFP. 2013). At the same time, with rising
of world agriculture (Jackson et al. 2012). living standards of the growing middle class, diets are shifting
The criteria and approach we propose, for a paradigm shift towards more livestock products that require more land and
towards SIA, integrates the dual and interdependent goals of water resources than vegetarian sources of nutrition. In order
using sustainable practices to meet rising human needs while to feed the world in 2050, global food production may have to
contributing to resilience and sustainability across scales. increase by 60–110 % (Pretty 2008; IAASTD 2008; Tilman
Both of these, in turn, are required to sustain the future via- et al. 2011; Ray et al. 2013; Pardey et al. 2014). The challenge
bility of agriculture. This paradigm shift aims at repositioning is further complicated by the need not only to produce more,
world agriculture from its current role as the world’s single but also to manage the entire food supply chain much more
largest driver of global environmental change, to becoming a efficiently, reducing waste which has reached unaccept-
critical agent of a world transition to global sustainability able proportions (estimated at 30%) along with promoting
within the biophysical safe operating space on Earth. better distribution, access, and nutrition (FAO 2011a). This
A transformation to sustainable intensification is thus requires nothing less than a planetary food revolution which,
justified both by necessity (to safeguard global sustain- for the foreseeable future, will largely be driven by the
ability, a precondition for long-term agricultural viability) 2.5 billion smallholders that control 500 million small farms
and by opportunity (to use sustainable practices as a and which provide up to 80 % of the food supply in Asia and
vehicle for a second green revolution). sub-Saharan Africa (FAO 2012) while residing in some of the
world’s most social–ecologically vulnerable regions.
Today, approximately 40 % of the world’s terrestrial sur-
BACKGROUND face has been transformed to agriculture (crop, fiber, biofuel,
and livestock production systems) (Ramankutty et al. 2008).
The necessity of a transformation of sustainable Appropriate land for food production, however, is a finite
intensification of agriculture resource and hence further expansion could compromise
development within Earth’s safe operating space (approxi-
The case for intensification has been well articulated in the mately 25% of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases
literature, both from a perspective of increased production, are sequestered on land, of which all occurs in terrestrial non-
through high-yielding crops, increased irrigation, mecha- cultivated ecosystems). If business-as-usual prevails, the
nization, and the role of chemicals that increase production expected range of cropland expansion (123–495 Mha per
levels (World Bank 2007), and from a conservation per- annum) would overshoot the preliminary estimate of the ‘‘safe
spective, in terms of the millions of hectares of forests which operating space’’ of 1640 Mha well before 2050 (UNEP 2014).
otherwise would be converted into farm land, unquantifiable Sustainable intensification of agriculture, in our proposed
amount of ecosystem services saved, and of some 590 bil- paradigm, aims at hunger reduction through biodiversity con-
lion tons of CO2 prevented from being released into the servation that secures ecological functions in agricultural land-
atmosphere (Burney et al. 2010). We however underline the scapes. It will require well-informed regional and targeted
fact that much of such intensification has taken place with solutions (Tscharntke et al. 2012) drawing upon the strengths of
production increases being the primary, if not the sole, both land-sparing and land-sharing approaches underpinned by
objective, whose negative consequences were understood strategic land-use planning and allocation (Law et al. 2015)
after-the-fact and are now well documented. across local, regional, and basin scales. Fischer et al. (2008)
Convincing evidence has emerged that humanity has conclude that land sparing is readily compatible with opti-
entered the Anthropocene, where human pressures have mization methods that attempt to allocate land uses in the most
reached a planetary scale in terms of ecosystem and resource efficient way, while sustainable agro-ecological systems
constraints and rising risks of environmental shocks and emphasize heterogeneity, resilience, and ecological interactions
large-scale tipping points (Lenton et al. 2008; Rockström between farmed and unfarmed areas. Both social and biophys-
et al. 2014; Steffen et al. 2015a; Waters et al. 2016). A rapid ical factors influence which approach is feasible or appropriate
world transformation to global sustainability is increasingly in a given landscape. Our approach in this paper seeks to draw
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
www.kva.se/en 123
Ambio
upon the strengths of each approach, although the focus of this increased without adverse environmental impact and without
paper is on transforming agricultural systems into sustainable the cultivation of more land’ (Royal Society 2009). Our
agro-ecological systems. As mentioned above, however, con- conclusion is that these definitions are either not concrete
servation measures including protected area habitats, areas co- enough or only partial. World agriculture must now meet
managed with local communities, and indigenous reserves are social needs and fulfill sustainability criteria that enables food
all potentially viable sustainable intensification strategies and all other agricultural ecosystem services (i.e., climate
(Phalan et al. 2011; Garnett et al. 2013). stabilization, flood control, support of mental health, nutrition,
Our current agricultural inputs are also a challenge. Agri- etc.) to be generated within a safe operating space of a
culture is the single largest user of freshwater in the world, with stable and resilient Earth system, which in turn can be defined
70 % of the totally withdrawn water of almost 6000 km3 year-1 from Earth system science applying the planetary boundary
being diverted for agriculture (Kabat 2013), which has resulted framework (Table 1). This is a comprehensive definition of
in approximately 25 % of the world’s major river basins no sustainable intensification of agriculture in the Anthropocene.
longer reaching the ocean (Comprehensive Assessment of Recognizing the central role agriculture plays in deter-
Water Management in Agriculture 2007). Agriculture is the mining and regulating Earth’s resilience, and the sustain-
world’s largest contributor to altering the global nitrogen and ability criteria for agriculture (outlined in Table 1), there is a
phosphorus cycles (Carpenter 2005). Anthropogenic uptake of strong case for adopting sustainable intensification of agri-
N from the atmosphere (for industrial and intentional biological culture as the strategy to meet twin objectives for people and
fixation of N) today exceeds the natural global uptake of N for the planet. The ‘‘human goal,’’ adopted by the UN Sustainable
biomass growth (Galloway and Cowling 2002; Gruber and Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, is to eradicate hunger
Galloway 2008) and currently at approximately and poverty by 2030 (which will require[50 % increase in
150 Tg N year-1 the global uptake far exceeds the boundary food production). The global sustainability goal (as defined by
value of 62–82 Tg N year-1 (Steffen et al. 2015a). Table 1) is supported by the SDG goals and targets 2-Healthy
Although the focus of this paper is on sustainability as food for all, 6-Sustainable freshwater, 12-Sustainable Con-
the strategy for productive agriculture, it is recognized that sumption and Production, 13-Decarbonising climate system
a case for sustainable intensification must also tackle the under 1.5–2 C, 14-Sustainable oceans, and 15-Halt biodi-
challenge of improving the health and livelihoods of the versity loss) and can only be translated as the UN SDGs setting
2.5 billion smallholder farmers who are the primary stew- out to feed humanity this within a safe operating space of a
ards of our natural resources. As highlighted in the Global stable and resilient Earth system. Together, these integrated
Nutrition Report (IFPRI 2015), improving nutrition status goals will require a doubly green revolution (Conway 1997)
reduces disease burdens, increases income, improves life within ambitious and absolute targets for sustainability: in
expectancies, and provides a host of additional socioeco- principle (1) net zero emissions of greenhouse gases, (2) very
nomic benefits to families and communities. These benefits low or zero expansion of agriculture into remaining natural
are essential drivers of sustainable development. A key ecosystems, while restoring others providing vital ecosystem
strategy is investing in food that is healthy for people and services, (3) zero loss of biodiversity, (4) drastic reduction in
planet, where nutritional food, low in refined sugars, fats, excessive use of N and P (recycling nutrient flows), and (5)
and meat, can help combat malnourishment and obesity major improvement in water productivity and safeguarding of
and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and resource environmental water flows. These will require, among others,
footprints (Tilman and Clark 2014; IFPRI 2015). conducive legal and institutional frameworks, incentives,
Together, these social–ecological pressures pose an rights, infrastructure, and support services that farmers will
unprecedented challenge for the global food system, and we need for implementation.
can see no other pathway to resolve it other than adopting a From these social–ecological criteria emerges a clear def-
paradigm of sustainable intensification, with a dual purpose inition of sustainable intensification: adopting practices along
of (i) enabling a step-change in productivity and resilience the entire value chain of the global food system that meet
and (ii) averting unacceptable global environmental risks. rising needs for nutritious and healthy food through practices
that build social–ecological resilience and enhance natural
The way forward: transforming sustainable capital within the safe operating space of the Earth system.
intensification of agriculture
Recent efforts in defining SIA (Royal Society 2009; Conway Nature-based solutions for sustainable intensification
et al. 2010; Godfray et al. 2010; Rockström and Karlberg of agriculture to build prosperity and resilience
2010; Tilman et al. 2011; Pretty et al. 2011; Garnett et al. 2013;
Godfray and Garnett 2014) provide an emerging framework Evidence increasingly shows that sustainable agricultural
built around the simple principle whereby ‘yields are practices can raise productivity and meet sustainability
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
123 www.kva.se/en
Ambio
Climate 350 ppm CO2 (350–450 ppm) 396.5 ppm Keep global average temperature 50–80% reduction of CO2 emissions from energy use
change \1 W m2 (\1–1.5 W m-2) rise \2 C compared to pre- by 2050 (compared to 1990);
industrial levels Transform agriculture from world’s single largest
Corresponding to *400 ppm carbon source to major carbon sink in soils
CO2
Translates to 1000 Gt CO2
remaining global carbon
budget from 2011 onwards
Land-use Global Maintain [75 % forest cover for critical Earth system 62 % REDD? Drastically reduced, and in most regions zero
change regulating forest systems expansion of agricultural land
Regional Maintain 85 % rainforest, 85 % temperate forest: 50 % Aichi targets (17 % land
boreal forest ecosystems set aside as
protected areas)
Proposed SDG goals on halting
biodiversity loss
Global Global Maximum 4000 km3 year1 of consumptive use 2600 km3 50 % increase in water productivity by 2030
freshwater year1
use
Regional Secure minimum volumes of environmental water flows in River basin plans Limit to runoff withdrawals in rivers
www.kva.se/en
rivers
25–55 % maximum withdrawals of blue water in rivers
(25–85 %)
Biosphere Global Genetic diversity: keep extinction rate \10 E/MSY 100–1000 Aichi targets Zero loss of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes
integrity E/MSY Proposed SDG goal No 15 aimed Adopt watershed and catchment management
at halting biodiversity loss practices that build ecological landscape resilience
Regional Functional diversity: Aichi targets
Biosphere integrity index [90 (90–30 %)
Interference P Global P flows from land to oceans \11 Tg P year1 (11–100 Tg P *22 Tg P Close nutrient loops; not increase overall P use, Raise
N/P cycles Oceans year1) year1 N and P use per ha in developing countries; reduce
in developed countries
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
P Regional P flows from fertilizers to erodible soils \3.72 Tg year1 *14 Tg P
freshwater (3.72–4.84 Tg year1)—Global average but regional year1
distribution is critical for impacts
N Global Industrial and agricultural biological fixation of N \ 44 Tg *150 Tg
N year1 (44–62 Tg N year1) N year1
Novel Reduce loading of novel, anthropogenic chemical Minimze leakage of agricultural chemicals
entities compounds in the biosphere
123
Ambio
criteria (Pretty 2008; Royal Society 2009; Conway et al. Hence, SIA is about strategic land-use planning to maintain
2010; Godfray et al. 2010; Rockström and Karlberg 2010; and improve the interacting stocks and flows involving
Tilman et al. 2011; Pretty et al. 2011; Garnett et al. 2013; water, nutrients, energy, carbon, and biodiversity across
Ponisio et al. 2015). A recent WRI report (2013) docu- landscape mosaics of natural, semi-natural, and agricultural
ments a worldwide range of sustainable management land uses, so that multi-functionality of the whole land-
practices of land, water, and biodiversity in agro-ecosys- scape is manageable across scales from local to basin to
tems that increase productivity. A key part of the journey to national levels.
long-term SIA requires safeguarding not only local (on- From a production perspective (see Box 2), SIA should
farm) productivity through sustainable practices, but also now entail a three-step approach: (1) at the basis be as
ecological functions across scales, from watershed, to resource efficient as possible combining locally relevant
basin, region, and Earth system scales, to avoid, e.g., loss crop and animal genetic improvement and practices that
of rainfall during future growing seasons. It furthermore minimize inputs and close nutrient, carbon, and water
requires building the capacity to deal with rising frequency cycles, (2) adopt practices that build landscape-scale
and amplitude of shocks and stresses as a result of global resilience by sustaining ecosystem functions and services,
changes (e.g., droughts and floods exacerbated by climate such as water flows and biodiversity, and (3) connect
change; disease outbreaks promoted by globalization). thinking, planning, and practice across scales to fully
For example, with rising risks of water shocks at the local grasp field to biome and global interactions in the
scale—droughts, floods, and dry spells, it is increasingly Anthropocene. This must go with improved and more
important to manage water across scales—from local farm equitable access to knowledge and resources including
fields to watersheds and river basins. Spatial planning land tenure, common property, markets, and social rela-
strategies are required to safeguard multi-functional land- tions. Building on the work of Pretty et al. (2011) and
scapes, with a diverse set of ecosystems that are able to others (e.g., van Noordwijk and Brussaard 2014; Tittonell
dampen the effects of storm-floods and maximize sub-sur- 2014), a paradigm shift towards SIA translates to some
face flows of water rather than erosive surface runoff. key operational strategies:
Wetlands, meandering rivers, forests, and landscape
• Plan and implement farm-level practices in the context
mosaics are important natural capital assets that build
of cross-scale interactions with catchments, biomes,
resilience. Moreover, watershed and river basin manage-
and the landscape as a whole. Maximize farm-level
ment is required to safeguard rainfall. In many parts of the
productivity by maximizing ecological functions, from
world, a large portion of rainfall (often[50 %) is convec-
moisture feedback to disease abatement, across scales.
tive, originating from local scale to meso-scale vapor flows,
• Integrate ecosystem-based strategies with practical
in particular from upwind evaporating forests contributing
farm practices, where natural capital (soil, biodiversity,
moisture flows that generate rainfall downwind. This so-
nutrients, water) and multi-functional ecosystems are
called moisture feedback is common to the Sahel region
used as tools to develop productive and resilient
where moisture from the West African rainforests in the
farming systems.
south provides rainfall on the semi-arid savannah in the
• Develop system-based farming practices that integrate
north. These examples demonstrate the importance of
land, water, nutrient, livestock, and crop management.
managing water at the watershed and regional scale in order
• Utilize crop varieties and livestock breeds with a high
to secure rainfall and therefore future food production at the
ratio of productivity to use of externally and internally
local scale. This landscape approach needs to be nurtured
derived inputs.
and facilitated by a social–ecological framework for policy
• Adopt circular approaches to managing natural
design and on-ground implementation (IAASTD 2008;
resources (e.g., nutrient recycling) and mixing organic
Garnett et al. 2013; Godfray and Garnett 2014) (see Box 1).
and inorganic sources of nutrients.
SIA requires a radical refocusing of food production that
• Harness agro-ecological processes such as nutrient
encapsulates the twofold aims of increasing yields and the
cycling, biological nitrogen fixation, allelopathy, pre-
ecosystem services provided by agriculture (Godfray and
dation, and parasitism.
Garnett 2014). In some areas, increases in yield will be
• Assist farmers in overcoming immediate SIA adoption
compatible with environmental improvements. In others,
barriers and build incentives for their sustained adop-
yield reductions or land reallocation will be needed to
tion, rendering the ecological approach profitable in the
ensure sustainability and deliver benefits such as biodi-
long run (See Box 2).
versity conservation, carbon storage, flood protection, and
• Build robust institutions of small farmers, led especially
recreation (see Box 1). An overall increase in production
by women, which enable an equitable interface with
does not mean that yields should increase everywhere or at
both markets and government.
any cost: the challenge is context and location specific.
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
123 www.kva.se/en
Ambio
Figure showing China’s new Ecosystem Function Conservation Areas (EFCAs), zoned to protect nationally critical biodiversity and
ecosystem services, and to alleviate poverty, now span 49 % of the country. The Natural Capital Project’s InVEST models were co-
developed with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and are used to define the locations of EFCAs. China has invested over US$150 billion
in restoring natural capital since 2000, through a suite of pioneering initiatives. Now entering a new phase of investment, over 200
million people are being paid to perform restoration and conservation activities. Figure courtesy of H. Zheng and Z. Ouyang, Research
Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences (MEP & CAS 1998; State Council of China 2010).
EFCAs are also a way of focusing poverty alleviation efforts in places where the stakes are highest, both for local residents and for distant
beneficiaries of ecosystem services. EFCAs encompass rural areas in deep poverty that face great challenges in harmonizing people and
nature. The government aims to change the economic structure of these regions to increase local household income while making local
households’ rural livelihoods more sustainable.
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
www.kva.se/en 123
Ambio
Box 1 continued
Implementing EFCAs involves new, experimental compensation mechanisms, whereby regional beneficiaries—for example, Beijing—
invest in the transformation to more sustainable livelihoods and improvements in wellbeing among the landholders producing the
ecosystem services. EFCAs are expanding in both biophysical and financial terms. They spanned 27 % of the country in 2008, 40 % in
2010, and grew to 49 % of the country in 2015. Financial transfer payments increased from 6 billion Yuan RMB (to 221 counties) in
2008 to 48 billion Yuan RMB (to 512 counties) in 2014, for a total of 200 billion Yuan RMB (USD 32 billion) since inception.
While EFCA initiatives are driving massive scientific and policy shifts, there is still little understanding of their local costs of
implementation, their success in reversing environmental degradation, or their effects on poor and vulnerable populations. The initiatives
represent a new paradigm for integrating conservation and human development, in China and potentially elsewhere. Success hinges on
careful testing, evaluation, and refinement.
Further, while the idea of a green GDP has been discussed for decades, China is the first nation to implement it. In March 2014, the
Ministry of Environmental Protection of China approved reporting Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) alongside Gross Domestic Product
at all levels of government, from local to national. GEP is the total value of final ecosystem goods and services to human welfare,
including production of agricultural goods, as well as generation of regulating services and cultural values (Ouyang et al. 2013). The
objective of GEP accounting is to determine the total economic value of ecosystem contributions to human wellbeing, to build the links
between ecosystem service providers and beneficiaries, and to assess the achievements of ecological protection and government
management, instead of only GDP.
Sustainable intensification can deliver more food, better reduced wind speed and evaporation (Reij et al. 2009),
ecosystems, and improved livelihoods and incomes for women from different products of
baobab up to $210 per household per year.
Scientific and practical evidence clearly indicates that • In Ethiopia, farmers capture flood water and runoff from
agriculture can shift from ‘‘foe,’’ in terms of being the ephemeral rivers, roadsides, and hillsides using tempo-
single large contributing sector to global environmental rary stone and earth embankments, to irrigate crops and
risks, to ‘‘friend,’’ thereby contributing to global sustain- pasture. In the central and western part of the country,
ability, and, in so doing, build natural capital and resi- total irrigated land is approximately 65 500 ha, and some
lience, while increasing productivity and improving 344 000 (approximately 90 %) of the households have
livelihoods (Pretty et al. 2006, Pretty 2008; IAASTD 2008; benefited from doubling of sorghum yields as well as
Foley et al. 2011; Pretty et al. 2011). The sources of sus- 75 % sustainable expansion production of pepper,
tainable practices range across all areas of agricultural onions, and tomatoes (Binyam and Desale 2015). Other
development, in soil tillage systems, water resource man- ecosystem benefits have included improved moisture and
agement, crop and nutrient management, livestock prac- fertility in the cultivated fields and reduction of down-
tices, integrated landscape management, pest management, stream flooding (Awulachew 2010; Liniger et al. 2011).
and management of ecosystem services are already evident • In Brazil, conservation agriculture (CA) which is prac-
and what is required is a scaling up. For example: ticed on over 25 million ha (accounting for over 25.5 %
of arable land) is defeating erosion and drought. For
• The Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management
example, severe drought in 2008–2009 caused an
in Agriculture (2007) showed that there is a large
average yield loss of 50 % among conventional maize
untapped potential in upgrading rainfed agriculture in
producers; producers who applied CA, however, expe-
savannah regions (covering 40 % of the Earth’s
rienced smaller losses of around 20 %, demonstrating
surface) by enhancing rainwater harvesting. As an
greater resilience of the latter system (Altieri et al. 2012).
example, in semi-arid areas of Niger and Burkina Faso,
• Too often, agro-ecosystems have been considered as
small-scale farmers use planting pits to harvest rain
separate from other natural ecosystems and insufficient
water and rehabilitate degraded land for the cultivation
attention has been paid to the way in which services can
of millet and sorghum. In Burkina Faso alone, these
flow to and from the agro-ecosystem to surrounding
practices have helped rehabilitate up to 300 000
ecosystems. Recent research (Poppy et al. 2014)
hectares of land and produce an additional 80 000 tons
illustrates that an ecosystem services approach to food
of food per year (Reij et al. 2009). In addition, in
security using a case study from the Zomba district of
southern Niger, farmers are innovatively regenerating
Malawi allows key issues in food security/environmen-
and multiplying valuable trees on their lands, and this
tal stability to be addressed, including scale, the identity
has improved about 5 million hectares while producing
of beneficiaries, trade-offs, and the winners and losers
more than 500 000 additional tons of food per year
from management and mitigation strategies. The study
resulting in improved food security for about 3 million
illustrates the power of an ecosystem services approach
people. Other ecosystem benefits registered included
to strategic land-use planning and implementation.
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
123 www.kva.se/en
Ambio
Figure addressing the challenge of over-exploited groundwater reserves in India through the co-generation of power from solar panels for
pump sets to pump water for irrigation and satisfy national energy requirements in India
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
www.kva.se/en 123
Ambio
• Science and innovation that strengthens sustainability, in growing water-intensive crops even in water-scarce
while improving productivity and on-farm profits, is regions is that State support for prices and procurement is
possible. Such systems have been developed in Aus- limited to such crops and is not available for more ecolog-
tralia (Williams and McKenzie 2008a, b) and elsewhere ically appropriate crops such as pulses and millets. The
and have been adopted by grain growers who are result has been the emergence, for example of the ‘‘Punjab
moving increasingly to conservation farming tech- Water Syndrome,’’ where falling water tables combine
niques, such as no-till farming—improved agronomy dangerously with waterlogging in other parts of the state in
through more sophisticated crop rotations to minimize India (Kulkarni and Shah 2013). However, the aforemen-
nutrient leakage and maximize nutrient cycling, inter- tioned could be addressed through innovative incentive-
faced with integrated weed and pest management based approaches that result in distinct behavior changes
options that rely less on chemicals. (see Box 2).
• In the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, a million A lasting paradigm shift will require the ability to place
farmers have come together, in an FAO-supported research into policy and enable large-scale change. Influ-
project, to restore depleted groundwater tables, adopting encing policy requires an understanding of the power
an approach to governing the commons delineated by dynamics and political systems that both enable and
Nobel Laureate Elinor Ostrom (World Bank 2010). Food undermine the shift to SIA, associated improvements in
security is increased, utilizing ecosystem services, livelihoods, and protection of the environment. Institu-
without exhausting the endangered resource. tional trust will need to be built among the many stake-
• Rehabilitating degraded landscapes in the Highlands is holders in the food system, all of whom will be required to
a high-priority of the Ethiopian government and its make compromises. While SIA needs to be central to the
partners. Research by CGIAR Centers and programs way we produce food in the future, it also needs to be
working with national partners has helped lay the integrated within a nexus of strategies aimed at achieving
groundwork. An ICRISAT-led activity is promoting food system sustainability, in the broadest sense of the
integrated watershed management in the Yewol water- phrase (Godfray and Garnett 2014).
shed in the Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. By
strengthening local capacity, facilitating collective Grand experiments for transformation, co-design,
action, using research to identify niches for integration and learning
of technologies at farm and landscape scales, and
introducing system compatible technologies, the project It should be recognized that SIA is a new, evolving concept,
has led to improved productivity, crop diversification, and its meaning and objectives subject to debate and con-
improved downstream water availability, and strength- test. Sustainable intensification is only part of what is
ened livelihoods for an estimated 15 000 beneficiaries needed to improve food system viability and sustainability
(Evaluation of WLE 2016, p. 52). and is not synonymous with food security. Both sustain-
ability and food security have multiple social, ethical, and
environmental dimensions. Achieving a sustainable,
health-enhancing food system for all will require more than
CONCLUSIONS just changes in agricultural production, essential though
these are. Equally radical agendas will need to be pursued
Challenges for science to reduce resource-intensive consumption and waste and to
improve governance, e.g., on trade, incentives and equity.
Adopting a livelihood-centered paradigm for sustainable Much hope has been generated by India’s 12th Five Year
intensification within planetary boundaries is a major Plan, which adopts a paradigm shift in water resource
challenge for research and development that will require management, exactly along the lines proposed in this paper
new approaches to how research for development is for- (Shah 2013). A promising development is the emphasis in
mulated, managed, and executed. the strategic plan of the CGIAR until 2030 (CGIAR 2015),
Pursuing SIA will entail approaches that integrate social which places reduced poverty, improved food and nutrition
and natural sciences, in solution-oriented knowledge gen- security for health, and improved natural resources and
eration that couples academic and practical knowledge ecosystem services, as its three highest level system out-
through co-design and co-development of research. The comes. As the CGIAR played a pivotal role in the 1st
implementation of SIA will require an understanding of the Green Revolution, this creates the potential framework for
political economy in which food is traded and prices are a 2nd Green Revolution based on SIA principles.
determined and the business economy along the value chain Similarly, FAO pursues a strategic transformation,
from field to consumer. A major reason why farmers persist which endorses an ecosystem approach in agricultural
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
123 www.kva.se/en
Ambio
management for sustainable crop production intensifica- Awulachew, S.B. 2010. Irrigation potential in Ethiopia: constraints
tion, provides associated policy advice, and envisages a and opportunities for enhancing the system. Colombo: Interna-
tional Water Management Institute (IWMI).
vision of sustainable food and agriculture that merges Beddington, J., M. Asaduzzaman, M. Clark, A. Fernández, M.
access by all to nutritious food with ecosystem-focused Guillou, M. Jahn, L. Erda, and T. Mamo, et al. 2012. Achieving
natural resources management (FAO 2011b, 2014). food security in the face of climate change: Final report from the
The shift outlined in this article demands a new framework commission on sustainable agriculture and climate change.
Copenhagen: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change,
for research and development. Major productivity enhance- Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). www.ccafs.cgiar.org/
ments are required, and the strategy is through sustainable commission.
intensification of agricultural practices for livelihoods that Binyam, A.Y., and K.A. Desale. 2015. Rain water harvesting: An
build farm, community, and biosphere resilience. New option for dry land agriculture in arid and semi-arid Ethiopia.
International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental
research and development is required to advance fresh inte- Engineering 7: 17–28.
grated whole-of-systems approaches for sustainable intensifi- Burney, J.A., S.J. Davis, and D.B. Lobell. 2010. Greenhouse gas
cation, which can inspire and influence all domains involved in mitigation by agricultural intensification. Proceedings of the
agricultural development, from economics to biotechnology. National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
107: 12052–12057.
We believe one strategy forward is the investment in Carpenter, S.R. 2005. Eutrophication of aquatic ecosystems: bista-
spatially concentrated major ‘‘grand experiments’’ where bility and soil phosphorus. Proceedings of the National Academy
knowledge from different domains, ranging from irrigated of Sciences of the United States of America 102: 10002–10005.
to rainfed agriculture, ecology and agronomy, equity to CCICED (China Council for International Cooperation on Environ-
ment and Development). 2014. Institutional Innovation of Eco-
business development, work together to pilot sustainable Environmental Redlining, CCICED Special Policy Study Report.
intensification at scale (e.g., in a region or basin), to pool CCICED 2014 Annual General Meeting 2014.12.1.
experience, explore synergies and trade-offs, testing the CGIAR. 2015. CGIAR strategy and results framework 2016–2030.
hypothesis that sustainable intensification can deliver food, Redefining How CGIAR does business until 2030. CGIAR
Consortium Office.
livelihoods, and resilience, while contributing to develop- Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture.
ment within Earth’s safe operating space. These would be 2007. In Water for food, water for life: A comprehensive
large R&D investments. They would deviate from the assessment of water management in agriculture, ed. D. Molden.
normal business-as-usual approaches of discipline by dis- London: Earthscan, and Colombo: International Water Manage-
ment Institute.
cipline, sector-by-sector, scale-by-scale approaches to Conway, G. 1997. The doubly green revolution: Food for all in the
agricultural development. They would be system-integrat- twenty-first century. Ithaca, NY: Comstock Publishing
ing and innovative ventures, and thus challenging but, as Associates.
argued in this paper, necessary. Evidence strongly suggests Conway, G., J. Waage, and S. Delaney. 2010. Science and innovation
for development. London: UK Collaborative on Development
that sustainable transformations of agricultural systems are Sciences.
direly and urgently required to meet World and Earth needs. Daily, G.C., O. Zhiyun, Z. Hua, L. Shuzhuo, W. Yukuan, M.
Feldman, P. Kareiva, S. Polasky, et al. 2013. Securing natural
Acknowledgments We gratefully acknowledge the valuable contri- capital and human well-being: Innovation and impact in China.
butions of WLE scientists in advancing sustainable intensification. Ecology 33: 677–685. (in Chinese).
We are grateful for the support from the Stockholm Resilience Evaluation of WLE. 2016. CGIAR independent evaluation arrange-
Centre, The CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosys- ment. http://iea.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/WLE%20Evaluation%
tems and the Natural Capital Project. Special thanks to two anony- 20Report%20Volume%20I.pdf.
mous reviewers for their comments on earlier drafts of this article and FAO. 2011a. Global food losses and food waste—Extent, causes and
to the Editor and Springer Corrections team. We also thank Belinda prevention. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the
Crozier for much appreciated assistance with formatting. United Nations.
FAO. 2011b. Save and grow. A policymaker’s guide to the
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the sustainable intensification of smallholder crop production.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http:// Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted FAO. 2012. Smallholders and family farmers. Sustainability path-
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give ways, factsheet. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/nr/
appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a sustainability_pathways/docs/Factsheet_SMALLHOLDERS.
link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were pdf.
made. FAO. 2013a. FAO statistical yearbook 2013. Part 1—The setting.
Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3107e/i3107e01.pdf.
REFERENCES FAO. 2013b. Resilient livelihoods—Disaster risk reduction for food
and nutrition security framework programme. Rome: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Altieri, M.A., F.R. Funes-Monzote, and P. Petersen. 2012. Agroeco- FAO. 2014. Building a common vision for sustainable food and
logically efficient agricultural systems for smallholder farmers: agriculture: Principles and approaches. Rome: Food and
contributions to food sovereignty. Agronomy for Sustainable Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Development 32: 1–13.
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
www.kva.se/en 123
Ambio
FAO, IFAD and WFP. 2013. The state of food insecurity in the world Kabat, P. 2013. Water at a crossroads. Nature Climate Change 3:
2013. The multiple dimensions of food security. Rome: Food and 11–12.
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Keating, B.A., M. Herrero, P.S. Carberry, J. Gardner, and M.B. Cole.
Fischer, J., A.D. Manning, W. Steffen, et al. 2007. Mind the 2014. Food wedges: Framing the global food demand and supply
sustainability gap. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 22: 621–624. challenge towards 2050. Global Food Security 3: 125–132.
Fischer, J., B. Brosi, G.C. Daily, P.R. Ehrlich, R. Goldman, J. Kuyper, T.W., and P.C. Struik. 2014. Epilogue: Global food security,
Goldstein, D.B. Lindenmayer, A.D. Manning, H.A. Mooney, L. rhetoric, and the sustainable intensification debate. Current
Pejchar, J. Ranganathan, and T. Tallis. 2008. Should agricultural Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8: 71–79.
policies encourage land sparing or wildlife-friendly farming? Kulkarni, H., and M. Shah. 2013. Punjab water syndrome. Diagnos-
Frontiers Ecology Environment 6: 380–385. tics and prescriptions. Review of rural affairs. Economic &
Foley, J.A., R. DeFries, G.P. Asner, C. Barford, G. Bonan, S.R. Political Weekly XLVIII 52: 64–73.
Carpenter, F.S. Chapin, M.T. Coe, et al. 2005. Global conse- Law, E.A., E. Meijaard, B.A. Bryan, T. Mallawaarachchi, L.P. Koh,
quences of land use. Science 309: 570–574. and K.A. Wilson. 2015. Better land-use allocation outperforms
Foley, J.A., N. Ramankutty, K.A. Brauman, E.S. Cassidy, J.S. Gerber, land sparing and land sharing approaches to conservation in
M. Johnston, N.D. Mueller, C. O’Connell, et al. 2011. Solutions Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biological Conservation 186:
for a cultivated planet. Nature 478: 337–342. 276–286.
Folke, C., T. Hahn, P. Olsson, and J. Norberg. 2005. Adaptive Lenton, T.M., H. Held, E. Kriegler, J.W. Hall, W. Lucht, S. Rahmstorf,
governance of social-ecological systems. Annual Review of and H.J. Schellnhuber. 2008. Tipping elements in the Earth’s
Environment and Resources 30: 441–473. climate system. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Galloway, J.N., and E.B. Cowling. 2002. Reactive nitrogen and the of the United States of America 105: 1786–1793.
world: 200 Years of change. Ambio 31: 64–71. Le Quéré, C., R. Moriarty, R.M. Andrew, J.G. Canadell, S. Sitch, J.I.
Garnett, T., and C.J. Godfray. 2012. Sustainable intensification in Korsbakken, P. Friedlingstein, G.P. Peters, et al. 2015. Global
agriculture. Navigating a course through competing food system carbon budget 2015. Earth System Science Data 7: 349–396.
priorities. Food Climate Research Network and the Oxford doi:10.5194/essd-7-349-2015.
Martin Programme on the Future of Food, University of Oxford. Liniger, H.P., R. Mekdaschi Studer, C. Hauert, and M. Gurtner. 2011.
Garnett, T., M.C. Appleby, A. Balmford, I.J. Bateman, T.G. Benton, Sustainable land management in practice—Guidelines and best
P. Bloomer, B. Burlingame, M. Dawkins, et al. 2013. Sustainable practices for Sub-Saharan Africa. TerrAfrica, World Overview
intensification in agriculture: Premises and policies. Science 341: of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) and
33–34. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
Gerland, P., A.E. Raftery, H. Ševčı́ková, N. Li, D. Gu, T. Spooren- Ministry of Environmental Protection of China, Chinese Academy of
berg, L. Alkema, B.K. Fosdick, et al. 2014. World population Sciences. National Ecosystem Service Zoning in China. 1998.
stabilization unlikely this century. Science 346: 234–237. (in Chinese).
Godfray, H.C.J., and T. Garnett. 2014. Food security and sustainable NDRC (National Development and Reform Commission). Opinions
intensification. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society on accelerating the construction of ecological civilization.
B 369: 20120273. doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0273. National Development and Reform Commission of People’s
Godfray, H.C.J., J.R. Beddington, I.R. Crute, L. Haddad, D. Republic of China, Beijing, 2013.
Lawrence, J.F. Muir, J. Pretty, S. Robinson, et al. 2010. Food Ouyang, Z., C. Zhu, G. Yang, X. Weihua, H. Zheng, Y. Zhang, and Yi
security: The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327: Xiao. 2013. Gross ecosystem product concept accounting
812–818. framework and case study. Acta Ecologica Sinica 33:
Gordon, L.J., G.D. Peterson, and E.M. Bennett. 2008. Agricultural 6747–6761. (in Chinese).
modifications of hydrological flows create ecological surprises. Pardey, P.G., J.M. Beddow, T.M. Hurley, T.K.M. Beatty, and V.R.
Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23: 211–219. Eidman. 2014. A bounds analysis of world food futures: Global
Gruber, N., and J.N. Galloway. 2008. An earth-system perspective of agriculture through to 2050. Australian Journal of Agricultural
the global nitrogen cycle. Nature 451: 293–296. and Resource Economics 58: 571–589.
IAASTD. 2008. Agriculture at a crossroads: The synthesis report. Phalan, B., M. Onial, A. Balmford, and R.E. Green. 2011. Recon-
Synthesis report with executive summary: A synthesis of the ciling food production and biodiversity conservation: Land
global and sub-global IAASTD reports. International Assessment sharing and land sparing compared. Science 333: 1289–1291.
of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Devel- Ponisio, L.C., L.K. M’Gonigle, K.C. Mace, J. Palomino, P. de
opment (IAASTD). Washington, DC: Island Press. Valpine, and C. Kremen. 2015. Diversification practices reduce
IFPRI. 2015. Global nutrition report 2015: Actions and accountabil- organic to conventional yield gap. Proceedings of the Royal
ity to advance nutrition and sustainable development. Washing- Society B 282: 20141396. doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.1396.
ton, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Pretty, J. 2008. Agricultural sustainability: Concepts, principles and
IPCC. 2014. Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and evidence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
vulnerability. In Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contri- 363: 447–466.
bution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the Pretty, J.N., A.D. Noble, D. Bossio, J. Dixon, R.E. Hine, F.W.T.
intergovernmental panel on climate change, ed. C.B. Field, Penning de Vries, and J.I.L. Morison. 2006. Resource-conserv-
V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. ing agriculture increases yields in developing countries. Envi-
Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. ronmental Science and Technology 40: 1114–1119.
Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastran- Pretty, J.N., C. Toulmin, and S. Williams. 2011. Sustainable
drea, and L.L. White. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge intensification in African agriculture. International Journal of
University Press. Agricultural Sustainability 9: 5–24.
Jackson, L.E., M.M. Pulleman, L. Brussaard, K.S. Bawa, G.G. Poppy, G.M., S. Chiotha, F. Eigenbrod, C.A. Harvey, M. Honzák,
Brown, I.M. Cardoso, P.C. de Ruiter, L. Garcia-Barrios, et al. M.D. Hudson, A. Jarvis, N.J. Madise, et al. 2014. Food security
2012. Social-ecological and regional adaptation of agrobiodi- in a perfect storm: Using the ecosystem services framework to
versity management across a global set of research regions. increase understanding. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Global Environmental Change 22: 623–639. Society B 369: 20120288. doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0288.
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
123 www.kva.se/en
Ambio
Ramankutty, N., A.T. Evan, C. Monfreda, and J.A. Foley. 2008. agricultural intensification. Biological Conservation 151:
Farming the planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global 53–59.
agricultural lands in the year 2000. Global Biogeochemical United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2014. Assessing
Cycles 22: GB1003. 10.1029/2007GB002952. global land use: Balancing consumption with sustainable supply.
Ray, D.K., N.D. Mueller, P.C. West, and J.A. Foley. 2013. Yield A Report of the Working Group on Land and Soils of the
trends are insufficient to double global crop production by 2050. International Resource Panel. Bringezu S., Schütz H., Pengue
PLoS One 8: e66428. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066428. W., ÓBrien M., Garcia F., Sims R., Howarth R., Kauppi L.,
Reij, C., G. Tappan, and M. Smale. 2009. Agroenvironmental Swilling M., and Herrick J.
Transformation in the Sahel: Another Kind of ‘‘Green Revolu- United Nations Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Global
tion’’, p. 43. International Food Policy Research Institute Sustainability (UN GSP). 2012. Resilient people, resilient planet:
(IFPRI), IFPRI discussion paper 00914, Washington, DC. A future worth choosing. Report for the 2012 Rio ? 20 Earth
Rockström, J., and L. Karlberg. 2010. The quadruple squeeze: summit, New York.
Defining the safe operating space for freshwater use to achieve a van Noordwijk, M., and L. Brussaard. 2014. Minimizing the
triply green revolution in the Anthropocene. Ambio 39: 257–265. ecological footprint of food: Closing yield and efficiency gaps
Rockström, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, Å. Persson, F.S. Chapin III, E. simultaneously? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainabil-
Lambin, T.M. Lenton, M. Scheffer, et al. 2009. A safe operating ity 8: 62–70.
space for humanity. Nature 461: 472–475. Waters, C.N., J. Zalasiewicz, and C. Summerhayes, et al. 2016. The
Rockström, J., M. Falkenmark, T. Allan, C. Folke, L. Gordon, A. Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from
Jägerskog, M. Kummu, M. Lannerstad, et al. 2014. The the Holocene. Science 351(6229): aad2622-1-10.
unfolding water drama in the Anthropocene: Towards a Williams, J., and F. McKenzie. 2008a. ‘Agriculture’. In 10 Commit-
resilience-based perspective on water for global sustainability. ments: Reshaping the lucky country’s environment, ed. D.B.
Ecohydrology 7: 1249–1261. Lindenmayer, S. Dovers, M. Harriss Olson, and S. Morton,
Rogelj, J., G. Luderer, R.C. Pietzcker, E. Kriegler, M. Schaeffer, V. 105–112. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing.
Krey, and K. Riahi. 2015. Energy system transformations for Williams, J., and F. McKenzie. 2008b. Farming without Harming.
limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5 C. Nature Australasian Science 29: 31–34.
Climate Change 5: 519–528. World Bank. 2007. World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for
Royal Society. 2009. Reaping the benefits: Science and the sustainable Development. Washington, DC.
intensification of global agriculture. London: Royal Society. World Bank. 2010. Deep wells and prudence: towards pragmatic
Shah, M. 2013. Water: Towards a paradigm shift in the twelfth plan. action for addressing groundwater overexploitation in India.
Economic and Political Weekly 48: 41. WRI (World Resources Institute). 2013. Creating sustainable food
Steffen, W., P.J. Crutzen, and J.R. McNeill. 2007. The Anthropocene: futures: a menu of solutions to sustainably feeding more than 9
Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature? billion people by 2050. Chapter 4. World Resources Report
Ambio 36: 614–621. 2013-02014: Interim Findings (p. 144). Washington.
Steffen, W., Å. Persson, L. Deutsch, J. Zalasiewicz, M. Williams, K.
Richardson, C. Crumley, P. Crutzen, et al. 2011. The Anthropocene: AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES
From global change to planetary stewardship. Ambio 40: 739–761.
Steffen, W., K. Richardson, J. Rockström, S.E. Cornell, I. Fetzer, Johan Rockström (&) is a Professor at Stockholm Resilience
E.M. Bennett, R. Biggs, S.R. Carpenter, et al. 2015a. Planetary Centre. His interdisciplinary research interests are on global water
boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. resources, ecosystem services, agricultural development, social-eco-
Science 347: 736–747. logical resilience and Earth system research.
Steffen, W., W. Broadgate, L. Deutsch, O. Gaffney, and C. Ludwig. Address: Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University,
2015b. The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The great accelera- Stockholm, Sweden.
tion. The Anthropocene Review. doi:10.1177/2053019614564785. e-mail: johan.rockstrom@su.se
Struik, P.C., T.W. Kuyper, L. Brussaard, and C. Leeuwis. 2014.
Deconstructing and unpacking scientific controversies in intensi- John Williams, FTSE, is an Adjunct Professor at Crawford School of
fication and sustainability: Why the tensions in concepts and the Australian National University and the Institute of Land Water
values? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8: 80–88. and Society of Charles Sturt University. His research interests lay
The State Council of China. The main functional area planning of focus on development of sustainable food and fiber production and its
China. 2010. (in Chinese). impact on natural resources and the environment.
Tilman, D., and M. Clark. 2014. Global diets link environmental Address: Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National
sustainability and human health. Nature 515: 518–522. University, Canberra, Australia.
Tilman, D., C. Balzer, J. Hill, and B.L. Befort. 2011. Global food e-mail: jwil3940@bigpond.net.au
demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United Gretchen Daily is a Professor at the Department of Biology, Stanford
States of America 108: 20260–20264. University. Her research interests include sustainable agricultural
Tilman, D., J. Fargione, B. Wolff, C. D’Antonio, A. Dobson, R. systems, harmonizing conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem
Howarth, D. Schindler, W.H. Schlesinger, et al. 2001. Forecast- services with rural livelihoods.
ing agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science Address: Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
292: 281–284. e-mail: gdaily@stanford.edu
Tittonell, P. 2014. Ecological intensification of agriculture—Sustain-
able by nature. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability Andrew Noble is a Deputy Director General Research at Interna-
8: 53–61. tional Centre for Agriculture Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).
Tscharntke, T., Y. Clough, T.C. Wanger, L. Jackson, I. Motzke, I. His research interests include degraded production systems.
Perfecto, J. Vandermeer, and A. Whitbread. 2012. Global Address: ICARDA, Amman, Jordan.
food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of e-mail: a.noble@cgiar.org
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
www.kva.se/en 123
Ambio
Nathanial Matthews is the Research Coordinator at the CGIAR Charlotte de Fraiture is a Professor of Land and Water Develop-
Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems. His research ment at UNESCO-IHE, Centre for Water Education based in Delft,
interests include political ecology and political economy of natural The Netherlands. Her research interests include sustainable use of
resource management. water for agriculture, water for food security, irrigation and drainage.
Address: CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems, Address: Unesco-IHE, Delft, The Netherlands.
Battaramulla, Sri Lanka. e-mail: c.defraiture@unesco-ihe.org
e-mail: n.matthews@cgiar.org
Nuhu Hatibu is a Professor and CEO of Kilimo Trust. His research
Line Gordon is an Assistant Professor at the Stockholm Resilience interests include agricultural value chains, knowledge management,
Centre. Her research focuses on freshwater resources, ecosystem strategy formulation, and capacity building and management of water
services and food production. for agriculture.
Address: Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Address: Kilimo Trust, Kampala, Uganda.
Stockholm, Sweden. e-mail: nuhu.hatibu@kilimotrust.org
e-mail: line.gordon@su.se
Olcay Unver is the Deputy Director of Land and Water Division of
Hanna Wetterstrand is a PhD candidate and a program officer at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
Stockholm Resilience Centre at Stockholm University. Her research since September 2013. His professional interests include water within
interests include global food security and deliberative methods in a socioeconomic development context, transboundary water cooper-
valuing ecosystem services. ation, water governance, and natural resources management.
Address: Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Address: FAO, Land and Water Division, Rome, Italy.
Stockholm, Sweden. e-mail: olcay.unver@fao.org
e-mail: hanna.wetterstrand@su.se
Jeremy Bird specializes in water resources policy, management and
Fabrice DeClerck is an Associate Professor and a community and institutions and joined IWMI in October 2012 having been CEO of
landscape ecologist trained at the University of California Davis. He the Mekong River Commission for three years. His varied career
currently works for Bioversity International, a member center of the includes research and consultancy work across Asia and Africa and
CGIAR charged with research for development on the contribution of experience with project development with the Asian Development
biodiversity of ecosystem services in agricultural development. His Bank. His research interests include water law and policy, water
research covers several domains of biodiversity’s impacts from resources institutions and management, and dams and hydropower.
human health and nutrition, to agro-ecological services such as pol- Address: IWMI, Battaramulla, Sri Lanka.
lination and pest control, and landscape planning for the sustainable e-mail: j.bird@cgiar.org
management of common-pool ecosystem services.
Address: Bioversity International, Montpellier, France. Lindiwe Sibanda, FANRPAN South Africa, is currently the CEO of
e-mail: f.declerk@cgiar.org the Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Net-
work (FANRPAN). Under her leadership, FANRPAN was trans-
Mihir Shah is President of Bharat Rural Livelihoods Foundation and formed from a small sub-regional network to a global player in the
a Visiting Professor of Political Economy at Ashoka University. His food security agenda giving voice to Africa’s position on the Green
research interests include ecological economics, sustainable liveli- Revolution, Climate Smart Agriculture and Nutrition Sensitive
hoods and participatory water management. Agriculture.
Address: Bharat Rural Livelihoods Foundation, New Delhi, India. Address: FANRPAN, Pretoria, South Africa.
e-mail: mihir.shah@nic.in e-mail: lmsibanda@fanrpan.org
Pasquale Steduto is an FAO Representative in Egypt. His research Jimmy Smith, Ph.D., is a Director General of the International
interests include agricultural water use efficiency and water produc- Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) at Animal sciences, Global
tivity, focusing on crops’ yield response to water and associated Livestock.
modeling development under water-scarce conditions. Address: ILRI, Nairobi, Kenya.
Address: FAO, Land and Water Division, Rome, Italy. e-mail: j.smith@cgiar.org
e-mail: pasquale.steduto@fao.org
The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
123 www.kva.se/en