• norsk
    • English
  • English 
    • norsk
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Øvrige samlinger
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin - NTNU
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Øvrige samlinger
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin - NTNU
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

The impact of interventions in the global land and agri-food sectors on Nature’s Contributions to People and the UN Sustainable Development Goals

McElwee, Pamela; Calvin, Katherine; Campbell, Donovan; Cherubini, Francesco; Grassi, Giacomo; Korotkov, Vladimir; Le Hoang, Anh; Lwasa, Shuaib; Nkem, Johnson; Nkonya, Ephraim; Saigusa, Nobuko; Soussana, Jean‐Francois; Taboada, Miguel Angel; Manning, Frances C.; Nampanzira, Dorothy; Smith, Pete
Journal article
Submitted version
Thumbnail
View/Open
McElwee (1.141Mb)
URI
https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2780615
Date
2020
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • Institutt for energi og prosessteknikk [4541]
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin - NTNU [41955]
Original version
Global Change Biology. 2020, 26 (9), 4691-4721.   10.1111/gcb.15219
Abstract
Interlocked challenges of climate change, biodiversity loss, and land degradation require transformative interventions in the land management and food production sectors to reduce carbon emissions, strengthen adaptive capacity, and increase food security. However, deciding which interventions to pursue and understanding their relative co-benefits with and trade-offs against different social and environmental goals have been difficult without comparisons across a range of possible actions. This study examined 40 different options, implemented through land management, value chains, or risk management, for their relative impacts across 18 Nature's Contributions to People (NCPs) and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We find that a relatively small number of interventions show positive synergies with both SDGs and NCPs with no significant adverse trade-offs; these include improved cropland management, improved grazing land management, improved livestock management, agroforestry, integrated water management, increased soil organic carbon content, reduced soil erosion, salinization, and compaction, fire management, reduced landslides and hazards, reduced pollution, reduced post-harvest losses, improved energy use in food systems, and disaster risk management. Several interventions show potentially significant negative impacts on both SDGs and NCPs; these include bioenergy and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, afforestation, and some risk sharing measures, like commercial crop insurance. Our results demonstrate that a better understanding of co-benefits and trade-offs of different policy approaches can help decision-makers choose the more effective, or at the very minimum, more benign interventions for implementation.
Publisher
Wiley
Journal
Global Change Biology
Copyright
This is the authors' manuscript to an article published by Wiley

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit
 

 

Browse

ArchiveCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournalsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit