Search

Context: Anthropogenic landscape change is an important driver shaping our environment. Historical landscape analysis contributes to the monitoring and understanding of these change processes. Such analyses are often focused on specific spatial scales and single research methods, thus covering only limited aspects of landscape change. Objectives: Here, we aim to assess the potential of combining the analysis of historical aerial imagery and local stakeholder interviews for landscape change studies using a standardized mapping and interviewing approach. Methods: We compared six agricultural landscapes across Europe and mapped land-cover using historical aerial imagery (starting between 1930 and 1980, depending on data availability, until recent years) with an object-based image analysis and random forest classification. For local perspectives of landscape change, we conducted oral history interviews (OHIs) with (almost) retired farmers. Comparing recorded landscape changes from both approaches provided insight into advantages of combining these two methods. Results: Object-based analysis enabled the identification of high-resolution land-cover dynamics, with scale enlargement and cropland/grassland expansion being the most commonly recurring trends across European landscapes. Perceived landscape changes identified in the OHIs included changes in farm management, landscape structure, and infrastructure. Farmers also reported drivers and personal values associated with landscape change. Combining the two historical landscape analysis tools resulted in a qualitative and quantitative understanding of changes in land-cover, land use, and land management. Conclusions: Comparing physical land-cover change with local farmer perspectives is key to a comprehensive understanding of landscape change. There are different ways the two methods can be combined, leading to different venues for science and policy making.

Current agricultural practices in Europe are increasingly aggravating societal and environmental safety concerns. This creates social and regulatory pressures on farmers, which can lead to declining material and social status of farmers, farmer discontent, and anti-regulation protests. These tensions are rooted in conflicting value systems for agricultural development, which can range from productivist pathways (i.e. valuing production above all else) to increasing multifunctionality pathways (i.e. valuing agriculture for its contribution to multiple economic, environmental and societal needs). It is largely unknown to what degree individual farms and agricultural landscapes are transitioning towards increasing productivism or multifunctionality in practice. Here, we mapped landscape changes and interviewed farmers (n = 274) to examine the diversity of agricultural development pathways in 17 study sites across Europe over the last 20 years (2000–2020). We also assessed the associations between the development pathways and farmers’ perceptions of socio-economic outcomes, namely job satisfaction, societal valuation, and economic performance. Farm-level development was largely aligned with productivist pathways, while landscape-level changes aligned more closely with an increasing multifunctionality pathway. Farmers on pathways of increasing multifunctionality did not perceive improved outcomes on livelihood indicators as compared to productivist farmers. Furthermore, farms on increasing multifunctionality pathways were concentrated in sites with very high management intensities that face strong pressure from environmental regulations, as well as low-intensity, mountainous sites, where opportunities for intensification are limited. These results suggest that current pathways that increase multifunctionality arise mostly by necessity. Successful agricultural transformation will therefore require policy to create enabling environments that provide socioeconomic benefits

European agri-food systems must overcome structural lock-ins to achieve more sustainable modes of production and consumption. Yet European regions are highly diverse, and we lack understanding of how different regional characteristics may enable or inhibit sustainability transitions. This hinders the development of context-tailored governance strategies. In this paper, we identify and apply sets of spatial indicators to map the regional potentials for agri-food transitions. We first analyse the strength of lock-in to the incumbent agro-industrial paradigm. We then map the enabling environments for two alternative agri-food networks—multifunctional value chains and civic food networks—that each embed distinct social–ecological qualities of agriculture and food. Results demonstrate a large spatial diversity in transition potential, with stronger lock-ins throughout North and Western Europe and stronger enabling environments for agri-food transitions in Italy, France, Switzerland, and Southwest Germany. We find that lock-ins are strongest in livestock-dominated regions and are associated with higher GHG emissions and excess nitrogen levels. Our study demonstrates the need for coordinated public policies that (1) leverage region-specific transition potentials and (2) enable complementary innovations in market-based and community-led networks.

Current agricultural practices in Europe are increasingly aggravating societal and environmental safety concerns. This creates social and regulatory pressures on farmers, which can lead to declining material and social status of farmers, farmer discontent, and anti-regulation protests. These tensions are rooted in conflicting value systems for agricultural development, which can range from productivist pathways (i.e. valuing production above all else) to increasing multifunctionality pathways (i.e. valuing agriculture for its contribution to multiple economic, environmental and societal needs). It is largely unknown to what degree individual farms and agricultural landscapes are transitioning towards increasing productivism or multifunctionality in practice. Here, we mapped landscape changes and interviewed farmers (n = 274) to examine the diversity of agricultural development pathways in 17 study sites across Europe over the last 20 years (2000–2020). We also assessed the associations between the development pathways and farmers’ perceptions of socio-economic outcomes, namely job satisfaction, societal valuation, and economic performance. Farm-level development was largely aligned with productivist pathways, while landscape-level changes aligned more closely with an increasing multifunctionality pathway. Farmers on pathways of increasing multifunctionality did not perceive improved outcomes on livelihood indicators as compared to productivist farmers. Furthermore, farms on increasing multifunctionality pathways were concentrated in sites with very high management intensities that face strong pressure from environmental regulations, as well as low-intensity, mountainous sites, where opportunities for intensification are limited. These results suggest that current pathways that increase multifunctionality arise mostly by necessity. Successful agricultural transformation will therefore require policy to create enabling environments that prov

Farmers are at the centre of scientific and political debates about sustainability in European agriculture, but rarely do we discuss the roles of other actors who shape their behaviour. Understanding the interactions and balance of power in agri-food systems is critical to effectively govern sustainability transitions. Here, we conduct a meta-study of 71 case studies in European agri-food systems to synthesise evidence on the diversity of actors and network configurations. We characterise the reported power-laden relationships to generate an agri-food network for each case study and then create a typology of archetypical network configurations. Our study provides three major insights. First, we find a diverse range of actors and complex network configurations. This indicates that the predominant focus on farmers in sustainability policy overlooks the other actors in their agri-food networks, thus risking suboptimal policy design and efficacy. Second, the typology identifies three groups of networks – agro-industrial control, multifunctional value chains, and civic food networks – associated with diverging levels of farmer autonomy. Agricultural governance should therefore consider the context-specific agency of farmers; policies that target farmer decision-making can only have impact if farmers have the capacity to change. Third, the typology demonstrates the potentially complementary roles of conventional and alternative value chains, as well as top-down state support and bottom-up civil society mobilisation. Agri-food networks hence provide diverse leverage points for sustainability transformation.

Item does not contain fulltext, 17 januari 2023

Farming in Europe has been the scene of several important socio-economic and environmental developments and crises throughout the last century. Therefore, an understanding of the historical driving forces of farm change helps identifying potentials for navigating future pathways of agricultural development. However, long-term driving forces have so far been studied, e.g. in anecdotal local case studies or in systematic literature reviews, which often lack context dependency. In this study, we bridged local and continental scales by conducting 123 oral history interviews (OHIs) with elderly farmers across 13 study sites in 10 European countries. We applied a driving forces framework to systematically analyse the OHIs. We find that the most prevalent driving forces were the introduction of new technologies, developments in agricultural markets that pushed farmers for farm size enlargement and technological optimisation, agricultural policies, but also cultural aspects such as cooperation and intergenerational arrangements. However, we find considerable heterogeneity in the specific influence of individual driving forces across the study sites, implying that generic assumptions about the dynamics and impacts of European agricultural change drivers hold limited explanatory power on the local scale. Our results suggest that site-specific factors and their historical development will need to be considered when addressing the future of agriculture in Europe in a scientific or policy context.

Advances in Land System Science (LSS) rely on the evidence generated by different types of research activities, including place-based case studies, landscape/land-system mapping and synthesis research. However, these activities are usually conducted in parallel, with a lack of integration often leading to important knowledge gaps and limitations. In this article, we provide tools for the application of geographic similarity analysis (GSA), a collection of spatially-explicit methods assessing the degree of similarity between geographic locations, and thereby help to address these limitations. We identify opportunities for employing GSA to support: 1) selecting geographically representative sets of case studies; 2) integrating empirical evidence generated at different scales and levels of abstraction; and 3) facilitating context-sensitive knowledge transfer. The resulting toolbox provides approaches for facilitating researchers to get an enhanced understanding of multi-scale land change processes, as well as supporting land governance in scaling up the knowledge and solutions generated by LSS research.

Farming in Europe has been the scene of several important socio-economic and environmental developments and crises throughout the last century. Therefore, an understanding of the historical driving forces of farm change helps identifying potentials for navigating future pathways of agricultural development. However, long-term driving forces have so far been studied, e.g. in anecdotal local case studies or in systematic literature reviews, which often lack context dependency. In this study, we bridged local and continental scales by conducting 123 oral history interviews (OHIs) with elderly farmers across 13 study sites in 10 European countries. We applied a driving forces framework to systematically analyse the OHIs. We find that the most prevalent driving forces were the introduction of new technologies, developments in agricultural markets that pushed farmers for farm size enlargement and technological optimisation, agricultural policies, but also cultural aspects such as cooperation and intergenerational arrangements. However, we find considerable heterogeneity in the specific influence of individual driving forces across the study sites, implying that generic assumptions about the dynamics and impacts of European agricultural change drivers hold limited explanatory power on the local scale. Our results suggest that site-specific factors and their historical development will need to be considered when addressing the future of agriculture in Europe in a scientific or policy context.

A range of intensifying pressures is making the future of European agriculture dynamic and contested. Insights into these pressures are needed to inform debates about the future of the sector. In this study, we use a foresight approach to identify, quantify and map megatrends. Megatrends are long-term driving forces which are observable today and will likely have transformational potential in the future. By mapping these megatrends at the regional scale, we establish a geography of megatrends and detect where they coincide. Four megatrends significant for the future of European agriculture at the regional scale are assessed: Climate change, demographic change, (post-) productivism shifts, and increasingly stringent environmental regulations. The direction and intensity of these megatrends differs between regions, which drives regions into different systemic lock-ins or dynamics. In most regions, megatrends converge to destabilize the current system, forewarning impending systemic changes. While the specific megatrends contributing to this instability differ regionally, this result highlights that many regions are on a dynamic rather than stable trajectory, and the governance challenge is to steer these dynamics towards a desirable future. However, some regions are found to be highly persistent, indicating that megatrends reinforce business as usual, and change needs to be triggered through purposeful governance. In a minority of regions megatrends may drive marginalization as the current system becomes increasingly unviable. We argue that research and policies concerning agricultural sustainability transitions should be cognizant of the regional diversity of European megatrends and the pressures they create.

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture has been proposed as a promising concept for safeguarding global food security, while simultaneously protecting the environment and promoting good quality of life. However, SI often leads to context-specific sustainability trade-offs. Operationalising SI thus needs to be supported by transparent sustainability assessments. In this article, we propose a general systematic approach to developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change. Firstly, we specify a comprehensive system representation for analysing how changes in agricultural intensity lead to a multitude of sustainability outcomes affecting different societal groups across geographical scales. We then introduce a procedure for identifying the attributes that are relevant for assessment within particular contexts, and respective indicator metrics. Finally, we illustrate the proposed approach by developing an assessment framework for evaluating a wide range of intensification pathways in Europe. The application of the approach revealed processes and effects that are relevant for the European context but are rarely considered in SI assessments. These include farmers’ health, workers’ living conditions, cultural heritage and sense of place of rural communities, animal welfare, impacts on sectors not directly related to agriculture (e.g., tourism), shrinking and ageing of rural population and consumers’ health. The proposed approach addresses important gaps in SI assessments, and thus represents an important step forward in defining transparent procedures for sustainability assessments that can stimulate an informed debate about the operationalisation of SI and its contribution towards achieving SDGs.

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture has been proposed as a promising concept for safeguarding global food security, while simultaneously protecting the environment and promoting good quality of life. However, SI often leads to context-specific sustainability trade-offs. Operationalising SI thus needs to be supported by transparent sustainability assessments. In this article, we propose a general systematic approach to developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change. Firstly, we specify a comprehensive system representation for analysing how changes in agricultural intensity lead to a multitude of sustainability outcomes affecting different societal groups across geographical scales. We then introduce a procedure for identifying the attributes that are relevant for assessment within particular contexts, and respective indicator metrics. Finally, we illustrate the proposed approach by developing an assessment framework for evaluating a wide range of intensification pathways in Europe. The application of the approach revealed processes and effects that are relevant for the European context but are rarely considered in SI assessments. These include farmers’ health, workers’ living conditions, cultural heritage and sense of place of rural communities, animal welfare, impacts on sectors not directly related to agriculture (e.g., tourism), shrinking and ageing of rural population and consumers’ health. The proposed approach addresses important gaps in SI assessments, and thus represents an important step forward in defining transparent procedures for sustainability assessments that can stimulate an informed debate about the operationalisation of SI and its contribution towards achieving SDGs.

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture has been proposed as a promising concept for safeguarding global food security, while simultaneously protecting the environment and promoting good quality of life. However, SI often leads to context-specific sustainability trade-offs. Operationalising SI thus needs to be supported by transparent sustainability assessments. In this article, we propose a general systematic approach to developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change. Firstly, we specify a comprehensive system representation for analysing how changes in agricultural intensity lead to a multitude of sustainability outcomes affecting different societal groups across geographical scales. We then introduce a procedure for identifying the attributes that are relevant for assessment within particular contexts, and respective indicator metrics. Finally, we illustrate the proposed approach by developing an assessment framework for evaluating a wide range of intensification pathways in Europe. The application of the approach revealed processes and effects that are relevant for the European context but are rarely considered in SI assessments. These include farmers’ health, workers’ living conditions, cultural heritage and sense of place of rural communities, animal welfare, impacts on sectors not directly related to agriculture (e.g., tourism), shrinking and ageing of rural population and consumers’ health. The proposed approach addresses important gaps in SI assessments, and thus represents an important step forward in defining transparent procedures for sustainability assessments that can stimulate an informed debate about the operationalisation of SI and its contribution towards achieving SDGs.

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture has been proposed as a promising concept for safeguarding global food security, while simultaneously protecting the environment and promoting good quality of life. However, SI often leads to context-specific sustainability trade-offs. Operationalising SI thus needs to be supported by transparent sustainability assessments. In this article, we propose a general systematic approach to developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change. Firstly, we specify a comprehensive system representation for analysing how changes in agricultural intensity lead to a multitude of sustainability outcomes affecting different societal groups across geographical scales. We then introduce a procedure for identifying the attributes that are relevant for assessment within particular contexts, and respective indicator metrics. Finally, we illustrate the proposed approach by developing an assessment framework for evaluating a wide range of intensification pathways in Europe. The application of the approach revealed processes and effects that are relevant for the European context but are rarely considered in SI assessments. These include farmers’ health, workers’ living conditions, cultural heritage and sense of place of rural communities, animal welfare, impacts on sectors not directly related to agriculture (e.g., tourism), shrinking and ageing of rural population and consumers’ health. The proposed approach addresses important gaps in SI assessments, and thus represents an important step forward in defining transparent procedures for sustainability assessments that can stimulate an informed debate about the operationalisation of SI and its contribution towards achieving SDGs.

It has been shown that the COVID-19 pandemic affected some agricultural systems more than others, and even within geographic regions, not all farms were affected to the same extent. To build resilience of agricultural systems to future shocks, it is key to understand which farms were affected and why. In this study, we examined farmers’ perceived robustness to COVID-19, a key resilience capacity. We conducted standardized farmer interviews (n = 257) in 15 case study areas across Europe, covering a large range of socio-ecological contexts and farm types. Interviews targeted perceived livelihood impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on productivity, sales, price, labor availability, and supply chains in 2020, as well as farm(er) characteristics and farm management. Our study corroborates earlier evidence that most farms were not or only slightly affected by the first wave(s) of the pandemic in 2020, and that impacts varied widely by study region. However, a significant minority of farmers across Europe reported that the pandemic was “the worst crisis in a lifetime” (3%) or “the worst crisis in a decade” (7%). Statistical analysis showed that more specialized and intensive farms were more likely to have perceived negative impacts. From a societal perspective, this suggests that highly specialized, intensive farms face higher vulnerability to shocks that affect regional to global supply chains. Supporting farmers in the diversification of their production systems while decreasing dependence on service suppliers and supply chain actors may increase their robustness to future disruptions.

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture has been proposed as a promising concept for safeguarding global food security, while simultaneously protecting the environment and promoting good quality of life. However, SI often leads to context-specific sustainability trade-offs. Operationalising SI thus needs to be supported by transparent sustainability assessments. In this article, we propose a general systematic approach to developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change. Firstly, we specify a comprehensive system representation for analysing how changes in agricultural intensity lead to a multitude of sustainability outcomes affecting different societal groups across geographical scales. We then introduce a procedure for identifying the attributes that are relevant for assessment within particular contexts, and respective indicator metrics. Finally, we illustrate the proposed approach by developing an assessment framework for evaluating a wide range of intensification pathways in Europe. The application of the approach revealed processes and effects that are relevant for the European context but are rarely considered in SI assessments. These include farmers’ health, workers’ living conditions, cultural heritage and sense of place of rural communities, animal welfare, impacts on sectors not directly related to agriculture (e.g., tourism), shrinking and ageing of rural population and consumers’ health. The proposed approach addresses important gaps in SI assessments, and thus represents an important step forward in defining transparent procedures for sustainability assessments that can stimulate an informed debate about the operationalisation of SI and its contribution towards achieving SDGs.

A range of intensifying pressures is making the future of European agriculture dynamic and contested. Insights into these pressures are needed to inform debates about the future of the sector. In this study, we use a foresight approach to identify, quantify and map megatrends. Megatrends are long-term driving forces which are observable today and will likely have transformational potential in the future. By mapping these megatrends at the regional scale, we establish a geography of megatrends and detect where they coincide. Four megatrends significant for the future of European agriculture at the regional scale are assessed: Climate change, demographic change, (post-) productivism shifts, and increasingly stringent environmental regulations. The direction and intensity of these megatrends differs between regions, which drives regions into different systemic lock-ins or dynamics. In most regions, megatrends converge to destabilize the current system, forewarning impending systemic changes. While the specific megatrends contributing to this instability differ regionally, this result highlights that many regions are on a dynamic rather than stable trajectory, and the governance challenge is to steer these dynamics towards a desirable future. However, some regions are found to be highly persistent, indicating that megatrends reinforce business as usual, and change needs to be triggered through purposeful governance. In a minority of regions megatrends may drive marginalization as the current system becomes increasingly unviable. We argue that research and policies concerning agricultural sustainability transitions should be cognizant of the regional diversity of European megatrends and the pressures they create.

It has been shown that the COVID-19 pandemic affected some agricultural systems more than others, and even within geographic regions, not all farms were affected to the same extent. To build resilience of agricultural systems to future shocks, it is key to understand which farms were affected and why. In this study, we examined farmers’ perceived robustness to COVID-19, a key resilience capacity. We conducted standardized farmer interviews (n = 257) in 15 case study areas across Europe, covering a large range of socio-ecological contexts and farm types. Interviews targeted perceived livelihood impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on productivity, sales, price, labor availability, and supply chains in 2020, as well as farm(er) characteristics and farm management. Our study corroborates earlier evidence that most farms were not or only slightly affected by the first wave(s) of the pandemic in 2020, and that impacts varied widely by study region. However, a significant minority of farmers across Europe reported that the pandemic was “the worst crisis in a lifetime” (3%) or “the worst crisis in a decade” (7%). Statistical analysis showed that more specialized and intensive farms were more likely to have perceived negative impacts. From a societal perspective, this suggests that highly specialized, intensive farms face higher vulnerability to shocks that affect regional to global supply chains. Supporting farmers in the diversification of their production systems while decreasing dependence on service suppliers and supply chain actors may increase their robustness to future disruptions.

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture has been proposed as a promising concept for safeguarding global food security, while simultaneously protecting the environment and promoting good quality of life. However, SI often leads to context-specific sustainability trade-offs. Operationalising SI thus needs to be supported by transparent sustainability assessments. In this article, we propose a general systematic approach to developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change. Firstly, we specify a comprehensive system representation for analysing how changes in agricultural intensity lead to a multitude of sustainability outcomes affecting different societal groups across geographical scales. We then introduce a procedure for identifying the attributes that are relevant for assessment within particular contexts, and respective indicator metrics. Finally, we illustrate the proposed approach by developing an assessment framework for evaluating a wide range of intensification pathways in Europe. The application of the approach revealed processes and effects that are relevant for the European context but are rarely considered in SI assessments. These include farmers’ health, workers’ living conditions, cultural heritage and sense of place of rural communities, animal welfare, impacts on sectors not directly related to agriculture (e.g., tourism), shrinking and ageing of rural population and consumers’ health. The proposed approach addresses important gaps in SI assessments, and thus represents an important step forward in defining transparent procedures for sustainability assessments that can stimulate an informed debate about the operationalisation of SI and its contribution towards achieving SDGs.

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture has been proposed as a promising concept for safeguarding global food security, while simultaneously protecting the environment and promoting good quality of life. However, SI often leads to context-specific sustainability trade-offs. Operationalising SI thus needs to be supported by transparent sustainability assessments. In this article, we propose a general systematic approach to developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change. Firstly, we specify a comprehensive system representation for analysing how changes in agricultural intensity lead to a multitude of sustainability outcomes affecting different societal groups across geographical scales. We then introduce a procedure for identifying the attributes that are relevant for assessment within particular contexts, and respective indicator metrics. Finally, we illustrate the proposed approach by developing an assessment framework for evaluating a wide range of intensification pathways in Europe. The application of the approach revealed processes and effects that are relevant for the European context but are rarely considered in SI assessments. These include farmers’ health, workers’ living conditions, cultural heritage and sense of place of rural communities, animal welfare, impacts on sectors not directly related to agriculture (e.g., tourism), shrinking and ageing of rural population and consumers’ health. The proposed approach addresses important gaps in SI assessments, and thus represents an important step forward in defining transparent procedures for sustainability assessments that can stimulate an informed debate about the operationalisation of SI and its contribution towards achieving SDGs.

A range of intensifying pressures is making the future of European agriculture dynamic and contested. Insights into these pressures are needed to inform debates about the future of the sector. In this study, we use a foresight approach to identify, quantify and map megatrends. Megatrends are long-term driving forces which are observable today and will likely have transformational potential in the future. By mapping these megatrends at the regional scale, we establish a geography of megatrends and detect where they coincide. Four megatrends significant for the future of European agriculture at the regional scale are assessed: Climate change, demographic change, (post-) productivism shifts, and increasingly stringent environmental regulations. The direction and intensity of these megatrends differs between regions, which drives regions into different systemic lock-ins or dynamics. In most regions, megatrends converge to destabilize the current system, forewarning impending systemic changes. While the specific megatrends contributing to this instability differ regionally, this result highlights that many regions are on a dynamic rather than stable trajectory, and the governance challenge is to steer these dynamics towards a desirable future. However, some regions are found to be highly persistent, indicating that megatrends reinforce business as usual, and change needs to be triggered through purposeful governance. In a minority of regions megatrends may drive marginalization as the current system becomes increasingly unviable. We argue that research and policies concerning agricultural sustainability transitions should be cognizant of the regional diversity of European megatrends and the pressures they create.

Given current land degradation trends, Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN, SDG Target 15.3) by 2030 could be difficult to attain. Solutions to avoid, reduce, and reverse land degradation are not being implemented at sufficiently large scales, pointing to land governance as the main obstacle. In this paper, we review dynamics in agricultural land governance, and the potential this may have to enable land degradation or provide solutions towards LDN. The literature reveals agency shifts are taking place, where value chain actors are given increasing decision-making power in land governance. These agency shifts are manifested in two interrelated trends: First, through agricultural value chain coordination, such as contract farming, value chain actors increasingly influence land management decisions. Second, international large-scale land acquisitions and domestic larger-scale farms, both instances of intensified direct involvement of value chain with land management, are overtaking significant areas of land. These new arrangements are associated with agricultural expansion, and are additionally associated with unsustainable land management due to absent landowners, short-term interests, and high-intensity agriculture. However, we also find that value chain actors have both the tools and business cases to catalyze LDN solutions. We discuss how governments and other LDN brokers can motivate or push private actors to deploy private governance measures to avoid, reduce, and reverse land degradation. Successful implementation of LDN requires refocusing efforts to enable and, where necessary, constrain all actors with agency over land management, including value chain actors.

China has experienced unprecedented urbanization in the past few decades, fueled by population growth, economic development, and rural to urban migration. In the future, economic growth as well as rural to urban migration is expected to continue, but demographic scenarios indicate that the population of China will peak and subsequently decline. As a result, it is unsure how urban areas will develop after peak population. In this study we further develop the CLUMondo land system model to simulate land system changes in China until 2050. Our application represents a range of settlement systems, from dense urban areas to village landscapes, differing in their built-up area as well as their population density to enable the simulation of different settlement change trajectories. Our results show that a UN high population scenario in combination with a continued decline in population density leads to an increase of built-up land of about 48%. Conversely, the UN low population scenario in combination with a constant population density could be accommodated within the current amount of built-up land in China. Due to prevailing cropland protection policies, increase in built-up land will mostly lead to a loss of natural areas, hence our scenarios highlight the opportunity space for limiting land take and saving natural areas. This study also demonstrates the need for more nuanced representation of settlement systems for the assessment of land change trajectories.

The study of land systems aims to disentangle and understand the range of interactions between humans and the land they use. It takes, among others, environmental, biophysical, economic, political, technological, and social perspectives to comprehend how coupled human-environmental systems work, who decides over them, and how they could or should be transformed. Land systems take a central position in human livelihoods and environmental issues, and are a crucial parameter in many Sustainable Development Goals. This thesis starts from the premise that land systems are increasingly changing in ways that are poorly understood from a conventional land system science perspective. Conventional land system science rests on assumptions of mostly gradual processes, driven by a somewhat narrow range of actors, such as family farmers or local land administrations. However, large-scale land acquisitions, arguably the most dramatic land system changes of the 21st century, are definitively non-gradual, operate at scales that are orders of magnitude larger than typical smallholder dynamics, and are instigated by an international group of actors with a very different set of priorities than traditional actors. Pejoratively known as land grabs, large-scale land acquisitions globally cover an area over double the size of Germany, yet as a process, they have not been introduced in land system change models. This lacuna is significant, not only because large-scale land acquisitions cover large areas, but also because they profoundly change the relation that humans have with land as a resource. For example, the conversion of swidden landscapes to rubber monocultures in Southeast Asia causes a significant loss of agro-environmental diversity, but also a complete overhaul of livelihoods, culture, tradition, diets, and more. Furthermore, the constellation of decision-making concerning land is changed, and therefore, the possibilities for sustainable transitions are different. Upon closer in

Given current land degradation trends, Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN, SDG Target 15.3) by 2030 could be difficult to attain. Solutions to avoid, reduce, and reverse land degradation are not being implemented at sufficiently large scales, pointing to land governance as the main obstacle. In this paper, we review dynamics in agricultural land governance, and the potential this may have to enable land degradation or provide solutions towards LDN. The literature reveals agency shifts are taking place, where value chain actors are given increasing decision-making power in land governance. These agency shifts are manifested in two interrelated trends: First, through agricultural value chain coordination, such as contract farming, value chain actors increasingly influence land management decisions. Second, international large-scale land acquisitions and domestic larger-scale farms, both instances of intensified direct involvement of value chain with land management, are overtaking significant areas of land. These new arrangements are associated with agricultural expansion, and are additionally associated with unsustainable land management due to absent landowners, short-term interests, and high-intensity agriculture. However, we also find that value chain actors have both the tools and business cases to catalyze LDN solutions. We discuss how governments and other LDN brokers can motivate or push private actors to deploy private governance measures to avoid, reduce, and reverse land degradation. Successful implementation of LDN requires refocusing efforts to enable and, where necessary, constrain all actors with agency over land management, including value chain actors.

China has experienced unprecedented urbanization in the past few decades, fueled by population growth, economic development, and rural to urban migration. In the future, economic growth as well as rural to urban migration is expected to continue, but demographic scenarios indicate that the population of China will peak and subsequently decline. As a result, it is unsure how urban areas will develop after peak population. In this study we further develop the CLUMondo land system model to simulate land system changes in China until 2050. Our application represents a range of settlement systems, from dense urban areas to village landscapes, differing in their built-up area as well as their population density to enable the simulation of different settlement change trajectories. Our results show that a UN high population scenario in combination with a continued decline in population density leads to an increase of built-up land of about 48%. Conversely, the UN low population scenario in combination with a constant population density could be accommodated within the current amount of built-up land in China. Due to prevailing cropland protection policies, increase in built-up land will mostly lead to a loss of natural areas, hence our scenarios highlight the opportunity space for limiting land take and saving natural areas. This study also demonstrates the need for more nuanced representation of settlement systems for the assessment of land change trajectories.

The study of land systems aims to disentangle and understand the range of interactions between humans and the land they use. It takes, among others, environmental, biophysical, economic, political, technological, and social perspectives to comprehend how coupled human-environmental systems work, who decides over them, and how they could or should be transformed. Land systems take a central position in human livelihoods and environmental issues, and are a crucial parameter in many Sustainable Development Goals. This thesis starts from the premise that land systems are increasingly changing in ways that are poorly understood from a conventional land system science perspective. Conventional land system science rests on assumptions of mostly gradual processes, driven by a somewhat narrow range of actors, such as family farmers or local land administrations. However, large-scale land acquisitions, arguably the most dramatic land system changes of the 21st century, are definitively non-gradual, operate at scales that are orders of magnitude larger than typical smallholder dynamics, and are instigated by an international group of actors with a very different set of priorities than traditional actors. Pejoratively known as land grabs, large-scale land acquisitions globally cover an area over double the size of Germany, yet as a process, they have not been introduced in land system change models. This lacuna is significant, not only because large-scale land acquisitions cover large areas, but also because they profoundly change the relation that humans have with land as a resource. For example, the conversion of swidden landscapes to rubber monocultures in Southeast Asia causes a significant loss of agro-environmental diversity, but also a complete overhaul of livelihoods, culture, tradition, diets, and more. Furthermore, the constellation of decision-making concerning land is changed, and therefore, the possibilities for sustainable transitions are different. Upon closer in

There is widespread consensus among scientists, policy makers, and practitioners that agriculture should become more sustainable, while maintaining the ability to meet future food demand. However, there are still many diverging views on what sustainable intensification means, and how to get there. In this article, we present a conceptual framework to navigate agricultural intensification pathways. The conceptual framework aligns three research themes central to improving the sustainability of agriculture: (1) What are the social, economic, and environmental trade-offs of alternative agricultural intensification options? (2) How do land managers decide on intensification strategies, and how can the adoption of sustainable practices be made more attractive? (3) How do socio-political, technological, and environmental mega-trends and other drivers of change affect sustainable intensification measures and agricultural landscapes? The framework presented here goes beyond earlier frameworks by considering multiple dimensions of intensity and sustainability, drawing from both natural and social science theories. Also, it operates across spatial and temporal scales, and is outcome-focused while explicitly considering the linkages between decision making processes and sustainability outcomes. We argue that given these novelties the conceptual framework can serve as a blueprint to assess pathways towards sustainable agricultural intensification.

There is widespread consensus among scientists, policy makers, and practitioners that agriculture should become more sustainable, while maintaining the ability to meet future food demand. However, there are still many diverging views on what sustainable intensification means, and how to get there. In this article, we present a conceptual framework to navigate agricultural intensification pathways. The conceptual framework aligns three research themes central to improving the sustainability of agriculture: (1) What are the social, economic, and environmental trade-offs of alternative agricultural intensification options? (2) How do land managers decide on intensification strategies, and how can the adoption of sustainable practices be made more attractive? (3) How do socio-political, technological, and environmental mega-trends and other drivers of change affect sustainable intensification measures and agricultural landscapes? The framework presented here goes beyond earlier frameworks by considering multiple dimensions of intensity and sustainability, drawing from both natural and social science theories. Also, it operates across spatial and temporal scales, and is outcome-focused while explicitly considering the linkages between decision making processes and sustainability outcomes. We argue that given these novelties the conceptual framework can serve as a blueprint to assess pathways towards sustainable agricultural intensification.

There is widespread consensus among scientists, policy makers, and practitioners that agriculture should become more sustainable, while maintaining the ability to meet future food demand. However, there are still many diverging views on what sustainable intensification means, and how to get there. In this article, we present a conceptual framework to navigate agricultural intensification pathways. The conceptual framework aligns three research themes central to improving the sustainability of agriculture: (1) What are the social, economic, and environmental trade-offs of alternative agricultural intensification options? (2) How do land managers decide on intensification strategies, and how can the adoption of sustainable practices be made more attractive? (3) How do socio-political, technological, and environmental mega-trends and other drivers of change affect sustainable intensification measures and agricultural landscapes? The framework presented here goes beyond earlier frameworks by considering multiple dimensions of intensity and sustainability, drawing from both natural and social science theories. Also, it operates across spatial and temporal scales, and is outcome-focused while explicitly considering the linkages between decision making processes and sustainability outcomes. We argue that given these novelties the conceptual framework can serve as a blueprint to assess pathways towards sustainable agricultural intensification.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations GeneralAssembly in September 2015 include a target on land degradation neutrality (LDN)(SDG 15.3). Attaining and maintaining LDN requires addressing a land governancechallenge to steer land management towards avoiding, reducing and reversingland degradation. Uptake of LDN can be catalysed by creating an enabling environmentfor LDN and by designing and implementing measures that achieve multiplebenefits through safeguarding and enhancing well-being and livelihoods of peopleaffected by land degradation while improving a range of environmental conditions.This report provides science-based evidence on the configuration of the enablingenvironment for LDN and the opportunities for multiple benefits.Three approaches are used to delineate the evidence base. First, a literaturereview summarizes contemporary trends in land governance and land markets,and assesses the implications for LDN. Second, a survey among practitioners andexperts involved in the LDN process gauges their perceptions and expectationsabout the enabling environment, multiple benefits and general progress of LDN.Third, a review of LDN Target Setting Programme (TSP) country reports contextualizesthe results from the survey. Insights from these sources are triangulated toformulate key messages and policy options. These highlight the multidimensionalnature of the LDN enabling environment, which requires enhanced vertical andhorizontal integration of institutions and governance mechanisms.Further, land governance and secure land tenure need to be adapted to local conditions.Evidence highlights the dynamics of land governance and the increasingimpacts of global value chains on local land management, providing both challengesand opportunities for LDN implementation. LDN stakeholders have highexpectations for multiple well-being and livelihood benefits to be attained throughLDN implementation. Evidence indicates that the level of achieved multip

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015 include a target on land degradation neutrality (LDN) (SDG 15.3). Attaining and maintaining LDN requires addressing a land governance challenge to steer land management towards avoiding, reducing and reversing land degradation. Uptake of LDN can be catalysed by creating an enabling environment for LDN and by designing and implementing measures that achieve multiple benefits through safeguarding and enhancing well-being and livelihoods of people affected by land degradation while improving a range of environmental conditions. This report provides science-based evidence on the configuration of the enabling environment for LDN and the opportunities for multiple benefits. Three approaches are used to delineate the evidence base. First, a literature review summarizes contemporary trends in land governance and land markets, and assesses the implications for LDN. Second, a survey among practitioners and experts involved in the LDN process gauges their perceptions and expectations about the enabling environment, multiple benefits and general progress of LDN. Third, a review of LDN Target Setting Programme (TSP) country reports contextualizes the results from the survey. Insights from these sources are triangulated to formulate key messages and policy options. These highlight the multidimensional nature of the LDN enabling environment, which requires enhanced vertical and horizontal integration of institutions and governance mechanisms. Further, land governance and secure land tenure need to be adapted to local conditions. Evidence highlights the dynamics of land governance and the increasing impacts of global value chains on local land management, providing both challenges and opportunities for LDN implementation. LDN stakeholders have high expectations for multiple well-being and livelihood benefits to be attained through LDN implementation. Evidence indicates that

This paper investigates how large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) can be governed to avoid underuse and thereby spare room for other land claims, specifically nature conservation. LSLA underuse occurs when land in LSLAs is not converted to its intended use. Taking Cambodia as a case, we map converted and unconverted areas within LSLAs using remote sensing. We develop three scenarios of alternative LSLA policies until 2040, and use a land system change model to evaluate how governing the underuse of LSLAs affects overall land use. Specifically, we evaluate the impact of these policies on future tree cover, the size and spatial integrity of natural areas, and the potential these natural areas can offer to meet the conservation target of a successful tiger reintroduction. In 2015, only 32% of LSLA area was converted. Simulations suggest that both interventionist (reclaim unconverted areas) and preventive (avoid non-conversion) policies dramatically reduce underuse. Interventionist policies perform best in limiting tree cover loss and in preserving natural areas, but preventive measures lead to significantly less fragmentation. Noninterventionist policies (no enforced policies) make tiger reintroduction in the Eastern Plains impossible. Preventive policies with well-enforced protected areas succeed in creating the largest potential for tiger reintroduction. Our results suggest that Cambodia can reconcile LSLAs with tiger reintroduction in the Eastern Plains only when using preventive land use policies. In the absence of such policies, tiger survival in the Eastern Plains is unlikely and only the Cardamom or Virachey forest may offer such potential.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015 include a target on land degradation neutrality (LDN) (SDG 15.3). Attaining and maintaining LDN requires addressing a land governance challenge to steer land management towards avoiding, reducing and reversing land degradation. Uptake of LDN can be catalysed by creating an enabling environment for LDN and by designing and implementing measures that achieve multiple benefits through safeguarding and enhancing well-being and livelihoods of people affected by land degradation while improving a range of environmental conditions. This report provides science-based evidence on the configuration of the enabling environment for LDN and the opportunities for multiple benefits. Three approaches are used to delineate the evidence base. First, a literature review summarizes contemporary trends in land governance and land markets, and assesses the implications for LDN. Second, a survey among practitioners and experts involved in the LDN process gauges their perceptions and expectations about the enabling environment, multiple benefits and general progress of LDN. Third, a review of LDN Target Setting Programme (TSP) country reports contextualizes the results from the survey. Insights from these sources are triangulated to formulate key messages and policy options. These highlight the multidimensional nature of the LDN enabling environment, which requires enhanced vertical and horizontal integration of institutions and governance mechanisms. Further, land governance and secure land tenure need to be adapted to local conditions. Evidence highlights the dynamics of land governance and the increasing impacts of global value chains on local land management, providing both challenges and opportunities for LDN implementation. LDN stakeholders have high expectations for multiple well-being and livelihood benefits to be attained through LDN implementation. Evidence indicates that

This paper investigates how large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) can be governed to avoid underuse and thereby spare room for other land claims, specifically nature conservation. LSLA underuse occurs when land in LSLAs is not converted to its intended use. Taking Cambodia as a case, we map converted and unconverted areas within LSLAs using remote sensing. We develop three scenarios of alternative LSLA policies until 2040, and use a land system change model to evaluate how governing the underuse of LSLAs affects overall land use. Specifically, we evaluate the impact of these policies on future tree cover, the size and spatial integrity of natural areas, and the potential these natural areas can offer to meet the conservation target of a successful tiger reintroduction. In 2015, only 32% of LSLA area was converted. Simulations suggest that both interventionist (reclaim unconverted areas) and preventive (avoid non-conversion) policies dramatically reduce underuse. Interventionist policies perform best in limiting tree cover loss and in preserving natural areas, but preventive measures lead to significantly less fragmentation. Noninterventionist policies (no enforced policies) make tiger reintroduction in the Eastern Plains impossible. Preventive policies with well-enforced protected areas succeed in creating the largest potential for tiger reintroduction. Our results suggest that Cambodia can reconcile LSLAs with tiger reintroduction in the Eastern Plains only when using preventive land use policies. In the absence of such policies, tiger survival in the Eastern Plains is unlikely and only the Cardamom or Virachey forest may offer such potential.

Agricultural large-scale land acquisition (LSLA) is a process that is currently not captured by land change models. We present a novel land change modeling approach that includes processes governing LSLAs and simulates their interactions with other land systems. LSLAs differ from other land change processes in two ways: (1) their changes affect hundreds to thousands of contiguous hectares at a time, far surpassing other land change processes, e.g., smallholder agriculture, and (2) as policymakers value LSLA as desirable or undesirable, their agency significantly affects LSLA occurrence. To represent these characteristics in a land change model, we allocate LSLAs as multi-cell patches to represent them at scale while preserving detail in the representation of other dynamics. Moreover, LSLA land systems are characterized to respond to an explicit political demand for LSLA effects, in addition to a demand for various agricultural commodities. The model is applied to simulate land change in Laos until 2030, using three contrasting scenarios: (1) a target to quadruple the area of LSLA, (2) a moratorium for new LSLA, and (3) no target for LSLA. Scenarios yield drastically different land change trajectories despite having similar demands for agricultural commodities. A high level of LSLA impedes smallholders’ engagement with rubber or cash crops, while a moratorium on LSLA results in increased smallholder involvement in cash cropping and rubber production. This model goes beyond existing land change models by capturing the heterogeneity of scales of land change processes and the competition between different land users instigated by LSLA.

Agricultural large-scale land acquisition (LSLA) is a process that is currently not captured by land change models. We present a novel land change modeling approach that includes processes governing LSLAs and simulates their interactions with other land systems. LSLAs differ from other land change processes in two ways: (1) their changes affect hundreds to thousands of contiguous hectares at a time, far surpassing other land change processes, e.g., smallholder agriculture, and (2) as policymakers value LSLA as desirable or undesirable, their agency significantly affects LSLA occurrence. To represent these characteristics in a land change model, we allocate LSLAs as multi-cell patches to represent them at scale while preserving detail in the representation of other dynamics. Moreover, LSLA land systems are characterized to respond to an explicit political demand for LSLA effects, in addition to a demand for various agricultural commodities. The model is applied to simulate land change in Laos until 2030, using three contrasting scenarios: (1) a target to quadruple the area of LSLA, (2) a moratorium for new LSLA, and (3) no target for LSLA. Scenarios yield drastically different land change trajectories despite having similar demands for agricultural commodities. A high level of LSLA impedes smallholders’ engagement with rubber or cash crops, while a moratorium on LSLA results in increased smallholder involvement in cash cropping and rubber production. This model goes beyond existing land change models by capturing the heterogeneity of scales of land change processes and the competition between different land users instigated by LSLA.

An investigation was undertaken to better understand the hydrogeologic framework of the Rio Cobre and Rio Minho-Milk river basins, Jamaica, West Indies. A quasi three-dimensional finite-difference groundwater flow model was used to conceptualize flow conditions and establish a hydrogeologic budget of the region. The Rio Cobre and Rio Minho-Milk river basins lie on the Clarendon Block, an area with a complex geologic history. The geologic history includes: 1) the intrusion of calc-alkaline granites, 2) morphotectonic sedimentation, 3) three episodes of deformation by transpressional and transcurrent tectonics, 4) the deposition of a highly permeable, Tertiary carbonate platform, and 5) the development of near surface karst oriented with the major NNW-SSE fault trend in the basins. Since deposition, compression, faulting, and solution have modified the distribution and thickness of carbonate rocks impacting the ground-water flow of the region. The most notable features are the older NNW-SSE trend dip-slip faults and the younger E-W trend strike-slip faults, notably the South Coast Fault (SCF) formed during the Laramide Orogeny. The White Limestone aquifer is the principal aquifer of the Rio Cobre and Rio Minho-Milk river basins in the parishes of St. Catherine, Clarendon, and partly in Manchester. It is characterized by intercalated sequences of permeable rubbly and micritic carbonate rocks. The age of the rocks range from Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) to Recent. The permeability of the South Coast fault and the high hydraulic conductivity value associated with the Tertiary carbonate platform (480 m/d) in the Lower Rio Minho-Milk River basin control the gradient of the potentiometric surface and ground water flow in that region The agreement between the measured and the simulated hydraulic heads obtained for this steady-state model suggests that the values assigned to the hydraulic properties that characterize the ground-water flow of the White Limestone aquifer are

4 pages, original, Lettre de P. A. DeBonne à G[eorge] Pyke sur : le droit d'occuper le banc seigneurial des Jésuites à Beauport; le choix que les commissaires des biens des Jésuites doivent faire entre des fermiers de la seigneurie [de Notre-Dame-des-Anges] et DeBonne; des réparations faites au banc par DeBonne; son accord à payer pour le droit en question.

4 pages, original, Lettre de P.-A. DeBonne à Messire Fortier, curé de Saint-Jean (Ile d'Orléans), sur : un imprimé circulé par les amis de J. A. Panet, la perte électorale de Panet dans la Haute-Ville de Québec, la décision de Panet de se présenter en suite à l'île d'Orléans, avec l'appui de [Jérôme] Martineau, la loyauté de Fortier et des habitants de l'Ile, une suggestion à Fortier de mettre les habitants en garde contre les ruses de Panet et le désir de DeBonne que Fortier trouve un ""Honnête habitant aisé"" pour se présenter contre Panet.

4 pages

5 pages

4 pages

4 pages