Resilience and the Transformation of Food and Land Use Systems. Discussion paper prepared for the Food and Land Use Coalition (FOLU)

The transformation of food and land use systems has been recognized in its central importance of attaining sustainable development paths. Recent shocks and crises events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ukraine war and protracted conflicts, weather and climate extremes, have revealed the vulnerabilities of the current food and land use systems architecture. To secure long-term development gains, the resilience of food and land use systems needs to be strengthened. Reflecting on the evolution of resilience concepts, we argue that resilience building efforts must be seen as an integral part of sustainability transformations of food and land use systems. Resilience should not be understood as a static but as a dynamic, iterative process, which combines elements of absorptive, coping, adaptive and transformative capacities and is evaluated over time in its effectiveness to ensure continuous functionality of food and land use systems in times of rapid change. Here we offer a number of considerations for building resilience into food and land use systems in a dynamic world

Biodiversity and agriculture: rapid evidence review

Agriculture is the largest single source of environmental degradation, responsible for over 30% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 70% of freshwater use and 80% of land conversion: it is the single largest driver of biodiversity loss (Foley et al. 2011, 2005; IPBES 2019; Willett et al. 2019). Agriculture also underpins poor human health, contributing to 11 million premature deaths annually. While too many still struggle from acute hunger, a growing number of individuals, including in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), struggle to access healthy foods. Greater consideration for, and integration of, biodiversity in agriculture is a key solution space for improving health, eliminating hunger and achieving nature-positive development objectives. This rapid evidence review documents the best available evidence of agriculture’s relationships with biodiversity, drawing on the contributions of leading biodiversity experts, and recommends actions that can be taken to move towards more biodiversity/nature-positive production through the delivery of integrated agricultural solutions on climate, biodiversity, nutrition and livelihoods. The analysis, which takes a whole-of-food-system approach, brings together a large body of evidence. It accounts for aspects not typically captured in a stand-alone primary piece of research, and indicates where there are critical gaps

A whole earth approach to nature-positive food: biodiversity and agriculture

Agriculture is the largest single source of environmental degradation, responsible for over 30% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 70% of freshwater use and 80% of land conversion: it is the single largest driver of biodiversity loss (Foley JA, Science 309:570–574, 2005, Nature 478:337–342, 2011; IPBES. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES Secretariat, Bonn, 2019; Willett W et al. The Lancet 393:447–492, 2019). Agriculture also underpins poor human health, contributing to 11 million premature deaths annually. While too many still struggle from acute hunger, a growing number of individuals, including in low to middle-income countries (LMICs), struggle to access healthy foods. Greater consideration for, and integration of, biodiversity in agriculture is a key solution space for improving health, eliminating hunger and achieving nature-positive development objectives. This rapid evidence review documents the best available evidence of agriculture’s relationships with biodiversity, drawing on the contributions of leading biodiversity experts, and recommends actions that can be taken to move towards more biodiversity/nature-positive production through the delivery of integrated agricultural solutions for climate, biodiversity, nutrition and livelihoods. The analysis, which takes a whole-of-food-system approach, brings together a large body of evidence. It accounts for aspects not typically captured in a stand-alone primary piece of research and indicates where there are critical gaps.Fil: Declerck, Fabrice A.J.. The Alliance of Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture ; FranciaFil: Koziell, Izabella T.. The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development; NepalFil: Benton, Tim. Chatham House; Reino UnidoFil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas. Centro Cientifico Tecnologico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones En Recursos Naturales, Agroecologia y Desarrollo Rural. - Universidad Nacional de Rio Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones En Recursos Naturales, Agroecologia y Desarrollo Rural.; ArgentinaFil: Kremen, Claire. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Maron, Martine. University of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Rumbaitis Del Rio, Cristina. World Resources Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Sidhu, Aman. The Alliance of Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agricultura; FranciaFil: Wirths, Jonathan. The Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers ; Sri LankaFil: Clark, Michael. University of Oxford; Reino UnidoFil: Dickens, Chris. International Water Management Institute; Sri LankaFil: Estrada Carmona, Natalia. The Alliance of Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture ; FranciaFil: Fremier, Alexander K.. Washington State University; Estados UnidosFil: Jones, Sarah K.. The Alliance of Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture ; FranciaFil: Khoury, Colin K.. The Alliance of Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture ; FranciaFil: Lal, Rattan. Ohio State University; Estados UnidosFil: Obersteiner, Michael. University of Oxford; Reino UnidoFil: Remans, Roseline. The Alliance of Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture ; FranciaFil: Rusch, Adrien. Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique; FranciaFil: Schulte, Lisa A.. Natural Resource Ecology and Management; Estados UnidosFil: Simmonds, Jeremy. University of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Stringer, Lindsay C.. University of York; Reino UnidoFil: Weber, Christopher. World Wide Fund For Nature; Estados UnidosFil: Winowiecki, Leigh. World Agroforestry Center; Keni

Introduction to integrating ecology and poverty reduction.

At the writing of this book, the world is at a critical crossroads. The year 2010 was the United Nations (U.N.) year of biodiversity and the year when the targets of the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD), which was signed in 2002, were supposed to have been met. The CBD aimed to achieve by 2010 a �significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national levels as a contribution to poverty reduction and to the benefit of all life on Earth.� However, progress remains elusive � species extinction rates continue to be 1,000 times greater than background rates in the geological record (Secretariat of the CBD 2006; Walpole et al. 2009, 2010; Butchart et al. 2010)

Integrating ecology and poverty reduction. The application of ecology in development solutions.

At the writing of this book, the world is at a critical crossroads. The year 2010 was the United Nations (U.N.) year of biodiversity and the year when the targets of the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD), which was signed in 2002, were supposed to have been met. The CBD aimed to achieve by 2010 a ?significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national levels as a contribution to poverty reduction and to the benefit of all life on Earth.? However, progress remains elusive ? species extinction rates continue to be 1,000 times greater than background rates in the geological record (Secretariat of the CBD 2006; Walpole et al. 2009, 2010; Butchart et al. 2010)

Conclusion: integrating ecology and poverty reduction.

As discussed throughout the chapters of the two volumes comprising this series on Integrating Ecology and Poverty Reduction, in recent years an increasing amount of global attention has focused on the role of the natural environment in contributing to poverty reduction (McNeely and Scherr 2003; Ash and Jenkins 2007; World Bank 2007; Tekelenburg et al. 2009; Chivian and Bernstein 2008; Galizzi and Herklotz 2008). These volumes complement and build upon this growing body of work, but look specifically at the ecological dimensions of multiple development challenges related to rural poverty and the ways in which ecological science can be applied to address some of these challenges

Managing health risks in a changing climate: Red Cross operations in East Africa and Southeast Asia

While climate variability and change affect global patterns of disease, there are few examples of methods that effectively integrate climate into health programming. This study examines a Red Cross Red Crescent pilot project in Kenya, Tanzania, Vietnam, and Indonesia that incorporated climate information and considerations in health operations. Our investigation looks at three elements of programming: baseline community perceptions of climate and health, integration of climate information in operations, and resulting community-level risk reduction behaviour. (1) Through community focus groups, semi-structured interviews, and household surveys, our research reveals that potential health effects of climate variability and change are a key concern at the community level. (2) Project implementors used climate information to design educational materials and health contingency plans to inform when and where disease prevention activities should be concentrated. This climate-based disease anticipation and improved sharing of incidence data aimed to quickly detect and respond to changing disease patterns in a variable climate. (3) Subsequently, community-level risk reduction behaviour significantly increased in project locations. This pilot is evidence that climate information and considerations can be readily integrated into health programming to account for changing risks, using existing disease prevention techniques to address priority concerns of vulnerable communities

A whole earth approach to nature positive food: biodiversity and agriculture

Agriculture is the largest single source of environmental degradation, responsible for over 30% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 70% of freshwater use and 80% of land conversion: it is the single largest driver of biodiversity loss (Foley et al. 2011, 2005; IPBES 2019; Willett et al. 2019). Agriculture also underpins poor human health, contributing to 11 million premature deaths annually. While too many still struggle from acute hunger, a growing number of individuals, including in low to middle-income countries (LMICs), struggle to access healthy foods. Greater consideration for, and integration of, biodiversity in agriculture is a key solution space for improving health, eliminating hunger and achieving nature-positive development objectives. This rapid evidence review, documents the best available evidence of agriculture’s relationships with biodiversity, drawing on the contributions of leading biodiversity experts, and recommends actions that can be taken to move towards more biodiversity/nature-positive production through the delivery of integrated agricultural solutions on climate, biodiversity, nutrition and livelihoods. The analysis, which takes a whole-of-food- system approach, brings together a large body of evidence. It accounts for aspects not typically captured in a stand-alone primary piece of research and indicates where there are critical gaps