New actors and scales of agriculture:A land system science perspective

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 inspection, large-scale land acquisitions are merely the most visible manifestation of a more general trend of new actors, changing land systems at new scales. In Sub-Saharan Africa, a trend is being signaled of an emergence of medium-scale farms replacing smallholders, and, as a consequence, commercial agriculture replacing semi-subsistence agriculture. With limited empirical data, it is unclear whether this is an organically appearing structural transformation or an elite capture of land with similar characteristics as large-scale land acquisitions, nor is it clear what the potential consequences are for livelihoods or the environment. Even when farm scales are not perceivably shifting, decision-making concerning land is: value chain actors usurp some of the agency concerning land management from smallholders or state actors, for example by using contract farming. Land system science wishes to understand why land systems have the characteristics they have and change the way they change. To do so, new actors and new scales of changes can no longer be disregarded as mere aberrations. This leads to the overall objective of this thesis, which is to develop concepts and methods to integrate new actors and scales of agriculture into land system science. In pursuing this objective, four research questions are posed. RQ1: What are the land system characteristics related to new agricultural actors? RQ2: How can new agricultural actors, and associated scales of land system change, be integrated in land system models? RQ3: What are the objectives of new actors in agriculture and how do these objectives align or misalign with environmental or rural development objectives? RQ4: How do new actors and arrangements in agriculture provide opportunities for environmental management and rural development? I address these questions in six chapters. A summary of these chapters is given in the thesis

Agency shifts in agricultural land governance and their implications for land degradation neutrality

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

The geography of megatrends affecting European agriculture

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

Exploring agricultural landscape change from the second half of the twentieth century onwards: combining aerial imagery with farmer perspectives.

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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-024-01914-z

Developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change: An application for Europe

Agriculture plays a central role in achieving most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable intensi- fication (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 sus- tainability 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 pro- cesses 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

Farmer surveys in Europe suggest that specialized, intensive farms were more likely to perceive negative impacts from COVID-19.

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. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13593-022-00820-5

New actors and scales of agriculture: A land system science perspective

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 inspection, large-scale land acquisitions are merely the most visible manifestation of a more general trend of new actors, changing land systems at new scales. In Sub-Saharan Africa, a trend is being signaled of an emergence of medium-scale farms replacing smallholders, and, as a consequence, commercial agriculture replacing semi-subsistence agriculture. With limited empirical data, it is unclear whether this is an organically appearing structural transformation or an elite capture of land with similar characteristics as large-scale land acquisitions, nor is it clear what the potential consequences are for livelihoods or the environment. Even when farm scales are not perceivably shifting, decision-making concerning land is: value chain actors usurp some of the agency concerning land management from smallholders or state actors, for example by using contract farming. Land system science wishes to understand why land systems have the characteristics they have and change the way they change. To do so, new actors and new scales of changes can no longer be disregarded as mere aberrations. This leads to the overall objective of this thesis, which is to develop concepts and methods to integrate new actors and scales of agriculture into land system science. In pursuing this objective, four research questions are posed. RQ1: What are the land system characteristics related to new agricultural actors? RQ2: How can new agricultural actors, and associated scales of land system change, be integrated in land system models? RQ3: What are the objectives of new actors in agriculture and how do these objectives align or misalign with environmental or rural development objectives? RQ4: How do new actors and arrangements in agriculture provide opportunities for environmental management and rural development? I address these questions in six chapters. A summary of these chapters is given in the thesis

Opinie: ‘De eisen die de VU stelt aan fossiele bedrijven zijn nobel, maar naïef’

De VU neemt voortaan afstand van bedrijven die zich niet inspannen de klimaatdoelen van Parijs te halen. Waarom dan nog wel een dialoog met de fossiele industrie? Dat vragen dr. Debonne en dr. Doci zich af

Representing large-scale land acquisitions in land use change scenarios for the Lao PDR

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