Local costs of conservation exceed those borne by the global majority

Cost data are crucial in conservation planning to identify more efficient and equitable land use options. However, many studies focus on just one cost type and neglect others, particularly those borne locally. We develop, for a high priority conservation area, spatial models of two local costs that arise from protected areas: foregone agricultural opportunities and increased wildlife damage. We then map these across the study area and compare them to the direct costs of reserve management, finding that local costs exceed management costs. Whilst benefits of conservation accrue to the global community, significant costs are borne by those living closest. Where livelihoods depend upon opportunities forgone or diminished by conservation intervention, outcomes are limited. Activities can be displaced (leakage); rules can be broken (intervention does not work); or the intervention forces a shift in livelihood profiles (potentially to the detriment of local peoples’ welfare). These raise concerns for both conservation and development outcomes and timely consideration of local costs is vital in conservation planning tools and processes

High-resolution maps show that rubber causes substantial deforestation

Understanding the effects of cash crop expansion on natural forest is of fundamental importance. However, for most crops there are no remotely sensed global maps1, and global deforestation impacts are estimated using models and extrapolations. Natural rubber is an example of a principal commodity for which deforestation impacts have been highly uncertain, with estimates differing more than fivefold1,2,3,4. Here we harnessed Earth observation satellite data and cloud computing5 to produce high-resolution maps of rubber (10 m pixel size) and associated deforestation (30 m pixel size) for Southeast Asia. Our maps indicate that rubber-related forest loss has been substantially underestimated in policy, by the public and in recent reports6,7,8. Our direct remotely sensed observations show that deforestation for rubber is at least twofold to threefold higher than suggested by figures now widely used for setting policy4. With more than 4 million hectares of forest loss for rubber since 1993 (at least 2 million hectares since 2000) and more than 1 million hectares of rubber plantations established in Key Biodiversity Areas, the effects of rubber on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Southeast Asia could be extensive. Thus, rubber deserves more attention in domestic policy, within trade agreements and in incoming due-diligence legislation

Capturing the heterogeneity of sub-national production in global trade flows

With increasingly complex and globalised supply chains, agricultural production and related impacts are often far removed from the point of final demand and difficult to trace. Accurately linking consumption to production is essential to understand drivers, key actors, and to facilitate actionable adaptation strategies to minimise negative impacts and guarantee food security. Here a hybridised multiregional input-output (MRIO) model, IOTA, is introduced. IOTA utilises sub-national and national level production, trade and environmental data, national scale commodity-use data, and a global economic MRIO, to link sub-national production and associated impacts to regional final consumption. In an example case-study, applying the model to Brazilian soy production and related land use for EU consumption, the relative levels of production in Brazilian states to meet EU demand differ from those of total production, and differ further still between the EU's constituent countries. Patterns can also vary considerably within a country's consumption profile depending on the sector of purchase. The linking of consumption to sub-national production and trade allows for more accurate and meaningful connections to be made between consumer behaviour and the associated impacts and risks. This enhanced understanding of consumption-driven impacts in turn informs, and allows for, more targeted and effective policy interventions to tackle the pressures and risks associated with agricultural commodity production for a global market

Co-productive agility and four collaborative pathways to sustainability transformations

Co-production, the collaborative weaving of research and practice by diverse societal actors, is argued to play an important role in sustainability transformations. Yet, there is still poor understanding of how to navigate the tensions that emerge in these processes. Through analyzing 32 initiatives worldwide that co-produced knowledge and action to foster sustainable social-ecological relations, we conceptualize ‘co-productive agility’ as an emergent feature vital for turning tensions into transformations. Co-productive agility refers to the willingness and ability of diverse actors to iteratively engage in reflexive dialogues to grow shared ideas and actions that would not have been possible from the outset. It relies on embedding knowledge production within processes of change to constantly recognize, reposition, and navigate tensions and opportunities. Co-productive agility opens up multiple pathways to transformation through: (1) elevating marginalized agendas in ways that maintain their integrity and broaden struggles for justice; (2) questioning dominant agendas by engaging with power in ways that challenge assumptions, (3) navigating conflicting agendas to actively transform interlinked paradigms, practices, and structures; (4) exploring diverse agendas to foster learning and mutual respect for a plurality of perspectives. We explore six process considerations that vary by these four pathways and provide a framework to enable agility in sustainability transformations. We argue that research and practice spend too much time closing down debate over different agendas for change – thereby avoiding, suppressing, or polarizing tensions, and call for more efforts to facilitate better interactions among different agendas

Co-productive agility and four collaborative pathways to sustainability transformations

Co-production, the collaborative weaving of research and practice by diverse societal actors, is argued to play an important role in sustainability transformations. Yet, there is still poor understanding of how to navigate the tensions that emerge in these processes. Through analyzing 32 initiatives worldwide that co-produced knowledge and action to foster sustainable social-ecological relations, we conceptualize ‘co-productive agility’ as an emergent feature vital for turning tensions into transformations. Co-productive agility refers to the willingness and ability of diverse actors to iteratively engage in reflexive dialogues to grow shared ideas and actions that would not have been possible from the outset. It relies on embedding knowledge production within processes of change to constantly recognize, reposition, and navigate tensions and opportunities. Co-productive agility opens up multiple pathways to transformation through: (1) elevating marginalized agendas in ways that maintain their integrity and broaden struggles for justice; (2) questioning dominant agendas by engaging with power in ways that challenge assumptions, (3) navigating conflicting agendas to actively transform interlinked paradigms, practices, and structures; (4) exploring diverse agendas to foster learning and mutual respect for a plurality of perspectives. We explore six process considerations that vary by these four pathways and provide a framework to enable agility in sustainability transformations. We argue that research and practice spend too much time closing down debate over different agendas for change – thereby avoiding, suppressing, or polarizing tensions, and call for more efforts to facilitate better interactions among different agendas

A spatially explicit approach to assessing commodity-driven fertilizer use and its impact on biodiversity

Global demand for food, including rising consumption of meat and dairy products, is increasing pressure on the environment and natural resources, often in locations distant from points of consumption. To identify and quantify consumer driven impacts and the components of the supply chain where sustainability interventions will be most effective, spatially explicit consumption-linked indicators that encompass environmental risks are required. Large amounts of phosphorus fertilizers are used in Brazilian soybean cultivation, which potentially cause eutrophication and impact freshwater species. We use a sub-national trade model to develop a spatially explicit approach for assessing commodity-driven phosphorus fertilizer use and its potential impact on biodiversity linked to four key consumers. The use of phosphorus for embedded consumption per capita of Brazilian soybean in China, the EU, the UK, and Sweden are estimated at municipal level and combined with metrics that influence losses of phosphorus to create a normalised relative risk index. The relative risk index is presented in geospatial visualisations to explore geographical patterns of risk to freshwater biodiversity and make the link between consumer and producer countries less obscure. The results indicate high phosphorus-linked species risk in municipalities within Mato Grosso, Rio Grande do Sul, Paraná, and Goiás. Sweden and the UK generate the highest relative risk and the geographical patterns of risk differ between the investigated consuming countries, showing that smaller countries can have relatively large impacts at a spatially explicit scale. In the Amazon biome, risk of nutrient losses and biodiversity are relatively high, creating concerns as soybean production is expanding into the area. The results and methodological approach can contribute to understanding of accountability, agency, and increased transparency for the governance of global supply chains, necessary for enabling transformations towards sustainable food systems

Sustainability gridlock in a global agricultural commodity chain: reframing the soy–meat food system

Market governance is viewed as a potentially effective mechanism to achieve more sustainable global production-to-consumption systems when state regulation between production and consumption regions is uncoordinated. Through examining a key global food sector, the soy–meat value chain, we assess how effective market governance is. In this sector, numerous supply chain approaches have proliferated ranging from the first deforestation-free supply chain sectoral standard, to eco-labelling, and collective actions on various topics. To assess how effective these policy instruments are, we examine the choices in sustainability made by lead companies in the sector and then analyse how coordinated these initiatives are across the supply chain. We then assess, via a litereture review, which actors are creating ‘rules of the game’ for sustainability, and the impacts of these on coordination and on-the-ground impacts. We show that companies along the soy–meat value chain have made different sustainability commitments probably because they are facing very different risk factors: those upstream such as soy traders are concerned mainly with international pressures associated with deforestation, whilst those further downstream in the supply chain have from very loose to very ambitious sustainability objectives on various topics associated with the sector including animal welfare, climate change and human-health. We found that these supply chain initiatives are not addressing sufficiently the cause and effect of key drivers of sectoral impacts such as land appreciation and the global demand for cheap meat. Further, because the soy–meat sector is vertically integrated both upstream and downstream, this may result in comparable bargaining power among business actors such that none of these actors may be able to impose sustainability norms without inferring cost onto themselves or causing perverse outcomes. A lack of coordination in market governance is translating into a lack of uptake in various instruments (e.g. certification) or transference of cost and responsibilities onto soy producers (e.g. deforestation free standard such as the Soy Moratorium). A perverse outcome of the latter is the displacement of impacts onto other regions and commodities. In light of these challenges in market governance, we encourage more emphasis on network governance, which involves more social interactions that build trust, vision and exchanges of information and resources (e.g. between Brazil and China and Europe), these being more important in early phases of transitions for systems facing sustainability gridlock

Using changes in agricultural utility to quantify future climate-induced risk to conservation

Much of the biodiversity-related climate change impacts research has focused on the direct effects to species and ecosystems. Far less attention has been paid to the potential ecological consequences of human efforts to address the effects of climate change, which may equal or exceed the direct effects of climate change on biodiversity. One of the most significant human responses is likely to be mediated through changes in the agricultural utility of land. As farmers adapt their practices to changing climates, they may increase pressure on some areas that are important to conserve (conservation lands) whereas lessening it on others. We quantified how the agricultural utility of South African conservation lands may be altered by climate change. We assumed that the probability of an area being farmed is linked to the economic benefits of doing so, using land productivity values to represent production benefit and topographic ruggedness as a proxy for costs associated with mechanical workability. We computed current and future values of maize and wheat production in key conservation lands using the DSSAT4.5 model and 36 crop-climate response scenarios. Most conservation lands had, and were predicted to continue to have, low agricultural utility because of their location in rugged terrain. However, several areas were predicted to maintain or gain high agricultural utility and may therefore be at risk of near-term or future conversion to cropland. Conversely, some areas were predicted to decrease in agricultural utility and may therefore prove easier to protect from conversion. Our study provides an approximate but readily transferable method for incorporating potential human responses to climate change into conservation planning. © 2013 Society for Conservation Biology