Global Hotspots of Conflict Risk between Food Security and Biodiversity Conservation

This work contributes to the Belmont Forum/FACCE-JPI DEVIL project (grant number NE/M021327/1), and AM is supported by a BBSRC EastBio Studentship (http://www.eastscotbiodtp.ac.uk/). The Conservation Biology Institute are acknowledged for provision of data as well as BirdLife International, IUCN, NatureServe, and USGS for their contribution of the species range map data used in producing data available from the Biodiversity Mapping website (http://biodiversitymapping.org).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Impacts of land use, population, and climate change on global food security

Funding Information: This work contributes to the Belmont Forum/FACCE‐JPI DEVIL project (NE/M021327/1). AM is supported by a Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) EastBio Studentship ( http://www.eastscotbiodtp.ac.uk/ ) (grant number BB/M010996/1) and the Global Challenges Research Fund Trade, Development and the Environment Hub project (ES/S008160/1). Elke Stehfest and Jonathan Doelman are acknowledged for provision of land use data and we thank the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and helpful suggestions which have strengthened this manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Comparing the impact of future cropland expansion on global biodiversity and carbon storage across models and scenarios

Land-use change is a direct driver of biodiversity and carbon storage loss. Projections of future land-use often include notable expansion of cropland areas in response to changes in climate and food demand, although there are large uncertainties in results between models and scenarios. This study examines these uncertainties by comparing three different socio-economic scenarios (SSP1-3) across three models (IMAGE, GLOBIOM and PLUMv2). It assesses the impacts on biodiversity metrics and direct carbon loss from biomass and soil as a direct consequence of cropland expansion. Results show substantial variation between models and scenarios, with little overlap across all nine projections. Although SSP1 projects the least impact, there are still significant impacts projected. IMAGE and GLOBIOM project the greatest impact across carbon storage and biodiversity metrics due to both extent and location of cropland expansion. Furthermore, for all the biodiversity and carbon metrics used, there is a greater proportion of variance explained by model used. This demonstrates the importance of improving the accuracy of land-based models. Incorporating effects of land-use change in biodiversity impact assessments would also help better prioritise future protection of biodiverse and carbon-rich areas

Climate change mitigation in Zimbabwe and links to sustainable development

In 2021, Zimbabwe updated its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction target from a 33% reduction in per capita energy sector GHG emissions to a 40% reduction from all sectors, compared to 2030 baseline emission scenarios. This work aims to demonstrate how the actions identified in Zimbabwe's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) can achieve this updated target, and what development benefits could occur in Zimbabwe through the implementation of these actions. The magnitude of GHG emissions in Zimbabwe are modelled historically and to 2030 to quantify GHG emission reduction potentials, and contributions to selected sustainable development goal targets, from implementation of 28 mitigation measures. The estimated ∼37 million tonnes CO2-equivalent emissions emitted by Zimbabwe in 2017 are projected to increase by 109% to ∼77 million tonnes without implementation of any mitigation measures. The mitigation measures included in the updated NDC could reduce GHG emissions by 40% in 2030 compared to the baseline, while additional measures included in other plans and strategies in Zimbabwe could achieve a further 23% reduction. Implementing Zimbabwe's NDC could also lead to substantial development benefits locally, including to public health, biodiversity, and sustainable energy use. This assessment therefore provides a clear pathway to achieve Zimbabwe's updated climate change mitigation commitment, as the target is linked to the implementation of specific, concrete mitigation actions. It provides a practical example as to how methods to assess climate mitigation and development priorities can be integrated within climate change mitigation target-setting assessments. The more widespread adoption of prospective, quantitative assessment of development benefits from climate change mitigation actions could provide further motivation for more ambitious climate change action

Global projections of future cropland expansion to 2050 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon storage

Cropland expansion threatens biodiversity by driving habitat loss and impacts carbon storage through loss of biomass and soil carbon (C). There is a growing concern land use change (LUC) to cropland will result in a loss of ecosystem function and various ecosystem services essential for human health and wellbeing. This paper examines projections of future cropland expansion from an integrated assessment model IMAGE 3.0 under a 'business as usual' scenario and the direct impact on both biodiversity and C storage. By focusing on biodiversity hotspots and Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites, loss of habitat as well as potential impacts on endangered and critically endangered species are explored. With regards to C storage, the impact on both soil and vegetation standing C stocks are examined. We show that if projected trends are realised, there are likely to be severe consequences for these resources. Substantial loss of habitat in biodiversity hotspots such as Indo-Burma and the Philippians is expected as well as 50% of species in AZE sites losing part of their last remaining habitat. An estimated 13.7% of vegetation standing C stocks and 4.6% of soil C stocks are also projected to be lost in areas affected with Brazil and Mexico being identified as priorities in terms of both biodiversity and C losses from cropland expansion. Changes in policy to regulate projected cropland expansion, and increased measures to protect natural resources, are highly likely to be required to prevent these biodiversity and C losses in the future. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved