Synthesis and Review: Advancing agricultural greenhouse gas quantification

Reducing emissions of agricultural greenhouse gases (GHGs), such as methane and nitrous oxide, and sequestering carbon in the soil or in living biomass can help reduce the impact of agriculture on climate change while improving productivity and reducing resource use. There is an increasing demand for improved, low cost quantification of GHGs in agriculture, whether for national reporting to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), underpinning and stimulating improved practices, establishing crediting mechanisms, or supporting green products. This ERL focus issue highlights GHG quantification to call attention to our existing knowledge and opportunities for further progress. In this article we synthesize the findings of 21 papers on the current state of global capability for agricultural GHG quantification and visions for its improvement. We conclude that strategic investment in quantification can lead to significant global improvement in agricultural GHG estimation in the near term

Synthesis and Review: Advancing agricultural greenhouse gas quantification

Reducing emissions of agricultural greenhouse gases (GHGs), such as methane and nitrous oxide, and sequestering carbon in the soil or in living biomass can help reduce the impact of agriculture on climate change while improving productivity and reducing resource use. There is an increasing demand for improved, low cost quantification of GHGs in agriculture, whether for national reporting to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), underpinning and stimulating improved practices, establishing crediting mechanisms, or supporting green products. This ERL focus issue highlights GHG quantification to call attention to our existing knowledge and opportunities for further progress. In this article we synthesize the findings of 21 papers on the current state of global capability for agricultural GHG quantification and visions for its improvement. We conclude that strategic investment in quantification can lead to significant global improvement in agricultural GHG estimation in the near term

Evidence-Based Causal Chains for Linking Health, Development, and Conservation Actions

Sustainability challenges for nature and people are complex and interconnected, such that effective solutions require approaches and a common theory of change that bridge disparate disciplines and sectors. Causal chains offer promising approaches to achieving an integrated understanding of how actions affect ecosystems, the goods and services they provide, and ultimately, human well-being. Although causal chains and their variants are common tools across disciplines, their use remains highly inconsistent, limiting their ability to support and create a shared evidence base for joint actions. In this article, we present the foundational concepts and guidance of causal chains linking disciplines and sectors that do not often intersect to elucidate the effects of actions on ecosystems and society. We further discuss considerations for establishing and implementing causal chains, including nonlinearity, trade-offs and synergies, heterogeneity, scale, and confounding factors. Finally, we highlight the science, practice, and policy implications of causal chains to address real-world linked human-nature challenges

Society Is Ready for a New Kind of Science-Is Academia?

In her 1998 essay in Science (http://io.aibs.org/sci1), Jane Lubchenco boldly called for a new “Social Contract for Science,” one that would acknowledge the scope and scale of environmental problems and have “all scientists devote their energies and talents to the most pressing problems of the day in proportion to their importance.” We were entering a new millennium, and Lubchenco was worried that the scientific enterprise was unprepared to address the challenges related to climate change, pollution, health, and technology. Here we are, 20 years later, and our global challenges have only grown in complexity and urgency. Never before have we had such a clear understanding of our environmental crises and yet also been so far from delivering the investment in actionable research that Lubchenco called for. If the March for Science is any indication, researchers are ready to engage. But will universities — both leaders and the faculty who govern—acknowledge the need for reform?</p