Download Zero-order draft (31st March 2017)

GEO 6Land (State and trends)
CLAs: Nikolai Dronin, Andrés Guhl
1. Introduction. Why is land related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
(Andres Guhl)
Land resources are essential for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Land is
where a large proportion of food is produced, therefore it is closely related to Goal 2: End hunger,
achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. Specific targets
for this goal include ensuring access to sufficient, healthy and nutritious food, specially the most
vulnerable groups. Furthermore, it is closely related to increasing the productivity through
sustainable food production systems that are resilient under the increasing threats of global warming
and to maintain and improve the quality of soil for future generations. Men and women do not have
equal access to land resources in many parts of the world (SDG 4). Sustainable and resilient food
production systems also require to work towards more gender equality and other forms of inequality
(SDG 10)
However, land resources do not only involve food production but also where people live
and where most economic activities take place. Most people live now in urban areas and this poses
additional challenges for land management: how to deal with pollutants and chemicals that are
hazardous for people and the environment and how these substances impact more strongly
vulnerable population groups. Pollution on land is becoming an important pressure, and waste and
chemicals coming from urban centers, agriculture, industrial and extractive activities, among others,
are impacting the health of people and the functioning of many processes in the environment (SDG
3).
Additionally, human use of land resources is degrading many ecosystem services, or nature’s
contributions to people. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment clearly presented evidence that we
are living beyond our means (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2004) and that ecosystem´s ability
to provide us with food, fiber, forest resources and fodder are threatened. Although there have been
important improvements in land management, SDG 15: “Sustainably manage forests, combat
desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, halt biodiversity loss” implies that land resources
are degrading and the call for improved resource management from the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment has not been met. A healthy planet is the basis for development, and sustainable landresource management is at the core of this challenge.
Many issues have happened since GEO 5, which was published in 2012. An assessment of
the effectiveness of policies and management practices must begin with what were the important
messages from GEO 5, what are the key drivers and pressures of environmental change on land
resources, and what are their state and trends.
2. What has happened since GEO-5
(To be developed CLAs)
This entire section, including the Emerging issues will take about 1 page. It will be developed
for the First-order draft deadline (April 15th, 2017)
2.1 Emerging Issues
(To be developed)
Once we have the entire draft it will be possible to highlight emerging issues. Examples
include issues such as food trade and food security, new chemicals, land pollution, plastics on land,
among others. Most of these topics are flagged by Cross-cutting theme authors
3. Key state and trends
3.1 Climate change
(Andrei Kirilenko)
3.1.1 Impact on land productivity
On land, rising global temperatures have already impacted negatively agriculture. Shorter
growing seasons have slowed yield growth and, in the case of wheat and maize production, have
lowered global yields (Lobell and Gourdji 2012). Increased temperatures result in lower maize and
wheat yields: production declines of 3.8% and 5% respectively were observed between 1980 and
2008, relative to the yields that would otherwise have been achieved in the absence of climate
change (see figure x) (Lobell et al. 2011). Global yields of rice and soybean were less affected by
climate change owing to inter-regional differences: while some regions saw reductions in production,
others saw yield growth because of increased temperatures, with the result that aggregate levels
shifted only minimally (Lobell et al. 2011).
Figure x: Estimated net impact of climate trends for 1980-2008 on crop yields by
country (Lobell et al. 2011).
Increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere may benefit yields in certain regions
through greater CO2 fertilization (McGrath and Lobell 2013), while warmer temperatures could
bring yield gains in high-latitude regions (IPCC AR5 WGII). At a global level, however, yields are
expected to suffer as average temperatures and ozone concentrations in the troposphere continue to
rise beyond critical thresholds or 'tipping points' (IPCC AR5 WGII; Schlenker and Roberts 2009). In
tropical regions, the effects of higher temperatures are greater than in temperate zones: yields of
maize and wheat have been found to decline with a temperature rise of 1o -2oC (IPCC AR5 WGII),
while maize yields in temperate regions exhibit similar declines at warming of 3 o - 5 oC (IPCC AR5
WGII).Shifting rainfall patterns may benefit certain regions, but greater variability in precipitation
poses a risk to the 70% of global agriculture that is rain fed (IPCC AR5 WGII).
Climate change can also exacerbate biotic and abiotic stresses on agriculture. Higher
temperatures have led to increased distribution of certain weeds and pests (Pautosso et al. 2012) and
have exacerbated existing water stress with the result of limiting yields (Lobell et al. 2013).
Attribution analyses have demonstrated the links between human-driven climate change and
extreme weather events that have severe impacts on agriculture, including the Russian heatwave in
2010 and the 2012 drought in the US Midwest which brought a 25% in maize yield (Coghlan et al.
2014; Rosenzweig et al. 2013).
3.1.2 Climate disasters and devastation of agriculture
Land degradation, land use change, land loss, and poor land management can all
contribute to the increased vulnerability of rural populations by increasing food insecurity as well as
diminishing the sustainability of agricultural livelihoods. In turn, those dependent on the land see
their living conditions and assets decline alongside their capacity to adapt to environmental changes.
These impacts (in addition to other social, political, demographic factors) can exacerbate out-
migration to urban areas by people seeking economic opportunities, better living conditions and
improved food security (Hummel 2016). Unfortunately, the most vulnerable, lacking financial,
human, and social capital, commonly move in precarious conditions and arrive in overpopulated,
slum areas, placing them at increased risk for environmental disasters, such as flooding in coastal
African megacities.
Disasters such as floods, droughts and storms have a strong impact on food security,
particularly through the agricultural pathway. In fact, in developing countries the agriculture sector
absorbs about 22 percent of the total damage and losses caused by natural hazards (FAO 2015).
More than 80 percent of the damage and losses caused by drought is to agriculture, especially
livestock and crop production (FAO 2015). Although disasters may jeopardize many rural and
agricultural livelihoods directly, the devastation to agricultural production and development can
incite negative effects across national economies and have devastating effects on food security,
including in urban areas. The sustainable management of land and associated resources, such as
water, food and energy, are central to maintaining peace, ensuring livelihoods, macroeconomic
development, strong governance and trust in government, and the reintegration of conflict-affected
and displaced populations, including former combatants (Unruh and Williams, 2013) (Box. ).
Box. The Syrian conflict: droughts and land degradation as factors.
The Syrian conflict has sometimes been labelled as a ‘climate conflict’, as many observers
have pointed out that the root causes of the Syrian upheaval could be found in the drought that had
affected the country between 2007 and 2010 (Kelley et al. 2015). It was the worst drought in the
instrumental record, causing widespread crop failure and a mass migration of farming families to
urban centers. The most significant consequence of the drought was the migration of as many as 1.5
million people from rural farming areas to the peripheries of urban centers, which led to a spike in
food prices and eventually to the upheaval of the population (Ibid.). the government was unable to
provide migrants with housing, jobs and economic opportunities. This combination of factors
caused a terrible war that has now lasted for more than five years and left the country in ruins, with
about two thirds of its 22-million population displaced, mostly within Syria. About 5 million Syrians
have found refuge outside of the country, mostly in the neighbouring countries of Jordan, Lebanon
and Turkey. Only a minority of them have found asylum in Europe.
3.1.3. Land use change and carbon stock
Approximately 20% of fossil fuel emissions of CO2 are absorbed by land ecosystems (Arenth
et al., 2017); this change in the terrestrial carbon stock includes carbon source from processes such
as land use/land cover change and carbon sinks from e.g. afforestation and reforestation. Satellite
imagery show high rates of deforestation and reforestation processes globally with 2.3 million km2 of
forest land lost and 0.87 million km2 of forests gained from 2000 to 2012 (Hansen et al., 2013). The
largest and fastest loss happens in tropics, which are responsible for 32% of the annual forest loss;
almost half of it in South America (Hansen et al., 2013).
Climate change affects forest productivity in multiple ways, including increased stress from
droughts (Williams et al., 2013), wildfires, insects, pathogens, and windstorms (IPCC 2013 WG2
Chapter 4), Additionally, forests productivity is directly affected by “CO2 fertilization” effect
(enhanced photosynthesis under elevated levels of CO2 – see Farquhar, 1997), especially where
water availability is a limiting factor. The free-air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE) experiments
are being conducted to determine the potential response and limitations of the CO2 fertilization
effect (for review see Norby et al., 2015). Meanwhile, satellite based observations of increased green
foliage in warm and arid environments suggest that carbon fertilization has a significant contribution
to productivity on land.
In total, net land use change source is estimated at ~1.1 GtC/yr in 2000s (Houghton et al.,
2010) and residual land sink at ~2.5 GtC/yr (IPCC WG1 AR5 Ch 6). Estimation of these
components carry high uncertainties and their volumes were possibly underestimated until recent
(Arenth et al., 2017). An example of the processes contributing to emissions of carbon from land
include deforestation fires (i.e. fires inducing rapid replacement of forest vegetation); the SeptemberOctober 2015 deforestation fires in Indonesia were estimated to release more CO2 per day than the
total daily fossil fuel burning in the entire European Union (11.3 vs. 8.9 Mt CO2/day, respectively –
Huijnen et al., 2015) .
The rate of increase in global CO2 concentration is correlated with ENSO with higher CO2
release into the atmosphere during the El Niño years (such as in 2015 – 2016), suggesting that
drying tropical lands and more intense forest fires generate higher pulse of CO2 (Betts et al., 2016).
Deforestation contributes about 6.22 Gt CO2e and forest degradation contributes 2.1Bt CO2e
emissions, the latter includes 53% from harvesting timber, 30% from harvesting wood, and 17%
from forest fires. In different countries, the percentage of CO2 emissions coming from degradation
ranges from ~100% to ~ 0% with higher proportion of CO2 emissions coming from forest
degradation vs. deforestation occur in more arid environment (2005 – 2010 data, see Pearson et al.,
2017).
3.2 Land use dynamics
(Andrés Guhl. Need to incorporate other dynamics, for example agriculture, urbanization,
coastal areas and population, biofuel production, among others.)
Land is extremely dynamic. Land cover is permanently changing. Even in areas where land
cover apparently remains the same, it changes either as seasonal (i.e. wet vs. dry season) or ecological
(i.e. succession after disturbance) processes takes place. There are also changes associated with
episodic intense natural processes (i.e. volcanic eruption, tsunami), but human land use, mostly
agriculture, is currently responsible for most of the changes of land (Haberl, 2105; de Ruiter et al
2017). Agricultural production needs to double in the period 2005-2050 to keep up with an
increasing food demand (Tilman et al 2011). Although FAO estimates that there are about 1400
Mha available for expansion (Alexandratos and Bruinsma 2012), most of agricultural expansion
takes place in forests, where critical nature benefits to people are produced (Machovina et al 2015).
Therefore, from a sustainability point of view, replacing less disturbed ecosystems (including forests
and grasslands, among others) into agricultural fields, grazing lands or forest plantations is not a
desirable option.
Land resources can degrade, and when possible, people abandon those areas and expand
production elsewhere. As land becomes abandoned, in most instances it might slowly restart to
recover: vegetation and wildlife begin to reclaim the spaces left by the abandoned land use. For
2000-2010 in Latin America, indicate that, despite the prevalence of deforestation (541835 km2),
regrowth of woody vegetation (362430 km2) is also taking place in the region (Aide et al 2013). This
indicates than land-dynamics is more complex than just the transformation and degradation of land
resources, but also their regrowth. However, in some instances, land is so degraded that it cannot
recuperate.
Urbanization and lifestyle changes (i.e. technology, dietary change) generate significant
pressures that require more resources (food, fibers, minerals, among others). The demands for these
resources in some locations generate linkages with other locations where they are produced. In
cities, urban land uses usually take over formerly agricultural lands (van Vliet et al 2017), and the
demand for food and fiber can transform land use in places that are far away (van Vliet et al 2017;
Seto et al 2012). These teleconnections are a powerful force in land dynamics, as they link the
transformation of land covers in one location with the demand of certain commodities in other
places of the world. Global economic forces are shaping the land cover patterns.
The conversion of forests is an excellent example of how land dynamics and economic and
demographic pressures are related. As population grows and changes its lifestyle, there is need for
more land resources. In the 1990s, about 10.6 million hectares per year of natural forests were lost.
For the period 2010-2015, this rate had decreased to 6.5 million ha/yr. Simultaneously, the growth
rate of forest plantation is about 3,2 mha/yr,, and by 2015 they accounted for 7% of the global
forest area in 2015 mostly concentrated in the temperate regions (FAO 2015). Although yearly forest
loss has dropped drastically, it is still very significant in many areas of the world, particularly in
developing countries, and there are even countries where forest cover has increased, either through
regeneration or plantations (See map below). Furthermore, plantations do not provide the same
range of ecosystem services as natural forests.
Taken from FAOs Forest Resources Assessment (2015).
Agricultural area has decreased since 2000 (Figure X: Agricultural Area, FAO 2017). The
drop in 2009 might be associated with the economic recession that affected the world, and the
upward trend indicates the recovery. The decrease of agricultural land may also suggest more
intensive agricultural production. However, this Figure does not take into account land degradation
(see below), and how, despite the reduction in the total agricultural area, this area may mask the
abandonment of degraded lands and the expansion of the agricultural frontier elsewhere.
Agricultural area (1000 ha)
4980000
4960000
4940000
4920000
4900000
4880000
4860000
4840000
4820000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Figure X: Agricultural area. FAO 2017.
Many areas have been converted to agriculture as the demand for flexible crops increases (oil
palm, soy beans, sugar cane, among others) (Borras et al 2012). Grasslands in Argentina, Bolivia,
Paraguay and Uruguay have been converted into soy bean fields mostly for export (Graesser et al
2015). The area of soybeans has more than doubled since 2000 (Figure X: Production/Yield
quantities of Soybeans in South America). Simultaneously, yield exhibits an upward trend that
suggests more intensive use of the land. The area harvested in South America and North America
account for approximately 47% and 30% respectively of the soybean area worldwide (FAO 2017)
Figure X: Soybean production in South America 2000-2014.
A similar process occurs with oil palm production in South East Asia. The area planted with
this crop has increased since 2000 (Figure X: Production/Yield of Oil/palm fruit in South Eastern
Asia). In 2014, more than 68% of the total area on this crop was found in this region, and 85% in
Asia (FAO 2017)
Figure X: Production /Yield of Oil/Palm fruit in South Eastern Asia. FAO 2017
The expansion of oil palm in South East Asia has been at the expense of forests. In
Indonesia, from 1990 to 2010, 90% of lands converted to oil palm were forested (Carlson et al
2013). In the oil-palm plantations in the lowlands of Peninsular Malaysia (2 million ha), Borneo (2.4
million ha), and Sumatra (3.9 million ha) and found that 6% (or ≈880,000 ha) of tropical peatlands
in the region had been converted to oil-palm plantations by the early 2000s (Koh et al 2010). By
2010, 2.3 million ha of peatswamp forests were clear-felled, and currently occur as degraded lands
(Miettinen et al 2011). Peatlands are not the only kind of wetlands threatened by human resourceuse. Since 1900, about 69-75 percent of the fresh water wetlands has been lost (Davidson, 2014, See
Freshwater Chapter).
The number of cattle has increased since 2000, but its annual growth is slowing down since
2009 (See Figure X: Bovines). This has been accompanied by a decrease in pasture and permanent
meadows (Figure X: Pasture and permanent meadows)
Bovines (x 10^9)
1.50E+00
1.45E+00
1.40E+00
1.35E+00
1.30E+00
1.25E+00
1.20E+00
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Figure X: Bovines (FAO Statistics 2017)
Permanent meadows and pastures (1000 ha)
3440000
3420000
3400000
3380000
3360000
3340000
3320000
3300000
3280000
3260000
3240000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Figure X: Permanent meadows and pastures (1000 ha)
This suggests a more efficient livestock production system, as less area is needed for a larger
number of cattle. It also implies that flexible crops byproducts are being used as animal feed, which
raises sustainability questions as converting soy beans or maize into beef is not necessarily the most
effective way of utilizing those crops for human consumption.
Urbanization has led to the expansion of settlements. However, the expansion of cities has
been faster than population growth. Between 1975 and 2015 built-up areas increased 2,5 times,
while population increased by a factor of 1.8 (Atlas of the Human Planet 2016)
Figure X: Built-up area vs. Population (1975-2015). Atlas of the Human Planet.
The expansion of cities is putting pressures on adjoining agricultural areas, as land use
competition favors urban land uses rather than agricultural production (van Vliet et al 2017).
Furthermore, it is not only built up area that competes for these lands, but also areas for recreation
like parks and golf courses. Land use competition is very significant issue along coasts, where
mangroves and the limited agricultural lands of Small Island states are transformed into buildings or
tourist areas, increasing the vulnerability to environmental disasters, but also reducing food security.
Much of the increase in population in built-up areas took place in disaster-prone regions
(Atlas of the Human Planet, 2016). For example, Population in coastal areas has doubled in the
same period. There are regional variations on where the expansion of cities took place (Figure X:
Built up area and population per region, 1975-2015). Despite the lower increases in population in
Europe and North America, they have a very fast growth of built up area. Settlements in Europe
occupy about 200.000 sq. km for a population of about 800 million, while cities in Asia extend over
250.000 sq. km. for more than 4 billion people. Therefore, the built-up area per-capita is much
higher in Europe and North America than for the rest of the world
Figure X. Built up area and population per region, 1975-2015. Atlas of the Human Planet
In 2015, 52% of people lived in high-density urban centers, 33% in towns and suburbs, and
15% in rural areas (Atlas of the Human Planet 2016). Also city centers are becoming greener.
While urbanization is an economic driver overall, the general increase in incomes associated
with it is unevenly distributed. Overall, growing income inequality is strongly associated with
emerging economy urbanization, especially in the most rapidly urbanizing settings (Ukhova 2015;
Oxfam 2012). This income inequality is also strongly associated with gender inequality. The
emerging urban discretionary-income, high- consumption class is not equally populated by women
and men, although much of the gender-specific effect is masked by the standard practice of
collecting information on consumption and spending by “household” units.
Men dominate the ranks of the rich, high-consuming urban class, especially at the top of the
wealth pyramid. A recent International Monetary Fund (IMF) study examining the linkages of
gender and income inequality revealed that, at the top of the income ladder, higher gender inequality
is strongly associated with higher income shares in the top 10% income group (Gonzales et al. 2015).
In preparation for the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland in 2016,
Oxfam prepared an analysis which showed that the top 62 richest people in the world owned as
much wealth as the bottom half of the world population (some 3.6 billion people) (Oxfam 2016). Of
these 62 wealthiest individuals, 56 (90%) were men, 6 (10%) were women (Forbes 2016). vA
followup Oxfam study revealed that by 2017 eight people – all men -- own the same wealth as the
3.6 billion people who make up the poorest half of humanity (Oxfam 2017).
The current state of many urban environments, particularly lack of infrastructure and basic
services in urban slums and low-income areas, leads to stress and time poverty, for example in
regard to access to safe water, sanitation, education and health care. Environmental health
challenges in urban contexts increase women’s unpaid care work in terms of meeting family and
community nutrition and health needs, especially when health facilities and services are unavailable
or unaffordable.
3.2.1 Health effects of land use change
(Colin Butler)
Adverse mental and community health issues can arise from some forms of land use change,
including enclosure, dislocation, eviction (Richardson et al. 2016), drought and desertification. Other
significant alterations with harmful mental health effects include large-scale open cut mining and
mountain-top removal for coal mining (Cordial et al. 2012). Droughts can contribute to conflict in
some settings (Kelley et al. 2015) and migration, with health effects ranging from suicide (Hanigan et
al. 2012) to alienation and post-traumatic stress disorder. Solastalgia, another form of psychological
distress, has also been described in association with landscape change, including from mining and
disasters (Warsini et al. 2014).
Adverse human health issues are associated with mining and the refining of elements. While
such operations generate employment and provide essential fuels and raw materials, residues such as
lead affect air quality, and lodge in dust and on surfaces, posing a hazard especially to children, who
are more likely to ingest such dust (Taylor et al. 2013). The mining of some rare minerals, such as
tantalum, often involves exploitation and even slavery (Gold et al. 2015) (Box).
Box. Mining: global dimension
Volumetrically they are one of the world's largest waste streams. As they are often outside
national waste control regimes there is not official data to calculate the global generation. Some
studies (1) estimated that the global mine waste deposit was in the order of several hundred billion
tones, covering an area of one hundred million hectares. Metal mine waste generation in particular
is on the range of 10 to 20 billion tones per annum.(2).The trend is that the generation will
continuously growing, due to the fact that the richest mines are being or have already been
exploited, and companies are now turning to larger deposits with lower grade ores. Such deposits, as
a consequence generate more waste per unite extracted. Land use should be one of the most
important impact categories to consider in environmental impact assessments applied to
mining.(3)Risks associated with the stability of the tailings dam should be a matter of permanent
preoccupation. But mining could be also part of the circular economy. Extracting the value of mine
wastes and tailings constitute a potential future resource.
Natural sources of dust, such as from the Sahara (the harmattan) and from drought-affected
landscapes, can contain silica and reduce air quality, leading to adverse cardiovascular and
cardiopulmonary health effects (de Longueville et al. 2013). Approximately half of the world’s
mineral dust is blown from the Sahara, but few if any studies of the possible health effects of dust
have been undertaken in West Africa (de Longueville et al. 2013). Mining, including mountaintop
removal (Kurth et al. 2015) can also harm air quality and health, as can forest fires (Johnston et al.
2011).
An estimated 15 million people operating globally as informal recyclers, working in dump
sites (Binion and Gutberlet 2012). Good evidence of the health of this stigmatized sector (such as
their life expectancy) is lacking, but identified health risks include exposure to chemical hazards,
infections, musculoskeletal damage and poor mental health (Binion and Gutberlet 2012). Working in
organised groups, such as recycling cooperatives, may be a means to alleviate health issues. Waste
pickers are vulnerable to physical hazards, including landslides. For example, in 2015, at least 69
people were killed after a landslide in Shenzhen, China, triggered by collapse of a construction waste
disposal site (Yang et al. 2016).
3.3 Land degradation
(Nikolai Dronin)
Land degradation is a major global problem, and many publications attempt to assess of
observable global trend, scale and consequences of the phenomenon. However, the questions are
not easy to answer because of definition issue and methodological constraints.
Land degradation is generally defined as the persistent reduction or loss of land ecosystem
services, notably Net primary production (Le et al., 2016). Some authors think that the term should
be applied to those disturbances from which land cannot recover unaided (Bai et al., 2008).
According to Fernandez et al. (2002) land degradation as a decrease of biological productivity under
current human use that (i) reduces potential options for foreseeable uses in the future and (ii) is not
reversible to a specified level within the temporal scale relevant to the decision makers with the
current resources available to them. While this definition looks comprehensive (as land degradation
is a result of interaction or coevolution of biophysical and anthropogenic systems), it is not easy to
assess if land degradation is taking a plot of land to an irreversible state.
The main indication of degraded lands is that they are less productive than non-degraded
lands under the same environmental (mostly climate) and land use conditions in the region. It may
be measured by change in net primary productivity (NPP) with deviation from the norm taken as an
indicator of land degradation or improvement (Bai et al. 2008). To control for climatic factors, one
can measure the productivity of degraded areas per unit of precipitation, expecting that it should be
consistently lower than in less-degraded but similar areas. This approach allows measuring land
degradation along a scale from slight to severe (Wessels et al. 2004). As for land use condition it
could be regarded as not essentially changed during the observed period for the most grids. Thus
decline biomass productivity per unit of precipitation could be interpreted as indication of land
degradation. Land degradation results from different processes: soil erosion including water and
tillage erosion, soil salinization, forest fires, and overgrazing, among others (Kosmas et al., 2013).
Land degradation affects negatively the livelihoods and food security of global population.
There have been recurring efforts by the international community to identify the global extent and
severity of land degradation. The earlier mapping exercises (Global Assessment of Human-induced
Soil Degradation - GLASOD) used subjective expert opinion surveys as the basis for the maps
(Sonneveld & Dent, 2007; Bai et al., 2008). The more recent of these studies base on globally
available remotely-sensed NDVI data (Tucker et al. 2005). However, NDVI also has its own
shortcomings as a proxy for land degradation (Dentener 2006; Reay et al. 2008; Buitenwerf et al.
2012). For example, an interpretation of satellite-derived greening trend as an improvement or
recovery may originate from the composition of the vegetation cover but not improvement of land
quality (Herrmann and Tappan 2013). Nevertheless, remote sensing is still recognized as the only
viable option at a regional to global scale (Wessels, 2009).
The original Global Assessment of Land Degradation (GLADA) (Bai et al. 2008) set out to
answer questions about the global extent, severity and cost of land degradation using GIMMS data
for 1981–2003. Twenty-four per cent of the land area has been degrading over the last 25 years,
directly affecting the livelihoods of 1.5 billion people; this is on top of the legacy of thousands of
years of mismanagement in some long-settled areas. While the total figures for global land
degradation were comparable (24% against 15%) with the GLASOD project geographical
distribution of degraded areas was principally different. Globally, there is little correlation (r = -0.12)
between land degradation and the aridity index; 78% of degradation by area is in humid regions, 8%
in the dry sub-humid, 9% in the semi-arid and 5% in arid and hyper-arid regions (Bai et al. 2008).
Further analysis of the extended GIMMS3g dataset for 1981–2011 revealed different picture
once more (Pinzon and Tucker 2014a, b). As it was shown that land degradation is a global issue
with 22 % of the land degrading over the last 30 years, representing a loss of net primary production
of some 150 million tons of carbon but a loss of soil organic carbon orders of magnitude more.
Only 14% of the land surface has been improved over the period. The most degraded lands are
again found in Africa, especially south of the equator, and Southeast Asia. The assessment showed,
for the first time, land degradation in the grain belt from the Ukraine eastwards through Russia to
Kazakhstan; the Russian Far East and northeast China. Cropland had about 25% of deteriorating
lands; pasturelands – 32% and forest – up to 35%. These figures should be very alarming.
The latest assessment based on quantitative satellite data shows even more frightening
picture. Le et al. (2014) show land degradation hotpots as cover about 29 % of global land area and
are observed in all agro-ecologies and land cover types (Fig.X). The authors stress that this figure
does not include all areas of degraded lands, it refers to areas where land degradation is most acute
and requires priority actions in both in-depth research and management measures to combat land
degradation. About 3.2 billion people reside in these degrading areas. However, the number of
people affected by land degradation is likely to be higher as more people depend on the continuous
flow of ecosystem goods and services from these affected areas. In contrast the land improvement
has occurred in about 2.7 % of global land area during the last three decades.
Source: Le et al. 2014.
The results of these assessments (Bai et al. 2008; Pinzon and Tucker 2014a, b) suggest
global-scale of land degradation. However, this conclusion still needs groundtruthing. The FAO
Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA) programme was launched to identify ‘hot spots’
of land degradation around the globe. When the global assessment is being downscaled to national
and subnational levels some discrepancies emerge between its results and agricultural statistics. For
example, Wessels (2009) argues that inclusion of South Africa in category of a region strongly
affected by land degradation (up to 41% of cropland) is not supported by statistics on agricultural
performance of the country. Another example - in Kenya over the period 1981–2003, NPP
increased in woodland and grassland, but decreased across 40% of cropland, that was called as “a
critical situation in the context of a doubling of human population over the same period” (Bai &
Dent, 2006) while agricultural statistics show healthy 50% growth of cereals production (roughly
2.2%
a
year)
over
the
same
period
(see
Kenya
Data
Portal
http://kenya.opendataforafrica.org/gallery/agriculture). Ukraine and Russia emerged as the largest
grain exporters since 2000 are shown in the same category of countries with highest level of land
degradation ( see Pinzon and Tucker 2014a, b). Perhaps all these cases reflect improvements in land
management or that additional fertilizer could be mitigating the impact of soil degradation
(Sonneveld, Dent, 2007).
(Environmental Disasters CC) Land degradation, land use change, land loss, and poor land
management can all contribute to the increased vulnerability of rural populations by increasing food
insecurity as well as diminishing the sustainability of agricultural livelihoods.
In turn, those
dependent on the land see their living conditions and assets decline alongside their capacity to adapt
to these environmental changes. These impacts (in addition to other social, political, demographic
factors) can exacerbate out-migration to urban areas by people seeking economic opportunity, better
living conditions and improved food security (Hummel 2016). Unfortunately, the most vulnerable,
lacking financial, human, and social capital, commonly move in precarious conditions and arrive in
overpopulated, slum areas, placing them at increased risk for environmental disasters, such as
flooding in coastal African megacities.
3.3.1 Desertification
In many semi-arid areas, natural vegetation has clearly been eliminated or severely reduced
through cultivation, overgrazing, fuel gathering, and soils are eroding at accelerated rates. Many
perceive that the capacity of these lands to support human populations, livestock, and wild
herbivores has thereby been substantially reduced or desertified. However, “desertification” is a
highly contentious issue usually evoking strong disagreement and controversy (Reynolds et al.,
2003). This term is used to define human-induced aridization of geographically specific areas located
on the periphery the great deserts. However, many experts question the very possibility for humans
to cause deserts as some simplified interpretation of the term suggests (Reynolds et al. 2003). The
term “desertification” is not case-specific on the same level as terms “land erosion”, “land
compaction”, “soil salinization”. “Desertification” suggests combination of all the processes strongly
affected the lands in semi-arid zone. The UNCCD convention defines desertification as “land
degradation in arid, semi-arid, and dry sub-humid areas resulting from various factors, including
climatic variations and human activities” (UNCCD 1994). In this sense the two terms “land
degradation” and ‘desertification” can be used as synonyms when applied to problems of regions
with precipitation deficit (Brandt and Geeson 2005, Kosmaset al., 2013). However, Reynolds et al.
(2003) argue that the term desertification is only useful at higher levels of aggregation, while
degradation (appropriately refined) is applicable to lower levels. Fernandez et al. (2003) consider
“desertification” as only extreme cases when land degradation has passed thresholds beyond which
restoration is no longer practical and may indeed be improbable during human temporal scales.
In any case, all recent research shows that previous generalizations (GLASOD) claiming that
land degradation (or desertification) is ongoing in semiarid areas worldwide are not supported by the
satellite-based analysis of vegetation greenness (de Jong et al. 2011; Fensholt et al. 2012). Sahel
desertification and droughts were the focus of research that indicates a consistent trend of increasing
vegetation greenness in recent decades. This trend may be attributed to increasing rainfall, but also
to factors such as land-use change and migration (Olsson et al. 2005). However, another study
estimates that the current trends of recovery in the Sahel are still far below the wetter conditions that
prevailed in the region from 1930 to 1965. Current trends only reflect a gradual recovery from
extreme drought conditions that peaked during the 1983–1985 period (Anyamba and Tucker 2005).
A positive trend is also observed in semi-arid areas of China where human activities might explain
the “expansion of desertification” from 1980 to 1990 but conservation activities were the main
driving factor that induced the reversion of desertification from 1990 to 2000 (Xu et al. 2009). This
conclusion is supported by ground truthing. Others suggest that the NPP increase of about 0.3 %
per year in 1981-2003 and the decrease in net ecosystem productivity in the 1980s and 1990s is due
to global warming in China (Cao et al. 2003).
3.3.2 Soil salinization
(Supplied by the Chemicals and waste Cross-cutting issue)
Salt-induced land degradation is common in arid and semi-arid regions where irrigation is
practiced without a natural or artificial drainage system. Lack of drainage management in irrigated
areas triggers salts accumulation in the root zone, and negatively affects soil properties and crop
productivity (Qadir et al., 2014). In some countries, salt-affected land occurs on more than half of
the irrigated land (Metternicht and Zinck, 2003). However, widely reported data suggest that about
33% of global irrigated land has lower productivity due to poorly managed irrigation causing
waterlogging and salinity (Khan and Hanjra, 2008). For instance, multi-location studies undertaken
on saline-sodic fields in the Indus basin in Pakistan revealed that wheat grain yield losses from saltaffected lands ranged 20-43% with an overall average loss of 32%. Similarly, rice crop yield losses
from salt-affected lands ranged 36-69% with an overall average loss of 48% (Murtaza, 2013).
Simple extrapolation suggests that the global annual cost of salt-induced land degradation in
irrigated areas could be US$ 27.3 billion because of lost crop production (Qadir et al., 2014). The
costs of ‘no action’ on salt-affected lands may result in 15-69% revenue losses depending on the
cultivated crop, land degradation type and its intensity, irrigation water quality, and irrigation water
management. There are additional losses, which are not included in the previous estimates, including
costs of increased unemployment, increase in human and animal health problems and treatment
costs, infrastructure deterioration, losses in property values of farms with degraded land, and the
social cost of farm businesses (Qadir et al., 2014). Therefore, salinity Management Strategies might
be desirable for sustainable land management.
3.4 Food security
(Darshini Ravindranath)
Growing demand and competition for land, water, and energy, will affect the ability to
produce food, as will the urgent requirement to reduce impact of food systems on the environment.
Price volatilities have revealed the vulnerability of millions to hunger. A sizeable proportion of the
worlds’ seven billion people are hungry and malnourished. Roughly a billion people have energydeficient diets, and about a billion people suffer from diseases of energy surplus (called the ‘hidden
hunger’ of micronutrient deficiencies) (Godfray et al. 2014) 1. Increasing climate change and climate
variability affects all dimensions of food security and nutrition, including, food availability, access,
utilisation and stability. In addition, food production and consumption patterns are in itself
significant contributors to climate change (FAO estimates that the global food system is responsible
for about one-fifth of GHG emissions, 2016).
Figure x: Climate Change and Food Insecurity – WFP (2017)
These converging threats put greater pressure on land resources making land-use decisions
more important now than ever before. The limits on land resources are finite while demands on
them are not (FAO 1999). Of the 13 billion hectares of land available globally, most of the area
suited for crop production worldwide is already in use. More than 99.7% of human food comes
from the terrestrial environment, while less than 0.3% comes from oceans and other aquatic
ecosystems (Ajanovic, 2011). The World Bank (2016) estimates that there are more that the world
needs to produce at least 50% more food to feed 9 billion people by 2050. Since 2008, there has
been an increase in food prices and food price volatility which together with the large challenge
Godfray, H.C.J. and Garnett, T., 2014. Food security and sustainable intensification. Phil. Trans. R.
Soc. B, 369(1639), p.20120273.
1
presented by population growth, has led to greater food pessimism than ever before (Godfray and
Robinson (2015)2.
There are four key issues that relate with land and food (Durao et al. 2015)3; (i) food
availability (ii) food access (iii) food utilisation (iv) food stability. These dimensions are inter-related
but operate at different levels of influence. For instance, at the macro (national, regional, global) and
meso-levels (community), food security issues are mainly related to food availability and stability,
whereas at the micro-level they are mainly related to food access and utilization by households and
individuals. (Durao et al. 2015; Ecker 2012)4.
Under and over-nutrition represent the scale-related deficiencies of the current food system,
which does not provide a nutritious diet to all people. Globally, an estimated 2 billion people suffer
micronutrient deficiencies, and 795 million people are undernourished. Although under-nutrition is
slowly declining, 162 million children under age five still suffer from stunted growth, most of them
in Africa south of the Sahara and South Asia. At the other end of the spectrum, a growing number
of people are suffering from over-nutrition: currently more than 2 billion people are overweight or
obese. Moreover, under-nutrition and obesity increasingly coexist in the same households. Many
countries are also experiencing increased threats to agricultural value chains, which encompass all
actors and activities from the farm to the table. In recent years, progress has been hindered by
slower and less inclusive economic growth as well as political instability in some developing regions,
such as Central Africa and western Asia (FAO 2016)5.
Maximizing the potential of smallholders, including women and youth, is critical to food
security and nutrition, and to achieving multiple SDGs. 84 percent of the world’s 570 million farms
operate on less than 2 hectares of land. Small farms are a critical source of income, employment, and
food for billions of people in many developing countries, but they are also home to half of the
world’s hungry. Removing these inequalities and closing the gender gap in agricultural yields could
increase developing countries’ agricultural output by between 2.5 and 4.0 percent and in turn reduce
the number of undernourished people by 12–17 percent (100–150 million people) (IFPRI 2016).
( Environmental Disasters CC) Disasters such as floods, droughts and storms have a strong
impact on food security, particularly through the agricultural pathway. In fact, in developing
countries the agriculture sector absorbs about 22 percent of the total damage and losses caused by
Godfray, H.C.J. and Robinson, S., 2015. Contrasting approaches to projecting long-run global food
security. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 31(1), pp.26-44.
3 Durao, S., Schoonees, A., Ramokolo, V., Oliveira, J.M.D. and Kristjansson, E., 2015. Community‐
level interventions for improving access to food in low‐and middle‐income countries. The Cochrane Library.
4 Ecker 2012 Ecker O, Breisinger C. The Food Security System. A New Conceptual Framework.
IFPRI Discussion Paper 01166. International Food Policy Research Institute, 2012.
5 FAO, IFAD and WFP. 2015. The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2015. Meeting the 2015
international hunger targets: taking stock of uneven progress. Rome, FAO
2
natural hazards (FAO 2015). More than 80 percent of the damage and losses caused by drought is to
agriculture, especially livestock and crop production (FAO 2015). Although disasters may jeopardize
many rural and agricultural livelihoods directly, the devastation to agricultural production and
development can incite negative effects across national economies and have devastating effects on
food security, including in urban areas. As food security and the sustainability of agricultural
livelihoods diminish in the wake of an environmental disaster (whether rapid onset such as flooding
or slow-onset such as drought), affected populations are in turn more vulnerable to future disasters.
3.4.1 Sustainable food production and disposal:
Resource intensification is promoted to produce more food. At present, however
intensification in agriculture is leading to highly unsustainable results (Varghese and Singh 2016)6.
Sustainable intensification as a productivist discourse has recently been promoted to help soil health
and sustainable land management, which are key to producing a sustainable food supply, ensuring
ecosystem services, such as habitats for beneficial insects and pollinators; and promoting human
health nutrition (Robinson et al. 2015; Pretty et al. 2011)78. Critiques of sustainable intensification
point to its need to recognise the limits imposed by specific production discourses and expand its
argument to other stages of the food system i.e. the supply-side (Sonnino et al. 20149).
Furthermore, around 30-40% of food produced is estimated to be lost to waste. In the
Global South, losses are mainly due to absence of food-chain infrastructure and lack of knowledge
or investment in storage techniques. Data on these issues are however scarce. In contrast, the
Global North, pre-retail losses are lower but those arising from retail, food service, and home stages
of the food-chain have grown dramatically in recent years- see figure below (Godfray et al. 2012).
Figure x: Make-up of total food waste in developed and developing countries.
Varghese, N. and Singh, N.P., 2016. Linkages between land use changes, desertification and human
development in the Thar Desert Region of India. Land Use Policy, 51, pp.18-25.
7 Robinson, L.W., Ericksen, P.J., Chesterman, S. and Worden, J.S., 2015. Sustainable intensification in
drylands: What resilience and vulnerability can tell us. Agricultural Systems, 135, pp.133-140.
8 Pretty, J., Toulmin, C. and Williams, S., 2011. Sustainable intensification in African
agriculture. International journal of agricultural sustainability, 9(1), pp.5-24.
9 Sonnino, R., Moragues Faus, A. and Maggio, A., 2014. Sustainable food security: an emerging
research and policy agenda. International journal of sociology of agriculture and food, 21(1), pp.173-188.
6
Source: (Godfrey et al 2012); Note: Retail, food service and home and municipal categories are presented
together for developing countries.
(Atilio Sabino)
According to FAO estimates, approximately 1.3 billion tonnes of edible food -one third of
the nearly 4 billion tons of food produced annually for human consumption, is lost or wasted.
Overall, some 56% of total food loss and food waste occurs in the developed world, the remaining
44% across developing regions. This volume of food loss and waste constitute a serious concern,
because it reduces the availability of food for human consumption. Per-capita food losses in the
developed world average a whopping 250-300 kg per year, of which 75-115 kg are the result of
consumers' waste. This total food waste in the developed world amounts to 750-1,500 kcal per
person per day. In turn, the developing world loses 120-220 Kg of food per person per year, which
means that even regions ridden by under nutrition, such as South Asia and Sub Saharan Africa, lose
as many as 400-500 kcal per person per day, every day. Food loss represents a loss of economic
value estimated at us$ 1 trillion annually. Therefore, the resources used and the environmental
impacts caused to climate, land, water and biodiversity in order to produce this food have been for
nothing. As an example, without accounting for GHG emissions from land-use change, the carbon
footprint of wasted food is estimated in 3.3Gtonnes of CO2 equivalent. Food wastage ranks as the
third top emitter surpassing every nation, but the United States and China. This amount is more
than twice the total GHG emissions of all USA road transportation in 2010. At world level the total
amount of food wastage was produced in almost 1.4 billion hectares, equal to about 28 percent of
the world's agricultural land area. This figure can be compared to the surface of the largest countries,
where land surface occupied by food produced and not consumed is second to the total land area
occupied by the Russian Federation. Moreover, 28 million tonnes of fertilizers are used and wasted
Preventing this wastage either directly or through redistribution to those in need would undeniable
have a major positive effect on global food security. In addition, food waste could be used for
animal feed or even industrial chemicals, or recycled to converted into fertilizer , soil amendment ,
fuels or energy, and in this sense be part of the cycles of the circular economy.
3.4.2 Food security and Food Trade
(Laura Wellesley)
International trade is increasingly important to meeting global food demand (Nelson et al.
2010; Macdonald et al. 2015). Population growth, urbanisation and shifting dietary preferences are
just some of the mega-trends that have transformed our food system over the past fifty years and
have increased dependency on food imports (Alexandratos and Bruinsma 2012; Porkka et al. 2013;
FAO (undated); Msangi and Rosegrant 2011). The share of the global population living in fooddeficit countries has risen from 72 per cent in 1965 to 80 per in 2005 (Porkka et al. 2013). In
absolute terms, this means an increase from 2.4 billion people in 1965 to 5.1 billion people in 2005
(Porkka et al. 2013).
Just under a quarter of all food produced for human consumption is traded on international
markets (D’Odorico et al. 2014): for staple crops, the share of production traded internationally in
2014 was 24, 11 and 60 per cent of global wheat, maize, and soybean production respectively
(Chatham House Resource Trade Database; FAOSTAT). Traded volumes have also risen for rice, a
traditionally thinly traded commodity (Chatham House Resource Trade Database; FAOSTAT).
Million tonnes (of nutrients for the
fertilizers)
Figure 6: Share of global production volumes traded internationally, 2014
1400
1200
11%
1000
5%
24%
800
600
400
60%
200
30%
0
Maize
Wheat
Rice
Soybean Nitrogenous Phosphatic
Crops
Traded
53%
Potassic
Fertilizers
Not traded
Sources: Chatham House Resource Trade Database (2014 trade data); FAOSTAT 2014 data production and trade data in tonnes of nutrients for fertilizers.
In certain low-income food-deficit countries, there is a relatively high degree of ‘biophysical
redundancy’; that is, under- or unused land and/or water resources and capacity to increase food
productivity (Fader et al. 2016). A recent FAO report projects the area of cultivated land in
developing countries – primarily in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America – to increase by 132
million hectares by 2050 (Alexandratos and Bruinsma 2012). But in others, including those where
food insecurity is high – for example, Eritrea, Burundi, and Somalia –, food availability from
domestic production is falling and the capacity to increase production is limited (Fader et al. 2016).
Even with increases in domestic production, most developing countries – where population
growth is most rapid – have become increasingly reliant on imports to meet domestic demand, a
trend that is expected to continue through to 2050 (see figure below) (Alexandratos and Bruinsma
2012).
Source: Alexandratos and Bruinsma (2012).
3.5 Urban-rural linkages and teleconnections
(Hung Vo & Colin Butler)
Urban and rural areas have interdependent synergies not least in terms of people, resources
and services. Rural areas are connected to urban regions through networks and channels of roads,
information technology, electricity and traders. Meanwhile, urban areas are increasingly reliant on
land-based resources yielding perishable goods such as fruits and vegetables. Urbanization can both
positively and negatively impact these flows and functions and influence the economy and
development of peri-urban and rural areas. Given such linkages, urban and rural areas cannot be
differentiated as distinct units.
Cities operate within ecosystems that may extend well beyond jurisdictional boundaries and
affect the resilience of cities to climate change (Marcotullio and Solecki 2013). Studies have found
impact of urban forests in managing urban pollution, water quality, and carbon sequestration
(Livesley, McPherson and Calfapietra 2015).
Between 1970 to 2000, there was an increase in 58,000 km2 of urban land, with the highest
urban growth concentrated in India, China and African countries. Urban land growth in these
regions have outpaced urban population growth rates, suggesting that urbanization has resulted in
sprawled developments (Seto et al., 2011). Even in cities that are shrinking in population, sprawl still
occurs (Schmidt 2011). Urbanization in developing countries is consuming valuable agriculture land
that could have otherwise been left for farming and grazing (Kaufman and Woodcock, 2000).
Between 2000 and 2030, urban land area is projected to triple (Seto et al 2012). This not only
impacts peri-urban and rural economy, but also ecosystem health, food systems and the
environment. Studies in the United States have shown a positive relationship between sprawl and
adverse health risks such as obesity and health disease (Ewing et al 2013).
Nearly 34% of surveyed locations sampled in a meta-analysis study lie within 10 meters of
low elevation coastal zones, where the urban land expansion averaged to more than 5.7% between
1970 and 2000. This is compared to the global average of 4.7% in the sampled cities, indicating that
areas with the highest risk of rising sea levels are expanding the quickest (Seto et al., 2011). This
increases vulnerability of populations and infrastructures residing in coastal areas and its proximity.
Increasing demand for land-based resources have conflicted with rising attention towards
land conservation. This has resulted in growing competition over land-based resources, which has
only been exacerbated by climate change.
Teleconnections are becoming increasingly pronounced as the gap between urban and rural
areas narrows. Urban land teleconnections could serve as a lens of analysis to connect urbanization
processes to land use (Seto 2012). Teleconnections reveal the pervasiveness of urbanization
demands on former hinterlands and the transformation of these territories into sites of resource
extraction. For example, rising infrastructure demands have prompted mining activities.
Construction materials such as cement and steel are recognized to require the largest transport
distance.
Continuing rural to urban migration will present multifaceted impacts on land use through
changing diets and demands on infrastructure and housing. Rural to urban migration in developing
countries is no longer the primary driving force for urban population growth but rather from natural
birth rates (UN-Habitat 2013). While megacities—cities with populations over _____--is expected to
double by 2050, small- and mid-sized cities will experience the largest population growth.
As many cities continue to grow in population and expand its land boundaries, other cities
will experience population decline. Shrinking cities leave behind vacant parcels as part of a cycle of
growth and decline (Seto 2014).
Urbanization is a major source of land use change, with potential for beneficial and adverse
health effects. Optimists suggest that well designed denser and well-built human habitation will
reduce the per person environmental footprint, by smart design, energy and transport efficient cities,
and innovations such as rooftop gardens (Siri et al. 2015). Pessimists warn poorly built, and
maintained high rise slums, which are energy-intensive and with residents vulnerable to social
isolation, depression (Chen et al. 2014), and low social capital, as well as limited little restorative,
direct contact with nature.
3.6 Land Rights, land acquisitions, Gender and food security, the social value of land
(Darshini Ravindranath)
3.6.1 Land and socio-cultural services
Nkonya et al. (2016)10 highlight that the use-value of land refers to more than just the
productivity of its soil. Land provides a number of socio-cultural and aesthetic ecosystem
services that are essential for sustainable, healthy livelihoods. Land degradation, deforestation and
desertification lead to increases in land abandonment, outmigration, change in rural power structures
(due to increasing demand for intensification) among others. One of the key impacts of these
changes, affecting the entire global community, have been a loss of critical socio-cultural services
provided by land. Wilson et al. (2016) show that loss of these socio-cultural ties, has in recent
decades led to a lowering of overall community resilience.
Despite progress in recognising these challenges, land use research in the global arena
continues to be dominated by a study of land-use change from the perspective of productivity,
seldom acknowledging and documenting trends in the deep-rooted need for conservation from the
perspective of communities (Sharmina et al., 2016).
Cultural ties to land hold special significance in countries of the Global South. In many
countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America, a majority of the population reside in rural areas, and
are heavily dependent on land resources for their livelihood. They grow crops for food and to sell in
local markets; collect fodder for their livestock; gather wood for their stoves; and collect tree
10
Nkonya, E, Mirzabaev, A. and Von Braun, J. eds., 2016. Economics of Land Degradation
and Improvement: A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development. Springer.
products for their health and well-being (Tomei and Ravindranath 2017)11. Here, the value of land is
often an assertion of their long-standing socio-cultural identity, place and heritage (Bleischwitz et al.
2016)12. Kelly et al. (2015)13 show that ancient traditions such as festivals tied in with preservation of
timber, food and fuel resources; show a deeply embedded relationship between land, culture and
identity of people. In countries where social systems are dependent on land and related resource
conservation, loss or reduction in value of these services, can be a major stumbling block if
sustainable development is to be achieved (see box XX).
Box XX: Cultural values and conservation in Bhutan
Strong customary institutions and environment-friendly cultural values can be used for
promoting sustainable land management. The case of strong cultural values in Bhutan illustrates the
role played by cultural values in the protection of ecosystem services. Mahayana Buddhism places a
strong value on the peaceful co-existence of people with nature and the sanctity of life and
compassion for others. This is one of the major drivers of the high share (71 percent) of land area
under forests in Bhutan and of the fact that 25 percent of Bhutan’s population live within protected
areas (Source: Nkonya et al. 2016). Many of Bhutan’s Buddhist monasteries are located within the
pristine landscapes of the country (see pictures below).
In countries of the Global North, there is relatively better acknowledgement of the sociocultural and aesthetic contributions that land provides for healthy human populations. For instance,
in the European Union, recreational and cultural significance of land is incorporated, to an extent,
11
Tomei, J and Ravindranath, D. (2016). Resource Nexus in the Global South, Chapter on
Governance (in press)
12
Bleischwitz et al. (2016). Resource Nexus in the Global South, Chapter on Governance (in
press)
13
Kelly C, Ferrara A, Wilson GA, Ripullone F, Nole A. 2015. Community resilience and land
degradation in forest and shrubland socio-ecological systems: evidence from Gorgoglione, Basilicata,
Italy. Land Use Policy 46: 11-20.
through national and regional policies on management of ecosystem services. For instance, EU 2020
Biodiversity Strategy, currently being carried out throughout Europe, is predominantly covered by
“cultural landscapes” (EU Comission, 2011; Plieninger et al. 2013).14 15
Despite progress in recognising these challenges; land-use trends and impacts science in the
global arena continue to be dominated by a study of land-use change from the perspective of
productivity, seldom acknowledging and documenting trends in the deep-rooted need for
conservation from the perspective of communities (Sharmina et al. 2016). Another controversial
topic in research has been the monetising of these very social costs associated with land degradation
and net benefits from taking action against degradation. Nkonya et al. (2016)16 highlight that
economic assessments should take into consideration the value of land as more than just the
productivity of its soil. Trucost (2014) evaluated the global social cost of loss of ecosystem services
to be about US$4.7 trillion per year and concluded that the top 20 production sectors that lead in
ecosystem services degradation would not make profit if they took into account thes costs17.
3.6.2 Land Tenure, Land deals
Despite heavy reliance on land resources, communities, especially in the Global South,
frequently lack ownership to the land they farm or hold in common. This leads to issues of unequal
distribution, insecurity of tenure and loss of traditional knowledge on land maintenance held for
generations. Food and energy security of local people is profoundly diminished when they have lost
reliable access to their land. Furthermore, the ability to tap into any of the benefits of institutional
support and regulation, essential to supporting resilience is lost (Tomei and Ravindranath. 2017).
Land and housing are the most important assets in large sections of the world. Secure rights, for
both men and women, can help turn these assets into economic opportunities (World Bank 2016)18.
Indigenous populations, the poor, landless, and women are amongst the most vulnerable groups to
the implications of unequal land ownership and access (Narh et al. 2016)19.
14
Plieninger, T., Dijks, S., Oteros-Rozas, E., & Bieling, C. (2013). Assessing, mapping, and
quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land use policy, 33, 118-129.
15
European Commission, 2011. Our Life Insurance, our Natural Capital: an EU
Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. SEC(2011) 540 final, SEC(2011) 541 final, Brussels.
16
Nkonya, E, Mirzabaev, A. and Von Braun, J. eds., 2016. Economics of Land Degradation and
Improvement: A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development. Springer.
17
Trustcost. (2014). Natural capital at risk: The top 100 externalities of business. Online
at http:// www.trucost.com/ accessed June 17, 2014.
Ibid.
Narh, P., Lambini, C.K., Sabbi, M., Pham, V.D. and Nguyen, T.T., 2016. Land sector reforms in
Ghana, Kenya and Vietnam: a comparative analysis of their effectiveness. Land, 5(2), p.8.
18
19
While the precise amount of community land in the world is not known, estimates from
World Bank (2016)20 suggest that only approximately 30 percent of land rights are registered or
recorded worldwide. Local communities and indigenous people depend on and manage as much as
65 percent of the world’s land area, yet many governments recognise their rights over only a fraction
of these lands (RRI 2015)21. Within forestland, communities held some legal rights to about 15.5
percent of the world’s forests, when compared with figures from 2003 (see figure below).
Figure XX: Global Forest ownership, 2002-2013 (Mha)
Source: RRI (2014)22
Furthermore, as industrial agriculture and monoculture plantations continue to expand,
competition for access to land between industry, governments, and communities has worsened,
putting pressure on forests and drylands, threatening local peoples’ livelihoods. Without formal
recognition and protection of their land rights, communities lack legal recourse following
infringement of those rights. In the recent past, the story of poor governance has received a global
spotlight due to the issue of land acquisition, land grabbing and land leasing amidst fear of food
scarcity and rising food prices. Around the world, 26.7 million hectares of agricultural land have
been transferred into the hands of foreign investors since the year 200023. As of April 2016, Africa
remains the most significant target area, with deals concluded in many countries across the
continent. Africa accounts for 422 concluded agricultural deals (42% of all deals) and 10 million
hectares (37%). Most of the deals involve the private sector whose main focus lies in food and
World Bank briefs (2016). Accessed at:
http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/sustainabledevelopment/brief/land
21
Rights and Resources Initiative. 2015. Who Owns the World’s Land? A global baseline of formally
recognized indigenous and community land rights. Washington, DC: RRI.
22
RRI (2014).
20
23
Land Matrix (2016); http://www.landmatrix.org/en/
biofuels. Importantly, most acquisitions do not include a domestic shareholder or local community
negotiations, despite often targeting relatively highly populated areas dominated by croplands.
Figure x: Crops cultivated in land deals
Source: Land Matrix
The lack of land security among local communities is confounding since widespread
evidence exists of local indigenous communities successfully managing and conserving lands (see
Bhutan box above). WRI estimates (2016) suggest that in addition to the large-scale social and equity
implications, this is in fact bad economic policy. The authors argue that “tenure-secure” indigenous
lands generate billions and sometimes trillions of dollars’ worth of benefits in the form of carbon
sequestration, reduced pollution, clean water, erosion control, and a suite of other local, regional and
global “ecosystem services”. These benefits far outweigh the costs of securing land tenure (Ding et
al. 2016)24.
24
Ding et al (2016). Climate Benefits, Tenure Costs. The Economic Case For Securing
Indigenous Land Rights in the Amazon. World Resources Institute. Washington, USA, October
2016.
Figure x: benefits of tenure-secure lands outweigh the costs in three Latin American
countries
Source: Ding et al. 2016
(Red means that land acquisition was reported by by at
least one source; blue – reported by two and more sources).
3.6.3 Gender: land, health and food
(Gender Cross-cutting team)
Existing gender inequality and may contribute to increased resource scarcity, poverty, people
displacement, tension across generations due to loss of land and livelihoods, and other types of
conflicts (White and Park, 2015; Verma, 2014; Behrman, 2012). While progress has been made in
the acknowledgement of incorporating women as central to sustaining land productivity, it has
often been at a superficial, target-meeting level.
Often, contributions by women to agriculture are hidden or underestimated in formal
statistics. Statistical systems typically focus on formal employment in agricultural sectors and on
commercially related agriculture. This bias shrouds the considerable contributions to food security
made by women through activities such as subsistence agriculture collection of wild foods and home
gardening. (GGEO). In 2015, 43% of those economically active in agriculture globally were
women (FAO 2015d). However, globally, less than 20% of land titles are registered in women’s
names (less than 10% in most parts of Africa) (FAO 2010). For instance, UNEP (2016) highlights
that only one country in the world, Cape Verde, has reported that over half agricultural holdings
(50.5%) belong to women (FAO 2011)25. There are few statistics that show improvements in land
tenure of women, especially in countries of the Global South.
Women’s traditional role as seed collectors and savers is one that gives them a special status
(IRDP 2014). The widespread shift to hybrid seed varieties in recent decades prevents women
collecting seeds, undermining their status as well as food security, especially in developing countries
(Bhutani ed. 2013). In many cultures, women have traditionally been the keepers of deep knowledge
of the plants, animals and ecological processes around them. The erosion of biodiversity driven
forward by industrial agriculture has therefore had specific impacts for women as food producers
and caregivers, including a loss of knowledge related to seeds, food processing and cooking (IPESFood 2016).
Closing the gender gap in access to and control over resources such as land and production
inputs, and in access to information and technology, would increase agricultural productivity and
therefore reduce poverty and hunger.
Figure XX Distribution of agricultural land holdings: Females
Items to be developed later:
UNEP (2016), Global Gender and Environment Outlook: The Critical Issues. (p.15) FAO
(2011). State of Food and Agriculture; Women in Agriculture: Closing the Gender Gap for
Development. FAO, Rome.
25
Case study: Gender and REDD+
-
king
From Irene – Gender cross-cutting
-
3.7 Changing livelihoods: health, chemicals and waste, changing lifestyles
3.7.1 Food, chemicals and health
(Colin Butler)
Food contamination, both with chemicals and micro-organisms, is of great importance.
While pesticides (defined here to include herbicides) have helped to enable a significant increase in
food production, they have also generated an almost universal human exposure to synthetic
chemicals (Kim et al. 2017), many of which are harmful and even rapidly fatal at a high dose.
However, there is much uncertainty concerning the health effects of chronic exposure to pesticides
at low doses, including in combinations. While human exposure to some chemicals, such as DDT
and organochlorines, has reduced in recent years due to regulation, other synthetic compounds have
entered and continue to enter the human food chain. The health effects of these substances,
whether in isolation or combination, are very difficult to determine. Reasons for this include
uncertainty concerning exposure, varying rates and times of the accumulation of these compounds
and their release from human tissue, and the lag between exposure and disease. It is difficult to
obtain funds to study the health effects of these chemicals in humans, and controlled trials are
unethical.
There is good evidence from high-income countries that occupationally exposed groups to
pesticides, such as farmers, have higher rates of non-Hodgkins lymphoma, attributed to pesticides
(Schinasi and Leon 2014). Higher than expected rates of Parkinson’s disease, a degenerative
neurological condition, have also been related to occupational exposure to pesticides (Liew et al.
2014). Other factors which influence health, such as age, under nutrition and impaired immune
status, may also interact with the health effects of pesticides, but this issue is currently under-studied.
(Gender CC team) The health effects of chronic pesticide exposures on women and men vary
considerably, and are related to the different physiologies of women and men. Data on pesticide use
(and protection) by women and men in food production are incomplete and inconsistent. Overall,
women are more biologically sensitive than men to many pesticides (Watts, 2007; Hardell, 2003). A
strong connection exists between pesticides and breast cancer rates (Watts 2013, Watts 2007).
Gender differences in chronic effects from exposures to pesticides are also related to biological
differences. Women’s higher level of hormonally sensitive tissues make them more vulnerable to the
effects of the endocrine-disrupting in pesticides (Howard 2003). Pregnant and breast-feeding
women are at particular risk from these chemicals, as are children exposed at a time when they are
developmentally vulnerable (WHO 2006). Overall, women’s generally higher percentage of body fat
than men means they carry more lipophilic pesticides (and for longer periods), resulting in greater
internal exposure (Watts 2007, Hardell 2003). Almost 100 pesticides have been identi ed as
potentially contributing to increased risk of breast cancer, and of these at least 63 are known to have
estrogenic effects in laboratory studies (Watts 2007). On the other hand, there are some pesticides to
which males are more sensitive or that may have effects speci c to their physiologies, such as those
that increase risk of prostate cancer (Slotkin et al. 2008). Despite widespread public concern about
synthetic chemical exposure, adjusted years of average global life expectancy have increased by over
6% since 2000, from 60 to 63 (Murray et al. 2015). While this suggests that unwanted chemical
exposure is, at least to date, tolerated at a population level, it is possible a reduced exposure could
have generated an even greater improvement in life expectancy.
Food quality can also be impaired through biotic contamination, both microbiological and
fungal (Gnonlonfin et al. 2013). Mycotoxins, including aflatoxins, can be generated when cereals are
damaged by rain, both pre-harvest and through poor storage, and are an important cause of liver
cancer in many low-income settings.
3.7.2 Soil and health
(Colin Butler)
The burden of disease of soil-transmitted helminths, including hookworm, ascariasis and
trichuriais is substantial, affecting human development and cognitive potential (Bartsch et al. 2016).
These helminths are generally acquired by walking barefoot on soil which has been contaminated by
human faeces. Unlike other helminth infections, high intensity hookworm infection commonly
affects both children and adults (Bartsch et al. 2016).
Land contains a range of trace elements, whose distribution varies naturally. These elements
enter the human food chain through the raising of crops and animals. Some of these elements are
essential for good health, including iodine, iron, selenium and zinc, while others are harmful in large
quantities, such as arsenic and fluoride (Oliver and Gregory 2015). Soils in mountainous areas often
have reduced levels of iodine, and human populations in such areas can face a double risk, as they
are likely to have reduced access to marine foods, which tend to contain iodine. However,
deficiencies in humans can be prevented by dietary supplementation (Pretell et al. 2017), although
the underlying soil deficiency usually cannot be. Fertilizers are often contaminated by cadmium,
which is not essential to human health, and is harmful in high doses (Ke et al. 2015).
Some valuable antibiotics have been derived from soil (Oliver and Gregory 2015). Many
more are likely to await discovery.
4. Policy responses
This section will be developed later. Possible subheadings include
4.1 Improved Governance
TBD
4.2 Good Agricultural Practices
TBD. It will include examples such as certified agriculture, permaculture, organic agriculture,
sustainable agriculture, among others
4.3 Restoration and other strategies to stop land degradation
TBD. Will include a discussion of approaches to stop desertification (i.e. China, Sahara),
ecosystem restoration, land remediation. As well as the UNCCD framework
4.4 Economic incentives
TBD. How to incorporate PES into land management. Think of other approaches
4.5 Ecosystem and Community based adaptation
TBD. Check IUCN approach to climate change and propose to extend it to environmental
change (land issues)
5. GEO 6 Main messages
TBD.