Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward

Joern Fischer, David J. Abson, Van Butsic, M. Jahi Chappell, Johan Ekroos, Jan Hanspach, Tobias Kuemmerle, Henrik G. Smith, Henrik von Wehrden

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

193 Citations (Scopus)
103 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

To address the challenges of biodiversity conservation and commodity production, a framework has been proposed that distinguishes between the integration (“land sharing”) and separation (“land sparing”) of conservation and production. Controversy has arisen around this framework partly because many scholars have focused specifically on food production rather than more encompassing notions such as land scarcity or food security. Controversy further surrounds the practical value of partial trade-off analyses, the ways in which biodiversity should be quantified, and a series of scale effects that are not readily accounted for. We see key priorities for the future in (1) addressing these issues when using the existing framework, and (2) developing alternative, holistic ways to conceptualise challenges related to food, biodiversity, and land scarcity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)149-157
Number of pages9
JournalConservation Letters
Volume7
Issue number3
Early online date26 Dec 2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2014

Fingerprint

biodiversity
land management
food production
food security
products and commodities
scale effect
commodity
trade-off
food
land

Keywords

  • Agroecological intensification
  • Agroecology
  • Food security
  • Food sovereignty
  • Land scarcity
  • Matrix
  • Sustainable intensification
  • Wildlife-friendly farming

Cite this

Fischer, J., Abson, D. J., Butsic, V., Chappell, M. J., Ekroos, J., Hanspach, J., ... von Wehrden, H. (2014). Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward. Conservation Letters, 7(3), 149-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12084

Land sparing versus land sharing : Moving forward. / Fischer, Joern; Abson, David J.; Butsic, Van; Chappell, M. Jahi; Ekroos, Johan; Hanspach, Jan; Kuemmerle, Tobias; Smith, Henrik G.; von Wehrden, Henrik.

In: Conservation Letters, Vol. 7, No. 3, 05.2014, p. 149-157.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fischer, J, Abson, DJ, Butsic, V, Chappell, MJ, Ekroos, J, Hanspach, J, Kuemmerle, T, Smith, HG & von Wehrden, H 2014, 'Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward' Conservation Letters, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 149-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12084
Fischer J, Abson DJ, Butsic V, Chappell MJ, Ekroos J, Hanspach J et al. Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward. Conservation Letters. 2014 May;7(3):149-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12084
Fischer, Joern ; Abson, David J. ; Butsic, Van ; Chappell, M. Jahi ; Ekroos, Johan ; Hanspach, Jan ; Kuemmerle, Tobias ; Smith, Henrik G. ; von Wehrden, Henrik. / Land sparing versus land sharing : Moving forward. In: Conservation Letters. 2014 ; Vol. 7, No. 3. pp. 149-157.
@article{ea652ea207284ce8bada3ab715fe52b7,
title = "Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward",
abstract = "To address the challenges of biodiversity conservation and commodity production, a framework has been proposed that distinguishes between the integration (“land sharing”) and separation (“land sparing”) of conservation and production. Controversy has arisen around this framework partly because many scholars have focused specifically on food production rather than more encompassing notions such as land scarcity or food security. Controversy further surrounds the practical value of partial trade-off analyses, the ways in which biodiversity should be quantified, and a series of scale effects that are not readily accounted for. We see key priorities for the future in (1) addressing these issues when using the existing framework, and (2) developing alternative, holistic ways to conceptualise challenges related to food, biodiversity, and land scarcity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.",
keywords = "Agroecological intensification, Agroecology, Food security, Food sovereignty, Land scarcity, Matrix, Sustainable intensification, Wildlife-friendly farming",
author = "Joern Fischer and Abson, {David J.} and Van Butsic and Chappell, {M. Jahi} and Johan Ekroos and Jan Hanspach and Tobias Kuemmerle and Smith, {Henrik G.} and {von Wehrden}, Henrik",
year = "2014",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1111/conl.12084",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "149--157",
journal = "Conservation Letters",
issn = "1755-263X",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Land sparing versus land sharing

T2 - Moving forward

AU - Fischer, Joern

AU - Abson, David J.

AU - Butsic, Van

AU - Chappell, M. Jahi

AU - Ekroos, Johan

AU - Hanspach, Jan

AU - Kuemmerle, Tobias

AU - Smith, Henrik G.

AU - von Wehrden, Henrik

PY - 2014/5

Y1 - 2014/5

N2 - To address the challenges of biodiversity conservation and commodity production, a framework has been proposed that distinguishes between the integration (“land sharing”) and separation (“land sparing”) of conservation and production. Controversy has arisen around this framework partly because many scholars have focused specifically on food production rather than more encompassing notions such as land scarcity or food security. Controversy further surrounds the practical value of partial trade-off analyses, the ways in which biodiversity should be quantified, and a series of scale effects that are not readily accounted for. We see key priorities for the future in (1) addressing these issues when using the existing framework, and (2) developing alternative, holistic ways to conceptualise challenges related to food, biodiversity, and land scarcity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

AB - To address the challenges of biodiversity conservation and commodity production, a framework has been proposed that distinguishes between the integration (“land sharing”) and separation (“land sparing”) of conservation and production. Controversy has arisen around this framework partly because many scholars have focused specifically on food production rather than more encompassing notions such as land scarcity or food security. Controversy further surrounds the practical value of partial trade-off analyses, the ways in which biodiversity should be quantified, and a series of scale effects that are not readily accounted for. We see key priorities for the future in (1) addressing these issues when using the existing framework, and (2) developing alternative, holistic ways to conceptualise challenges related to food, biodiversity, and land scarcity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

KW - Agroecological intensification

KW - Agroecology

KW - Food security

KW - Food sovereignty

KW - Land scarcity

KW - Matrix

KW - Sustainable intensification

KW - Wildlife-friendly farming

U2 - 10.1111/conl.12084

DO - 10.1111/conl.12084

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 149

EP - 157

JO - Conservation Letters

JF - Conservation Letters

SN - 1755-263X

IS - 3

ER -