Datum
2023-04-15Schlagwort
360 Soziale Probleme, Sozialarbeit 630 Landwirtschaft, Veterinärmedizin ErnährungssicherheitNahrungsmittelSicherheitBiodiversitätLandnutzungModellierungMetadata
Zur Langanzeige
Aufsatz
Systems methods for analyzing trade‑offs between food security and conserving biodiversity
Zusammenfassung
The endeavor for greater food security has caused trade-offs between increasing agricultural production and conserving habitat of threatened species. We take a novel approach to analyze these trade-offs by applying and comparing three systems methods (systems diagrams, influence matrices, and land use modeling) in a case study of Uganda. The first two methods were used to scope out the trade-off system and identify the most important variables influencing trade-offs. These variables were agricultural yield, land governance processes, and change in land use and land cover. The third method was used to quantify trade-offs and evaluate policy scenarios to alleviate them. A reference scenario indicated that increasing agricultural production by expanding agricultural land provided food for 79% more people in 2050 (compared to 2005) but with a 48% loss of habitat of threatened species. A scenario assuming strong investments to augment agricultural yield increased the number of people fed in 2050 up to 157%, while reducing the loss of habitat down to 27%. We use a novel “trade-off coefficient” for a consistent comparison of scenario results. A scenario assuming yield improvement and ring-fencing protected areas reduced the trade-off coefficient from − 0.62 in the reference case to − 0.15. This coefficient can be used as a common basis to compare results from different trade-off studies. It was found that the three systems methods are useful, but have limitations as stand-alone tools. Combining the methods into a single methodology increases their collective utility by maximizing the transparency and comprehensiveness and potential stakeholder engagement of a trade-off analysis.
Zitierform
In: Environment Systems and Decisions Volume 44 / Issue 1 (2023-04-15) , S. 16 - 29 ; eissn:2194-5403Förderhinweis
Gefördert im Rahmen des Projekts DEALZitieren
@article{doi:10.17170/kobra-202403089747,
author={Stuch, Benjamin and Alcamo, Joseph},
title={Systems methods for analyzing trade‑offs between food security and conserving biodiversity},
journal={Environment Systems and Decisions},
year={2023}
}
0500 Oax 0501 Text $btxt$2rdacontent 0502 Computermedien $bc$2rdacarrier 1100 2023$n2023 1500 1/eng 2050 ##0##http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/15546 3000 Stuch, Benjamin 3010 Alcamo, Joseph 4000 Systems methods for analyzing trade‑offs between food security and conserving biodiversity / Stuch, Benjamin 4030 4060 Online-Ressource 4085 ##0##=u http://nbn-resolving.de/http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/15546=x R 4204 \$dAufsatz 4170 5550 {{Ernährungssicherheit}} 5550 {{Nahrungsmittel}} 5550 {{Sicherheit}} 5550 {{Biodiversität}} 5550 {{Landnutzung}} 5550 {{Modellierung}} 7136 ##0##http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/15546
2024-03-11T10:14:46Z 2024-03-11T10:14:46Z 2023-04-15 doi:10.17170/kobra-202403089747 http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/15546 Gefördert im Rahmen des Projekts DEAL eng Namensnennung 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Systems approach Systems diagram Influence matrix Land use modelling Trade-off coeffictient Trade offs between SDGs 360 630 Systems methods for analyzing trade‑offs between food security and conserving biodiversity Aufsatz The endeavor for greater food security has caused trade-offs between increasing agricultural production and conserving habitat of threatened species. We take a novel approach to analyze these trade-offs by applying and comparing three systems methods (systems diagrams, influence matrices, and land use modeling) in a case study of Uganda. The first two methods were used to scope out the trade-off system and identify the most important variables influencing trade-offs. These variables were agricultural yield, land governance processes, and change in land use and land cover. The third method was used to quantify trade-offs and evaluate policy scenarios to alleviate them. A reference scenario indicated that increasing agricultural production by expanding agricultural land provided food for 79% more people in 2050 (compared to 2005) but with a 48% loss of habitat of threatened species. A scenario assuming strong investments to augment agricultural yield increased the number of people fed in 2050 up to 157%, while reducing the loss of habitat down to 27%. We use a novel “trade-off coefficient” for a consistent comparison of scenario results. A scenario assuming yield improvement and ring-fencing protected areas reduced the trade-off coefficient from − 0.62 in the reference case to − 0.15. This coefficient can be used as a common basis to compare results from different trade-off studies. It was found that the three systems methods are useful, but have limitations as stand-alone tools. Combining the methods into a single methodology increases their collective utility by maximizing the transparency and comprehensiveness and potential stakeholder engagement of a trade-off analysis. open access Stuch, Benjamin Alcamo, Joseph doi:10.1007/s10669-023-09909-y Ernährungssicherheit Nahrungsmittel Sicherheit Biodiversität Landnutzung Modellierung publishedVersion eissn:2194-5403 Issue 1 Environment Systems and Decisions 16 - 29 Volume 44 false
Die folgenden Lizenzbestimmungen sind mit dieser Ressource verbunden: