- Email: [email protected]
Land System Science: between global challenges and local realities
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Land System Science: between global challenges and local realities§ Editorial overview Peter H Verburg, Karl-Heinz Erb, Ole Mertz and Giovana Espindola Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437 For a complete overview see the Issue 1877-3435/$ – see front matter, # 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.08.001
Peter H Verburg1, Karl-Heinz Erb2, Ole Mertz3 and Giovana Espindola4
This issue of Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability provides an overview of recent advances in Land System Science while at the same time setting the research agenda for the Land System Science community. Land System Science is not just representing land system changes as either a driver or a consequence of global environmental change. Land systems also offer solutions to global change through adaptation and mitigation and can play a key role in achieving a sustainable future earth. The special issue assembles 14 articles that entail different perspectives on land systems and their dynamics, synthesizing current knowledge, highlighting currently under-researched topics, exploring scientific frontiers and suggesting ways ahead, integrating a plethora of scientific disciplines.
1 Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2
Institute for Social Ecology, Alpen-Adria University, Klagenfurt/Vienna/Graz, Austria 3 Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Denmark 4 Brazilian National Institute for Space Research, Brazil e-mails: Verburg, Peter H ([email protected]), Erb, Karl-Heinz ([email protected]), Mertz, Ole ([email protected]) and Espindola, Giovana ([email protected])
Peter H Verburg is a professor and department head at the department of Environmental Geography at the Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University Amsterdam. He is also Chair of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Land Project. His research focuses on the spatial analysis and modelling of land system change and ecosystem services using a socio-environmental systems perspective. In 2012 he was awarded an ERC Independent Researcher Grant by the European Research Council for the project ‘Integrating human agency in global-scale land change models’. Karl-Heinz Erb is an associated professor for Land Use and Global Change at the Institute of Social Ecology Vienna, Alpen-Adria University. His research focuses on the dynamic interplay of society and global environmental systems, the development of
§
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works License, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. www.sciencedirect.com
Land System Science Changes in land systems, human-induced transformations of ecosystems and landscapes and the resulting changes in land cover, reach far beyond local alterations and are pervasive factors of global environmental change. Today, more than 75% of the Earth’s ice-free land shows significant evidence of land use induced alterations of many environmental processes, such as primary production, the water cycle, biogeochemical cycles, the climate system, and biodiversity. On the other hand, land provides vital socioeconomic resources to society, such as of food, fuel, fibres and many other ecosystem services that support production functions, regulate risks of natural hazards, or provide cultural and spiritual services. Land system changes are the direct result of human decision making at multiple scales, with far reaching consequences for the Earth System, that feedback on human well-being and decision making. Thus, land system change is both a cause and consequence of socio-ecological processes that encompasses a huge range of spatio-temporal scales. Land systems represent the terrestrial component of the Earth system and encompass all processes and activities related to the human use of land, including socioeconomic, technological and organizational investments and arrangements, as well as the benefits gained from land and the unintended social and ecological outcomes of societal activities. Thus, Land System Science has emerged to serve as a platform for integration of these different dimensions of global environmental change research, and aims at offering potential options for mitigation and adaption to environmental change, for example through modified land system architecture [1]. By studying the mutual interplay between social and ecological systems that shape land use and land cover, land system science operates at the interface of the social and natural sciences and requires a high level of interdisciplinary collaboration across academic disciplines as is reflected in the contributions to this issue. Land system science has developed over the past twenty years from the study of Land Use and Land Cover Change, which initially was dominated by monitoring and modelling of the ecological impacts of land cover changes such as deforestation and desertification on the natural system [2–4]. Gradually, the research field has become more integrative, focusing on both the drivers and impacts of land change as part of global Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
434 Human settlements and industrial systems
global land-use indicators and datasets, the role of land use in the Earth System, and socio-ecological trade-offs and synergies in the land system. He is member of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Land Project, member of the Young Curia, of the Committee on Global Change and of the Commission of Geographic Information Science at the Austrian Academy of Sciences, member of the Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM) at The World Conservation Union (IUCN). In 2010, he was awarded an ERC Starting Independent Researcher Grant by the European Research Council, for the project ‘‘Land Use Intensity from a Socio-Ecological Perspective’’. Ole Mertz is an associate professor in Geography at the Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, where he leads the research group Environment and Society in Developing Countries. His research focuses on the interactions between change in land use, livelihoods and environment in developing countries with a specific focus on multifunctional land systems, forest-based agriculture and climate change adaptation/ mitigation. He coordinates an EU-FP7 funded project on REDD+ in Southeast Asia (2011– 2014), is member of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Land Project and Editor-in-Chief of Geografisk TidsskriftDanish Journal of Geography. He has edited nine special issues in international journals and serves as member of the Editorial Boards of the journals Human Ecology and Environmental Management. Giovana Espindola is the executive officer of the Global Land Project (GLP). She works at the International Project Office (IPO) of GLP, which is based at the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research (INPE), and where Giovana also acts as a young researcher. Her research investigates land processes broadly in developing countries as well as focusing specifically on the case of tropical forest-agriculture frontiers in Brazil and in the Brazilian Amazon and Cerrado regions. She looks to spatiotemporal scales ranging from local case studies to national or regional analyses, with a strong focus on spatiotemporal statistics, remote sensing time series analysis and interdisciplinary approaches.
environmental change. The growing group of researchers engaged in this field led to the emergence of ‘Land Change Science’ as a separate, interdisciplinary, research field engaging scientists across the social, economic, geographical and natural sciences [5,6]. The increasing attention for feedbacks between drivers and impacts including adaptive behaviour [7], the interactions between social and ecological systems and teleconnections between world regions [8,9] and between cities and their rural hinterlands [10] have motivated an integrated socio-ecological systems perspective. In this perception, land systems are acknowledged as resulting from the dynamic interactions within the socio-ecological system. This perspective has also moved land system science from a focus on the most dramatic land cover changes to giving more attention to subtle changes of human interactions with the natural surroundings, including land management and the provisioning of a wide range of ecosystem services. The articles in this issue strongly reflect this shift in perspective by explicitly addressing changes in land management and the modes in which land is governed. The Land System Science community is organized within the Global Land Project, one of the core projects of both the International Geosphere Biosphere Programme (IGBP) and the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP) commissioned by the International Council for Science (ICSU) and the International Social Science Council (ISSC). In 2013, a new programme gathering all previous global environmental change programmes was established and named ‘Future Earth’ in response to a visioning process on Earth System Science and Global Sustainability initiated by ICSU [11]. The aims of the new programme, that will also host the Global Land Project, include a stronger interdisciplinary approach and a stronger focus on science that supports sustainability transitions through co-design and co-production of research together with important stakeholders. While interdisciplinarity is in the genes of Land System Science, a stronger engagement in the development of sustainability solutions provides an important opportunity for the researchers engaged in this field. Traditionally Land System Science is closely related to the fields of land use planning and land use policy. However, scientific insights are not always easily integrated in these processes and much land is owned and managed by private land owners that are not always responsive to planning and policy. Therefore, new ways of linking science and practice need to be developed to effectively translate scientific findings into sustainability solutions and implementation in practice. Important ways forward in this perspective include the evaluation and design of alternative ways to govern land resources [12–14] and the use of land systems architecture in the design of novel land systems that more optimally use spatial and temporal interactions within the land system configuration to provide ecosystem services and adaptive capacity under conditions of global environmental change [1,15,16]. Many of the articles in this issue address these challenges and illustrate the role of Land System Science as a central and critical component of global sustainability science.
Synthesis of Land System Science The articles in this issue provide a synthesis of many, interrelated, topics in Land System Science, either from a thematic or methodological perspective. Overall, the articles can be divided into four main approaches to studying land systems: land systems dynamics, land use intensity, impacts of land change and governance of land systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
www.sciencedirect.com
Editorial overview Verburg et al. 435
The first four articles deal with linkages between the local and global, teleconnections and modelling approaches to understanding and influencing land system dynamics. Meyfroidt et al. [17] use the concept of telecoupling to review how local processes of land system change are affecting other, often distant, regions and how demand and policy often have indirect consequences in different world regions. The authors argue for combining placebased research and global modelling to better understand the causal links between flows of goods and services and land system change. Gu¨neralp et al. [18] state that land systems research should address the interactions between urban and rural areas as well as the transformations within urban and peri-urban landscapes. They propose a conceptual framework that allows identifying and examining linkages between urbanization dynamics and the associated land system changes, which can occur in distant places, and discuss the sustainability implications of this increasingly important land system change. Brown et al. [19] discuss the ways in which different model types can help in understanding future land system dynamics and inform the formulation, implementation and monitoring of land use policy and planning processes. From a review of current models they conclude that a majority of models are focusing on exploring socio-ecological system function, scenario analysis and ex-ante assessment. Seppelt et al. [16] argue for a complementary use of exploratory modelling and optimization approaches to explore the options of land system configurations that best meet the goods and services demands of society. While such combinations of modelling concepts have been proposed before [20], little operational examples are yet available and the combined use of such approaches in co-designing land use planning and policy with stakeholders has not yet been fully explored. Four articles specifically deal with the intensity and extent of land systems. Erb et al. [21] provide a conceptual framework for studying land use intensity based on a review of theoretical concepts and indicators available in the literature. They indicate that the integration of three dimensions of land-use intensity is needed, combining metrics for inputs and outputs of land based production systems as well as system parameters that can reflect the unintended outcomes of land use and represent powerful drivers of land system dynamics. Such structured analysis of land use intensity is rarely conducted in the current Land System Science literature. Munroe et al. [22] address the extensification processes taking place in several regions around the world and argue that agricultural abandonment does not always result in a straightforward trajectory of forest recovery. Agricultural abandonment is the starting point of many alternative pathways of changes in land management, vegetation and the use and governance of the natural resources. The different trajectories are strongly dependent on the local www.sciencedirect.com
socio-economic and biophysical context, and impacts may have strong tradeoffs between ecosystem services provided by the changing land system. Such tradeoffs are also key to the article of Grau et al. [23] who discuss alternative land development trajectories of land sparing and land sharing, that is, a separation of natural area conservation from intensive production systems versus a more multi-functional integration of service provisioning on the same area. While some of these discussions are dominated by strong generalizations, the article in this issue pleas for a more nuanced analysis, the integration of different development trajectories and a broadening of the scale of analysis while accounting for global teleconnections. Key to such analysis is an improved understanding of land use intensity, and the consideration of local socioeconomic and ecological constraints. Finally, Kuemmerle et al. [24] discuss strengths and weaknesses of remote sensing as provider of data on land cover change. Many of the more subtle changes in land use that occur within a certain land cover type, such as changes in land-use intensity, management and spatial organization, cannot be straightforwardly derived from remote sensing. Hence, different methods and approaches need to be followed to acquire relevant information on these changes. In their review of the state of the art in land-use intensity monitoring, they outline major challenges, but also opportunities emerging from the availability of new technologies, for mapping across different land-use types. The impacts — and feedbacks — of changes in land use intensity and land cover extent are addressed by the next group of four articles. Verburg et al. [25] discuss how the land system plays a crucial role within the food system, dependent on the connections between local food production systems and regional to global markets. In their article they sketch a land systems approach for contributing to sustainable local food production systems in the context of a globalized food system. Change in land systems also affects natural systems. Nagendra et al. [26] outline how changes and modifications in land cover constitute the most dominant drivers of biodiversity loss globally. These changes affect the structure and function of ecosystems and alter their capacity to provide sustained ecosystem services for human well-being. Moreover, there are challenges and critical gaps in our knowledge on the links between biodiversity, ecosystem function and ecosystem services. The authors suggest that research on ecosystem services needs to expand beyond its largely descriptive approach to a deeper understanding of socioecological functions. Crossmann and colleagues [27] discuss how land system science can contribute to mainstreaming and operationalizing the ecosystem service concept in land management and policy. It is argued that a further integration between socio-economic and biophysical approaches in ecosystem service assessments Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
436 Human settlements and industrial systems
and land governance analysis is needed to support the development and implementation of more sustainable land management practices. While the impact of land system change on food systems, biodiversity, ecosystem services has been discussed frequently, the relationships between land system changes and human health issues have been given much less attention, especially due to the very different disciplinary communities addressing these issues. Messina et al. [28] review the literature in this field and discuss the ways in which knowledge from both fields can complement each other and how problems due to the different ontologies of the different disciplines can be overcome. Two articles provide more specific insight on land governance issues. Sikor et al. [14] present an overview of alternative ways of governance of land resources and argue that land is now governed more on the basis of flows of resources or goods rather than on territorial arrangements. They conclude that this has generated new forms of social exclusion and inequity, and that future land policy needs to combine territorial and flow-centered arrangements. Messerli et al. [29] focus on the processes of large scale land acquisitions that have received a lot of media attention and an increasing interest from the scientific community. The impacts of such large scale land acquisition on social systems, the environmental system and the food system are still largely unknown and very variable depending on local context and the mode of acquisition and governance. However, the scale of these acquisitions is very large and spread across a large part of (mainly) the developing world. Land acquisitions are one of the typically examples of how local realities of changes in land systems are intricately linked to the global challenge of sustainable and equitable development. Finally, we acknowledge that a number of important aspects of Land System Science are not discussed in this issue — either because reviews of those topics have been published recently or because contributions were unavailable or not yet ready for publication. Examples of recent reviews on other important aspects of Land System Science include those on long term historic changes in land use [30], land use and the climate system [31,32], forest transitions [33], land use data [34] and livestock systems [35]. Also, a series of meta-analysis of case studies on the drivers [36–41] and consequences of land system change [42,43] provide a useful synthesis of commonalities and context dependencies across place-based land systems research. The synthesis of land change, through review, metaanalysis and the development of conceptual frameworks and theory, helps to bring together findings on land system changes across different scales and from different disciplinary perspectives. All papers in this issue identify Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
new challenges based on the knowledge gaps identified within the review. This way, synthesis of current knowledge translates into an updated research agenda for the Land System Science community.
Acknowledgements The editors of this issue would like to thank the many reviewers that have provided constructive comments on the articles submitted to this issue. This issue is one of the synthesis products of the Global Land Project (http://www.globallandproject.org). Work on this issue has been supported by several European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme funded projects: ERC Grant Agreement n. 311819 (GLOLAND), ERC Grant Agreement n. 263522 (LUISE), FP7 Grant agreement 265286 (IREDD+) and by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) within the project P20812-G11.
References 1.
Turner BL II, Janetos AC, Verburg PH, Murray AT: Land system architecture: using land systems to adapt and mitigate global environmental change. Global Environ Change 2013, 23:395397.
2.
Turner BL II, Ross RH, Skole DL: Relating land use and global land-cover change: a proposal for an IGBP-HDP core project. Report from the IGBP-HDP Working Group on Land-Use/LandCover Change. Joint Publication of the International GeosphereBiosphere Programme (Report No. 24) and the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Programme (Report No. 5). Stockholm: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; 1993.
3.
Lambin EF, Baulies X, Bockstael NE, Fischer G, Krug T, Leemans R, Moran EF, Rindfuss RR, Sato Y, Skole D et al.: LandUse and Land-Cover Change (LUCC), Implementation Strategy. Stockholm, Bonn: IGBP; 1999.
4.
Lambin EF, Geist H (Eds): Land-use and land-cover change—local processes and global impacts. Berlin: Springer; 2006.
5.
Turner BL, Lambin EF, Reenberg A: The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007, 104: 20666-20671.
6.
Rindfuss RR, Walsh SJ, Turner BL II, Fox J, Mishra V: Developing a science of land change: challenges and methodological issues. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004, 101:13976-13981.
7.
Verburg PH: Simulating feedbacks in land use and land cover change models. Landsc Ecol 2006, 21:1171-1183.
8.
Liu JQ, Hull V, Batistella M, DeFries R, Dietz T, Fu F, Hertel TW, Izaurralde RC, Lambin EF, Li S et al.: Framing sustainability in a telecoupled world. Ecol Soc 2013, 18:26.
9.
Lambin EF, Meyfroidt P: Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011, 108:3465-3472.
10. Seto KC, Reenberg A, Boone CG, Fragkias M, Haase D, Langanke T, Marcotullio P, Munroe DK, Olah B, Simon D: Urban land teleconnections and sustainability. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012. 11. Reid WV, Chen D, Goldfarb L, Hackmann H, Lee YT, Mokhele K, Ostrom E, Raivio K, Rockstro¨m J, Schellnhuber HJ et al.: Earth system science for global sustainability: grand challenges. Science 2010, 330:916-917. 12. Bourgoin J, Castella J-C, Pullar D, Lestrelin G, Bouahom B: Toward a land zoning negotiation support platform: ‘‘tips and tricks’’ for participatory land use planning in Laos. Landsc Urban Plan 2012, 104:270-278. 13. Deininger K, Selod H, Burns T: The land governance assessment framework: identifying and monitoring good practice in the land sector. Washington: World Bank; 2011. 14. Sikor T, Auld G, Bebbington AJ, Benjaminsen TA, Gentry BS, Hunsberger C, Izac A-M, Margulis ME, Plieninger T, Schroeder H et al.: Global land governance: from territory to flow? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:522-527. www.sciencedirect.com
Editorial overview Verburg et al. 437
15. Bateman IJ, Harwood AR, Mace GM, Watson RT, Abson DJ, Andrews B, Binner A, Crowe A, Day BH, Dugdale S et al.: Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 2013, 341:45-50.
29. Messerli P, Heinimann A, Giger M, Breu T, Scho¨nweger O: From ‘land grabbing’ to sustainable investments in land: potential contributions by land change science. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:528-534.
16. Seppelt R, Lautenbach S, Volk M: Identifying trade-offs between ecosystem services, land use, and biodiversity: a plea for combining scenario analysis and optimization on different spatial scales. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:458-463.
30. Ellis EC, Kaplan JO, Fuller DQ, Vavrus S, Klein Goldewijk K, Verburg PH: Used planet: a global history. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1217241110. in press.
17. Meyfroidt P, Lambin EF, Erb K-H, Hertel TW: Globalization of land use: distant drivers of land change and geographic displacement of land use. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:438444.
31. Houghton RA, House JI, Pongratz J, van der Werf GR, DeFries RS, Hansen MC, Le Que´re´ C, Ramankutty N: Carbon emissions from land use and land-cover change. Biogeosciences 2012, 9:5125-5142.
18. Gu¨neralp B, Seto KC, Ramachandran M: Evidence of urban land teleconnections and impacts on hinterlands. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:445-451.
32. Hibbard K, Janetos A, van Vuuren DP, Pongratz J, Rose SK, Betts R, Herold M, Feddema JJ: Research priorities in land use and land-cover change for the Earth system and integrated assessment modelling. Int J Climatol 2010, 30:2118-2128.
19. Brown DG, Verburg PH, Pontius RG, Lange MD: Opportunities to improve impact, integration, and evaluation of land change models. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:452-457.
33. Meyfroidt P, Lambin EF: Global forest transition: prospects for an end to deforestation. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2011, 36:343-371.
20. Castella J-C, Pheng Kam S, Dinh Quang D, Verburg PH, Thai Hoanh C: Combining top-down and bottom-up modelling approaches of land use/cover change to support public policies: application to sustainable management of natural resources in northern Vietnam. Land Use Policy 2007, 24:531-545.
34. Verburg PH, Neumann K, Nol L: Challenges in using land use and land cover data for global change studies. Global Change Biol 2011, 17:974-989.
21. Erb KH, Haberl H, Rudbeck Jepsen M, Kuemmerle T, Lindner M, Mueller D, Verburg PH, Reenberg A: A conceptual framework for analysing and measuring land-use intensity. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:464-470.
35. Herrero M, Thornton PK, Gerber P, Reid RS: Livestock, livelihoods and the environment: understanding the tradeoffs. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2009, 1:111-120. 36. Geist HJ, Lambin EF: Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. Bioscience 2002, 52:143-150.
22. Munroe DK, van Berkel DB, Verburg PH, Olson JL: Alternative trajectories of land abandonment: causes, consequences and research challenges. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:471-476.
37. Seto KC, Fragkias M, Gu¨neralp B, Reilly MK: A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e23777.
23. Grau R, Kuemmerle T, Macchi L: Beyond ‘land sparing versus land sharing’: environmental heterogeneity, globalization and the balance between agricultural production and nature conservation. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:477-483.
38. Keys E, McConnell WJ: Global change and the intensification of agriculture in the tropics. Global Environ Change A 2005, 15:320-337.
24. Kuemmerle T, Erb K, Meyfroidt P, Mu¨ller D, Verburg PH, Estel S, Haberl H, Hostert P, Jepsen MR, Kastner T et al.: Challenges and opportunities in mapping land use intensity globally. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:484-493. 25. Verburg PH, Mertz O, Erb K-H, Haberl H, Wu W: Land system change and food security: towards multi-scale land system solutions. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:494-502. 26. Nagendra H, Reyers B, Lavorel S: Impacts of land change on biodiversity: making the link to ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:503-508. 27. Crossman ND, Bryan BA, de Groot RS, Lin Y-P, Minang PA: Land science contributions to ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:509-514. 28. Messina JP, Pan WK: Different ontologies: land change science and health research. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:515-521.
www.sciencedirect.com
39. van Vliet N, Mertz O, Heinimann A, Langanke T, Pascual U, Schmook B, Adams C, Schmidt-Vogt D, Messerli P, Leisz S et al.: Trends, drivers and impacts of changes in swidden cultivation in tropical forest-agriculture frontiers: a global assessment. Global Environ Change 2012, 22:418-429. 40. Geist HJ, Lambin EF: Dynamic causal patterns of desertification. Bioscience 2004, 54:817-829. 41. Van Asselen S, Verburg PH, Vermaat JE, Janse J: A global metaanalysis of wetland conversion. PLoS ONE 2013. in press. 42. Don A, Schumacher J, Freibauer A: Impact of tropical land-use change on soil organic carbon stocks—a meta-analysis. Global Change Biol 2011, 17:1658-1670. 43. Gibson L, Lee TM, Koh LP, Brook BW, Gardner TA, Barlow J, Peres CA, Bradshaw CJA, Laurance WF, Lovejoy TE et al.: Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity. Nature 2011, 478:378-381.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
ScienceDirect Land System Science: between global challenges and local realities§ Editorial overview Peter H Verburg, Karl-Heinz Erb, Ole Mertz and Giovana Espindola Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437 For a complete overview see the Issue 1877-3435/$ – see front matter, # 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.08.001
Peter H Verburg1, Karl-Heinz Erb2, Ole Mertz3 and Giovana Espindola4
This issue of Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability provides an overview of recent advances in Land System Science while at the same time setting the research agenda for the Land System Science community. Land System Science is not just representing land system changes as either a driver or a consequence of global environmental change. Land systems also offer solutions to global change through adaptation and mitigation and can play a key role in achieving a sustainable future earth. The special issue assembles 14 articles that entail different perspectives on land systems and their dynamics, synthesizing current knowledge, highlighting currently under-researched topics, exploring scientific frontiers and suggesting ways ahead, integrating a plethora of scientific disciplines.
1 Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2
Institute for Social Ecology, Alpen-Adria University, Klagenfurt/Vienna/Graz, Austria 3 Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Denmark 4 Brazilian National Institute for Space Research, Brazil e-mails: Verburg, Peter H ([email protected]), Erb, Karl-Heinz ([email protected]), Mertz, Ole ([email protected]) and Espindola, Giovana ([email protected])
Peter H Verburg is a professor and department head at the department of Environmental Geography at the Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University Amsterdam. He is also Chair of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Land Project. His research focuses on the spatial analysis and modelling of land system change and ecosystem services using a socio-environmental systems perspective. In 2012 he was awarded an ERC Independent Researcher Grant by the European Research Council for the project ‘Integrating human agency in global-scale land change models’. Karl-Heinz Erb is an associated professor for Land Use and Global Change at the Institute of Social Ecology Vienna, Alpen-Adria University. His research focuses on the dynamic interplay of society and global environmental systems, the development of
§
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works License, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. www.sciencedirect.com
Land System Science Changes in land systems, human-induced transformations of ecosystems and landscapes and the resulting changes in land cover, reach far beyond local alterations and are pervasive factors of global environmental change. Today, more than 75% of the Earth’s ice-free land shows significant evidence of land use induced alterations of many environmental processes, such as primary production, the water cycle, biogeochemical cycles, the climate system, and biodiversity. On the other hand, land provides vital socioeconomic resources to society, such as of food, fuel, fibres and many other ecosystem services that support production functions, regulate risks of natural hazards, or provide cultural and spiritual services. Land system changes are the direct result of human decision making at multiple scales, with far reaching consequences for the Earth System, that feedback on human well-being and decision making. Thus, land system change is both a cause and consequence of socio-ecological processes that encompasses a huge range of spatio-temporal scales. Land systems represent the terrestrial component of the Earth system and encompass all processes and activities related to the human use of land, including socioeconomic, technological and organizational investments and arrangements, as well as the benefits gained from land and the unintended social and ecological outcomes of societal activities. Thus, Land System Science has emerged to serve as a platform for integration of these different dimensions of global environmental change research, and aims at offering potential options for mitigation and adaption to environmental change, for example through modified land system architecture [1]. By studying the mutual interplay between social and ecological systems that shape land use and land cover, land system science operates at the interface of the social and natural sciences and requires a high level of interdisciplinary collaboration across academic disciplines as is reflected in the contributions to this issue. Land system science has developed over the past twenty years from the study of Land Use and Land Cover Change, which initially was dominated by monitoring and modelling of the ecological impacts of land cover changes such as deforestation and desertification on the natural system [2–4]. Gradually, the research field has become more integrative, focusing on both the drivers and impacts of land change as part of global Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
434 Human settlements and industrial systems
global land-use indicators and datasets, the role of land use in the Earth System, and socio-ecological trade-offs and synergies in the land system. He is member of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Land Project, member of the Young Curia, of the Committee on Global Change and of the Commission of Geographic Information Science at the Austrian Academy of Sciences, member of the Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM) at The World Conservation Union (IUCN). In 2010, he was awarded an ERC Starting Independent Researcher Grant by the European Research Council, for the project ‘‘Land Use Intensity from a Socio-Ecological Perspective’’. Ole Mertz is an associate professor in Geography at the Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, where he leads the research group Environment and Society in Developing Countries. His research focuses on the interactions between change in land use, livelihoods and environment in developing countries with a specific focus on multifunctional land systems, forest-based agriculture and climate change adaptation/ mitigation. He coordinates an EU-FP7 funded project on REDD+ in Southeast Asia (2011– 2014), is member of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Land Project and Editor-in-Chief of Geografisk TidsskriftDanish Journal of Geography. He has edited nine special issues in international journals and serves as member of the Editorial Boards of the journals Human Ecology and Environmental Management. Giovana Espindola is the executive officer of the Global Land Project (GLP). She works at the International Project Office (IPO) of GLP, which is based at the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research (INPE), and where Giovana also acts as a young researcher. Her research investigates land processes broadly in developing countries as well as focusing specifically on the case of tropical forest-agriculture frontiers in Brazil and in the Brazilian Amazon and Cerrado regions. She looks to spatiotemporal scales ranging from local case studies to national or regional analyses, with a strong focus on spatiotemporal statistics, remote sensing time series analysis and interdisciplinary approaches.
environmental change. The growing group of researchers engaged in this field led to the emergence of ‘Land Change Science’ as a separate, interdisciplinary, research field engaging scientists across the social, economic, geographical and natural sciences [5,6]. The increasing attention for feedbacks between drivers and impacts including adaptive behaviour [7], the interactions between social and ecological systems and teleconnections between world regions [8,9] and between cities and their rural hinterlands [10] have motivated an integrated socio-ecological systems perspective. In this perception, land systems are acknowledged as resulting from the dynamic interactions within the socio-ecological system. This perspective has also moved land system science from a focus on the most dramatic land cover changes to giving more attention to subtle changes of human interactions with the natural surroundings, including land management and the provisioning of a wide range of ecosystem services. The articles in this issue strongly reflect this shift in perspective by explicitly addressing changes in land management and the modes in which land is governed. The Land System Science community is organized within the Global Land Project, one of the core projects of both the International Geosphere Biosphere Programme (IGBP) and the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP) commissioned by the International Council for Science (ICSU) and the International Social Science Council (ISSC). In 2013, a new programme gathering all previous global environmental change programmes was established and named ‘Future Earth’ in response to a visioning process on Earth System Science and Global Sustainability initiated by ICSU [11]. The aims of the new programme, that will also host the Global Land Project, include a stronger interdisciplinary approach and a stronger focus on science that supports sustainability transitions through co-design and co-production of research together with important stakeholders. While interdisciplinarity is in the genes of Land System Science, a stronger engagement in the development of sustainability solutions provides an important opportunity for the researchers engaged in this field. Traditionally Land System Science is closely related to the fields of land use planning and land use policy. However, scientific insights are not always easily integrated in these processes and much land is owned and managed by private land owners that are not always responsive to planning and policy. Therefore, new ways of linking science and practice need to be developed to effectively translate scientific findings into sustainability solutions and implementation in practice. Important ways forward in this perspective include the evaluation and design of alternative ways to govern land resources [12–14] and the use of land systems architecture in the design of novel land systems that more optimally use spatial and temporal interactions within the land system configuration to provide ecosystem services and adaptive capacity under conditions of global environmental change [1,15,16]. Many of the articles in this issue address these challenges and illustrate the role of Land System Science as a central and critical component of global sustainability science.
Synthesis of Land System Science The articles in this issue provide a synthesis of many, interrelated, topics in Land System Science, either from a thematic or methodological perspective. Overall, the articles can be divided into four main approaches to studying land systems: land systems dynamics, land use intensity, impacts of land change and governance of land systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
www.sciencedirect.com
Editorial overview Verburg et al. 435
The first four articles deal with linkages between the local and global, teleconnections and modelling approaches to understanding and influencing land system dynamics. Meyfroidt et al. [17] use the concept of telecoupling to review how local processes of land system change are affecting other, often distant, regions and how demand and policy often have indirect consequences in different world regions. The authors argue for combining placebased research and global modelling to better understand the causal links between flows of goods and services and land system change. Gu¨neralp et al. [18] state that land systems research should address the interactions between urban and rural areas as well as the transformations within urban and peri-urban landscapes. They propose a conceptual framework that allows identifying and examining linkages between urbanization dynamics and the associated land system changes, which can occur in distant places, and discuss the sustainability implications of this increasingly important land system change. Brown et al. [19] discuss the ways in which different model types can help in understanding future land system dynamics and inform the formulation, implementation and monitoring of land use policy and planning processes. From a review of current models they conclude that a majority of models are focusing on exploring socio-ecological system function, scenario analysis and ex-ante assessment. Seppelt et al. [16] argue for a complementary use of exploratory modelling and optimization approaches to explore the options of land system configurations that best meet the goods and services demands of society. While such combinations of modelling concepts have been proposed before [20], little operational examples are yet available and the combined use of such approaches in co-designing land use planning and policy with stakeholders has not yet been fully explored. Four articles specifically deal with the intensity and extent of land systems. Erb et al. [21] provide a conceptual framework for studying land use intensity based on a review of theoretical concepts and indicators available in the literature. They indicate that the integration of three dimensions of land-use intensity is needed, combining metrics for inputs and outputs of land based production systems as well as system parameters that can reflect the unintended outcomes of land use and represent powerful drivers of land system dynamics. Such structured analysis of land use intensity is rarely conducted in the current Land System Science literature. Munroe et al. [22] address the extensification processes taking place in several regions around the world and argue that agricultural abandonment does not always result in a straightforward trajectory of forest recovery. Agricultural abandonment is the starting point of many alternative pathways of changes in land management, vegetation and the use and governance of the natural resources. The different trajectories are strongly dependent on the local www.sciencedirect.com
socio-economic and biophysical context, and impacts may have strong tradeoffs between ecosystem services provided by the changing land system. Such tradeoffs are also key to the article of Grau et al. [23] who discuss alternative land development trajectories of land sparing and land sharing, that is, a separation of natural area conservation from intensive production systems versus a more multi-functional integration of service provisioning on the same area. While some of these discussions are dominated by strong generalizations, the article in this issue pleas for a more nuanced analysis, the integration of different development trajectories and a broadening of the scale of analysis while accounting for global teleconnections. Key to such analysis is an improved understanding of land use intensity, and the consideration of local socioeconomic and ecological constraints. Finally, Kuemmerle et al. [24] discuss strengths and weaknesses of remote sensing as provider of data on land cover change. Many of the more subtle changes in land use that occur within a certain land cover type, such as changes in land-use intensity, management and spatial organization, cannot be straightforwardly derived from remote sensing. Hence, different methods and approaches need to be followed to acquire relevant information on these changes. In their review of the state of the art in land-use intensity monitoring, they outline major challenges, but also opportunities emerging from the availability of new technologies, for mapping across different land-use types. The impacts — and feedbacks — of changes in land use intensity and land cover extent are addressed by the next group of four articles. Verburg et al. [25] discuss how the land system plays a crucial role within the food system, dependent on the connections between local food production systems and regional to global markets. In their article they sketch a land systems approach for contributing to sustainable local food production systems in the context of a globalized food system. Change in land systems also affects natural systems. Nagendra et al. [26] outline how changes and modifications in land cover constitute the most dominant drivers of biodiversity loss globally. These changes affect the structure and function of ecosystems and alter their capacity to provide sustained ecosystem services for human well-being. Moreover, there are challenges and critical gaps in our knowledge on the links between biodiversity, ecosystem function and ecosystem services. The authors suggest that research on ecosystem services needs to expand beyond its largely descriptive approach to a deeper understanding of socioecological functions. Crossmann and colleagues [27] discuss how land system science can contribute to mainstreaming and operationalizing the ecosystem service concept in land management and policy. It is argued that a further integration between socio-economic and biophysical approaches in ecosystem service assessments Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
436 Human settlements and industrial systems
and land governance analysis is needed to support the development and implementation of more sustainable land management practices. While the impact of land system change on food systems, biodiversity, ecosystem services has been discussed frequently, the relationships between land system changes and human health issues have been given much less attention, especially due to the very different disciplinary communities addressing these issues. Messina et al. [28] review the literature in this field and discuss the ways in which knowledge from both fields can complement each other and how problems due to the different ontologies of the different disciplines can be overcome. Two articles provide more specific insight on land governance issues. Sikor et al. [14] present an overview of alternative ways of governance of land resources and argue that land is now governed more on the basis of flows of resources or goods rather than on territorial arrangements. They conclude that this has generated new forms of social exclusion and inequity, and that future land policy needs to combine territorial and flow-centered arrangements. Messerli et al. [29] focus on the processes of large scale land acquisitions that have received a lot of media attention and an increasing interest from the scientific community. The impacts of such large scale land acquisition on social systems, the environmental system and the food system are still largely unknown and very variable depending on local context and the mode of acquisition and governance. However, the scale of these acquisitions is very large and spread across a large part of (mainly) the developing world. Land acquisitions are one of the typically examples of how local realities of changes in land systems are intricately linked to the global challenge of sustainable and equitable development. Finally, we acknowledge that a number of important aspects of Land System Science are not discussed in this issue — either because reviews of those topics have been published recently or because contributions were unavailable or not yet ready for publication. Examples of recent reviews on other important aspects of Land System Science include those on long term historic changes in land use [30], land use and the climate system [31,32], forest transitions [33], land use data [34] and livestock systems [35]. Also, a series of meta-analysis of case studies on the drivers [36–41] and consequences of land system change [42,43] provide a useful synthesis of commonalities and context dependencies across place-based land systems research. The synthesis of land change, through review, metaanalysis and the development of conceptual frameworks and theory, helps to bring together findings on land system changes across different scales and from different disciplinary perspectives. All papers in this issue identify Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437
new challenges based on the knowledge gaps identified within the review. This way, synthesis of current knowledge translates into an updated research agenda for the Land System Science community.
Acknowledgements The editors of this issue would like to thank the many reviewers that have provided constructive comments on the articles submitted to this issue. This issue is one of the synthesis products of the Global Land Project (http://www.globallandproject.org). Work on this issue has been supported by several European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme funded projects: ERC Grant Agreement n. 311819 (GLOLAND), ERC Grant Agreement n. 263522 (LUISE), FP7 Grant agreement 265286 (IREDD+) and by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) within the project P20812-G11.
References 1.
Turner BL II, Janetos AC, Verburg PH, Murray AT: Land system architecture: using land systems to adapt and mitigate global environmental change. Global Environ Change 2013, 23:395397.
2.
Turner BL II, Ross RH, Skole DL: Relating land use and global land-cover change: a proposal for an IGBP-HDP core project. Report from the IGBP-HDP Working Group on Land-Use/LandCover Change. Joint Publication of the International GeosphereBiosphere Programme (Report No. 24) and the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Programme (Report No. 5). Stockholm: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; 1993.
3.
Lambin EF, Baulies X, Bockstael NE, Fischer G, Krug T, Leemans R, Moran EF, Rindfuss RR, Sato Y, Skole D et al.: LandUse and Land-Cover Change (LUCC), Implementation Strategy. Stockholm, Bonn: IGBP; 1999.
4.
Lambin EF, Geist H (Eds): Land-use and land-cover change—local processes and global impacts. Berlin: Springer; 2006.
5.
Turner BL, Lambin EF, Reenberg A: The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007, 104: 20666-20671.
6.
Rindfuss RR, Walsh SJ, Turner BL II, Fox J, Mishra V: Developing a science of land change: challenges and methodological issues. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004, 101:13976-13981.
7.
Verburg PH: Simulating feedbacks in land use and land cover change models. Landsc Ecol 2006, 21:1171-1183.
8.
Liu JQ, Hull V, Batistella M, DeFries R, Dietz T, Fu F, Hertel TW, Izaurralde RC, Lambin EF, Li S et al.: Framing sustainability in a telecoupled world. Ecol Soc 2013, 18:26.
9.
Lambin EF, Meyfroidt P: Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011, 108:3465-3472.
10. Seto KC, Reenberg A, Boone CG, Fragkias M, Haase D, Langanke T, Marcotullio P, Munroe DK, Olah B, Simon D: Urban land teleconnections and sustainability. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012. 11. Reid WV, Chen D, Goldfarb L, Hackmann H, Lee YT, Mokhele K, Ostrom E, Raivio K, Rockstro¨m J, Schellnhuber HJ et al.: Earth system science for global sustainability: grand challenges. Science 2010, 330:916-917. 12. Bourgoin J, Castella J-C, Pullar D, Lestrelin G, Bouahom B: Toward a land zoning negotiation support platform: ‘‘tips and tricks’’ for participatory land use planning in Laos. Landsc Urban Plan 2012, 104:270-278. 13. Deininger K, Selod H, Burns T: The land governance assessment framework: identifying and monitoring good practice in the land sector. Washington: World Bank; 2011. 14. Sikor T, Auld G, Bebbington AJ, Benjaminsen TA, Gentry BS, Hunsberger C, Izac A-M, Margulis ME, Plieninger T, Schroeder H et al.: Global land governance: from territory to flow? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:522-527. www.sciencedirect.com
Editorial overview Verburg et al. 437
15. Bateman IJ, Harwood AR, Mace GM, Watson RT, Abson DJ, Andrews B, Binner A, Crowe A, Day BH, Dugdale S et al.: Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 2013, 341:45-50.
29. Messerli P, Heinimann A, Giger M, Breu T, Scho¨nweger O: From ‘land grabbing’ to sustainable investments in land: potential contributions by land change science. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:528-534.
16. Seppelt R, Lautenbach S, Volk M: Identifying trade-offs between ecosystem services, land use, and biodiversity: a plea for combining scenario analysis and optimization on different spatial scales. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:458-463.
30. Ellis EC, Kaplan JO, Fuller DQ, Vavrus S, Klein Goldewijk K, Verburg PH: Used planet: a global history. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1217241110. in press.
17. Meyfroidt P, Lambin EF, Erb K-H, Hertel TW: Globalization of land use: distant drivers of land change and geographic displacement of land use. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:438444.
31. Houghton RA, House JI, Pongratz J, van der Werf GR, DeFries RS, Hansen MC, Le Que´re´ C, Ramankutty N: Carbon emissions from land use and land-cover change. Biogeosciences 2012, 9:5125-5142.
18. Gu¨neralp B, Seto KC, Ramachandran M: Evidence of urban land teleconnections and impacts on hinterlands. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:445-451.
32. Hibbard K, Janetos A, van Vuuren DP, Pongratz J, Rose SK, Betts R, Herold M, Feddema JJ: Research priorities in land use and land-cover change for the Earth system and integrated assessment modelling. Int J Climatol 2010, 30:2118-2128.
19. Brown DG, Verburg PH, Pontius RG, Lange MD: Opportunities to improve impact, integration, and evaluation of land change models. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:452-457.
33. Meyfroidt P, Lambin EF: Global forest transition: prospects for an end to deforestation. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2011, 36:343-371.
20. Castella J-C, Pheng Kam S, Dinh Quang D, Verburg PH, Thai Hoanh C: Combining top-down and bottom-up modelling approaches of land use/cover change to support public policies: application to sustainable management of natural resources in northern Vietnam. Land Use Policy 2007, 24:531-545.
34. Verburg PH, Neumann K, Nol L: Challenges in using land use and land cover data for global change studies. Global Change Biol 2011, 17:974-989.
21. Erb KH, Haberl H, Rudbeck Jepsen M, Kuemmerle T, Lindner M, Mueller D, Verburg PH, Reenberg A: A conceptual framework for analysing and measuring land-use intensity. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:464-470.
35. Herrero M, Thornton PK, Gerber P, Reid RS: Livestock, livelihoods and the environment: understanding the tradeoffs. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2009, 1:111-120. 36. Geist HJ, Lambin EF: Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. Bioscience 2002, 52:143-150.
22. Munroe DK, van Berkel DB, Verburg PH, Olson JL: Alternative trajectories of land abandonment: causes, consequences and research challenges. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:471-476.
37. Seto KC, Fragkias M, Gu¨neralp B, Reilly MK: A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e23777.
23. Grau R, Kuemmerle T, Macchi L: Beyond ‘land sparing versus land sharing’: environmental heterogeneity, globalization and the balance between agricultural production and nature conservation. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:477-483.
38. Keys E, McConnell WJ: Global change and the intensification of agriculture in the tropics. Global Environ Change A 2005, 15:320-337.
24. Kuemmerle T, Erb K, Meyfroidt P, Mu¨ller D, Verburg PH, Estel S, Haberl H, Hostert P, Jepsen MR, Kastner T et al.: Challenges and opportunities in mapping land use intensity globally. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:484-493. 25. Verburg PH, Mertz O, Erb K-H, Haberl H, Wu W: Land system change and food security: towards multi-scale land system solutions. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:494-502. 26. Nagendra H, Reyers B, Lavorel S: Impacts of land change on biodiversity: making the link to ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:503-508. 27. Crossman ND, Bryan BA, de Groot RS, Lin Y-P, Minang PA: Land science contributions to ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:509-514. 28. Messina JP, Pan WK: Different ontologies: land change science and health research. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2013, 5:515-521.
www.sciencedirect.com
39. van Vliet N, Mertz O, Heinimann A, Langanke T, Pascual U, Schmook B, Adams C, Schmidt-Vogt D, Messerli P, Leisz S et al.: Trends, drivers and impacts of changes in swidden cultivation in tropical forest-agriculture frontiers: a global assessment. Global Environ Change 2012, 22:418-429. 40. Geist HJ, Lambin EF: Dynamic causal patterns of desertification. Bioscience 2004, 54:817-829. 41. Van Asselen S, Verburg PH, Vermaat JE, Janse J: A global metaanalysis of wetland conversion. PLoS ONE 2013. in press. 42. Don A, Schumacher J, Freibauer A: Impact of tropical land-use change on soil organic carbon stocks—a meta-analysis. Global Change Biol 2011, 17:1658-1670. 43. Gibson L, Lee TM, Koh LP, Brook BW, Gardner TA, Barlow J, Peres CA, Bradshaw CJA, Laurance WF, Lovejoy TE et al.: Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity. Nature 2011, 478:378-381.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2013, 5:433–437