Global Coverage of Agricultural Sustainability Standards, and Their Role in Conserving Biodiversity

Could global norms enable definition of sustainable farming systems in a transformative international trade system?

This paper aims to support differentiation between sustainable and unsustainable agricultural production, with a view to enabling a transformative agricultural trade system by incentivizing sustainable agricultural production. We argue that transformative governance of corresponding global trade flows will need to provide support to the weaker participants in production systems, above all small-scale farmers in the global South, in order to support their food security and a path out of poverty as well as global environmental goals. The present article seeks to provide an overview of internationally agreed norms that can serve as basis for differentiation between sustainable and unsustainable agricultural systems. Such common objectives and benchmarks could then be used in multilateral and binational trade agreements. We propose a list of objectives, criteria, and benchmarks that could contribute to formulation of new trade agreements that strengthen producers who are currently marginalized in international trade flows. While acknowledging that sustainability cannot be easily measured and defined for all site-specific conditions, we posit that it is nevertheless possible to identify such common objectives and benchmarks, based on internationally agreed norms.

Sustainability standards in global agrifood supply chains

Agrifood supply chains contribute to many environmental and social problems. Sustainability standards-rules that supply chain actors may follow to demonstrate their commitment to social equity and/or environmental protection-aim to mitigate such problems. We provide a narrative review of the effects of many distinct sustainability standards on different supply chain actors spanning multiple crops. Furthermore, we discuss five emerging questions-causality, exclusion, compliance and monitoring, excess supply and emerging country markets-and identify directions for future research. We find that, while sustainability standards can help improve the sustainability of production processes in certain situations, they are insufficient to ensure food system sustainability at scale, nor do they advance equity objectives in agrifood supply chains.

Emergy unsustainability index for agricultural systems assessment: A proposal based on the laws of thermodynamics

The anthropic effects of agriculture call for more sustainable systems. Agricultural sustainability conventionally communicates an idea of perennity. However, the sustainability of living open systems, like agricultural systems, can be regarded as a mere utopian idea when the effects of the laws of thermodynamics are taken into account. Under such physical laws, what really exists is the fact that any system alone has the property of unsustainability. The rate of entropy production can denote the potential level of the unsustainability of a system. The higher the rate of entropy production in an agricultural system, the higher its potential for unsustainability. Directly measuring entropy in living open systems is unfeasible. Even so, such systems are subject to the laws of thermodynamics. Indirect measurements of entropy in living open systems can be assessed by approximation through an analysis of the energy flows of the system. We used emergy analysis to account for the energy flows and compare the unsustainability among agricultural systems. However, the indicators proposed by emergy analysts have been more aligned with the perspective of sustainability. To change this perspective, we propose an emergy unsustainability index applied in this paper specifically to agricultural systems (EUI_AS). EUI_AS is not a simple inversion of the ESI obtained by the ratio between the Emergy Yield Ratio (EYR) and the Environmental Loading Ratio (ELR). The use of renewable exergy stored from one production cycle to another is one of the peculiarities of long-term agricultural systems. Therefore, quantifying the renewable and non-renewable fractions of resources used is fundamental to the EUI_AS. A higher EUI_AS means that an agricultural system is more dependent on non-renewable economic resources than renewable resources, and, in general, environmental impacts are higher due to the use of non-renewable resources.

Actions on sustainable food production and consumption for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework

Current food production and consumption trends are inconsistent with the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2050 vision of living in harmony with nature. Here, we examine how, and under what conditions, the post-2020 biodiversity framework can support transformative change in food systems. Our analysis of actions proposed in four science-policy fora reveals that subsidy reform, valuation, food waste reduction, sustainability standards, life cycle assessments, sustainable diets, mainstreaming biodiversity, and strengthening governance can support more sustainable food production and consumption. By considering barriers and opportunities of implementing these actions in Peru and the United Kingdom, we derive potential targets and indicators for the post-2020 biodiversity framework. For targets to support transformation, genuine political commitment, accountability and compliance, and wider enabling conditions and actions by diverse agents are needed to shift food systems onto a sustainable path.

Action needed for the EU Common Agricultural Policy to address sustainability challenges

Making agriculture sustainable is a global challenge. In the European Union (EU), the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is failing with respect to biodiversity, climate, soil, land degradation as well as socio-economic challenges.The European Commission's proposal for a CAP post-2020 provides a scope for enhanced sustainability. However, it also allows Member States to choose low-ambition implementation pathways. It therefore remains essential to address citizens' demands for sustainable agriculture and rectify systemic weaknesses in the CAP, using the full breadth of available scientific evidence and knowledge.Concerned about current attempts to dilute the environmental ambition of the future CAP, and the lack of concrete proposals for improving the CAP in the draft of the European Green Deal, we call on the European Parliament, Council and Commission to adopt 10 urgent action points for delivering sustainable food production, biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation.Knowledge is available to help moving towards evidence-based, sustainable European agriculture that can benefit people, nature and their joint futures.The statements made in this article have the broad support of the scientific community, as expressed by above 3,600 signatories to the preprint version of this manuscript. The list can be found here (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3685632).

Which practices co-deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?

There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as "land challenges"). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 Gt CO2 eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing-up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.

Similarities and Differences between International REDD+ and Transnational Deforestation-Free Supply Chain Initiatives—A Review

After years of multilateral deliberations on how to stop global deforestation, such as REDD+ under the UNFCCC, deforestation-free supply chain (DFSC) initiatives emerged from the private sector. Linking both concepts conceptually and in policy practice could provide for synergies and enable more effective approaches against global deforestation. To operationalise such a linkage, a prerequisite is the knowledge of both concepts’ key characteristics, as well as resulting similarities and differences. This literature review firstly identifies key characteristics that affects the potential impact of such concepts, secondly analyses if and how REDD+ and DFSC define these characteristics, and thirdly compares both concepts towards a potential linkage. The results show that a linkage of REDD+ and DFSC provides numerous complementarities which could foster the goal of halting deforestation. This includes for example the driver commercial agriculture, and in terms of permanence, leakage, and degradation. But close coordination is needed to avoid unintended negative consequences, especially for subsistence and smallholder agriculture. The comparison shows that the political consensus found under REDD+ provides a good basis to be supplemented with private sectors’ DFSC initiatives, but additional initiatives like the Bonn Challenge and investments in agroforestry are needed in order to ensure the long-term effect on forest conversion.

Mechanisms of soil macrofauna community sustainability in temperate rice-growing systems

Rice growing requires highly destructive and highly invasive field management negatively affecting soil biota and its functions. We aimed to compare taxonomic and functional trait compositions of soil macrofauna at different stages of rice cropping cycles in the three temperate rice-growing regions in Russia. Samples were collected in 2016 at four different biotopes in each region: flooded rice paddies; upland crops planted one year after flooded rice; rice paddy bunds; and relatively undisturbed seminatural control grasslands. Collected soil macrofauna were allocated to different traits according to their feeding preferences, vertical distribution, mobility and flood tolerance. The lowest macrofaunal abundance across all regions was observed in rice paddies. Cultivation of upland crops after paddy flooding consistently decreased the abundance of resident macrofauna, but not that of mobile soil macrofauna. In the upland crops, the abundance of belowground and mobile belowground macrofauna was significantly higher than that in control grasslands. The abundance of aboveground phytophages was significantly lower in the upland crops than in control sites. Flood-associated taxa showed low colonization ability after the paddies were drained. In contrast, representatives of other traits recorded in flooded fields increased their abundance at the next stage of crop rotation, demonstrating high resilience within an entire rice-growing system, including bunds. This finding indicates a high potential of seminatural grasslands and especially bunds as sources of rapid restoration of soil macrofauna functional diversity in rice-growing agroecosystems, thus maintaining the sustainability of soil food webs in the rice paddies.

Biological control of an agricultural pest protects tropical forests

Though often perceived as an environmentally-risky practice, biological control of invasive species can restore crop yields, ease land pressure and thus contribute to forest conservation. Here, we show how biological control against the mealybug Phenacoccus manihoti (Hemiptera) slows deforestation across Southeast Asia. In Thailand, this newly-arrived mealybug caused an 18% decline in cassava yields over 2009-2010 and an escalation in prices of cassava products. This spurred an expansion of cassava cropping in neighboring countries from 713,000 ha in 2009 to > 1 million ha by 2011: satellite imagery reveals 388%, 330%, 185% and 608% increases in peak deforestation rates in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Vietnam focused in cassava crop expansion areas. Following release of the host-specific parasitoid Anagyrus lopezi (Hymenoptera) in 2010, mealybug outbreaks were reduced, cropping area contracted and deforestation slowed by 31-95% in individual countries. Hence, when judiciously implemented, insect biological control can deliver substantial environmental benefits.

Protecting tropical forests from the rapid expansion of rubber using carbon payments

Expansion of Hevea brasiliensis rubber plantations is a resurgent driver of deforestation, carbon emissions, and biodiversity loss in Southeast Asia. Southeast Asian rubber extent is massive, equivalent to 67% of oil palm, with rapid further expansion predicted. Results-based carbon finance could dis-incentivise forest conversion to rubber, but efficacy will be limited unless payments match, or at least approach, the costs of avoided deforestation. These include opportunity costs (timber and rubber profits), plus carbon finance scheme setup (transaction) and implementation costs. Using comprehensive Cambodian forest data, exploring scenarios of selective logging and conversion, and assuming land-use choice is based on net present value, we find that carbon prices of $30–$51 per tCO₂ are needed to break even against costs, higher than those currently paid on carbon markets or through carbon funds. To defend forests from rubber, either carbon prices must be increased, or other strategies are needed, such as corporate zero-deforestation pledges, and governmental regulation and enforcement of forest protection.

Expansion of rubber plantations threatens tropical forest carbon stocks and biodiversity, but may be dis-incentivised using carbon finance. Here, Warren-Thomas et al. use forest and agricultural data for Cambodia to show that carbon prices of $30–$51 per tCO₂ are needed to match forest protection costs.