globalchange  > 气候变化与战略
DOI: 10.1111/gcb.14878
论文题名:
Which practices co-deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?
作者: Smith P.; Calvin K.; Nkem J.; Campbell D.; Cherubini F.; Grassi G.; Korotkov V.; Le Hoang A.; Lwasa S.; McElwee P.; Nkonya E.; Saigusa N.; Soussana J.-F.; Taboada M.A.; Manning F.C.; Nampanzira D.; Arias-Navarro C.; Vizzarri M.; House J.; Roe S.; Cowie A.; Rounsevell M.; Arneth A.
刊名: Global Change Biology
ISSN: 13541013
出版年: 2020
卷: 26, 期:3
语种: 英语
英文关键词: adaptation ; adverse side effects ; co-benefits ; demand management ; desertification ; food security ; land degradation ; land management ; mitigation ; practice ; risk management
Scopus关键词: article ; climate change ; competition ; desertification ; diet ; food security ; human ; risk management
英文摘要: 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 CO2eq/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. © 2019 The Authors. Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Citation statistics:
资源类型: 期刊论文
标识符: http://119.78.100.158/handle/2HF3EXSE/158799
Appears in Collections:气候变化与战略

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.


作者单位: Institute of Biological & Environmental Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom; Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute, College Park, MD, United States; United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; The University of the West Indies, Mona, Jamaica; Industrial Ecology Programme, Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy; Yu. A. Izrael Institute of Global Climate and Ecology, Moscow, Russian Federation; Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), Hanoi, Viet Nam; Department of Geography, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda; Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; IFPRI, Washington, DC, United States; Center for Global Environmental Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan; French National Institute for Agricultural, Environment and Food Research (INRA), Paris, France; National Agricultural Technology Institute (INTA), Natural Resources Research Center (CIRN), Institute of Soils, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina; Department of Livestock and Industrial Resources, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda; School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom; Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, United States; Climate Focus, Berlin, Germany; NSW Department of Primary Industries, DPI Agriculture, Livestock Industries Centre, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia; Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Atmospheric Environmental Research (KIT, IMK-IFU), Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany; Institute of Geography, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Recommended Citation:
Smith P.,Calvin K.,Nkem J.,et al. Which practices co-deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?[J]. Global Change Biology,2020-01-01,26(3)
Service
Recommend this item
Sava as my favorate item
Show this item's statistics
Export Endnote File
Google Scholar
Similar articles in Google Scholar
[Smith P.]'s Articles
[Calvin K.]'s Articles
[Nkem J.]'s Articles
百度学术
Similar articles in Baidu Scholar
[Smith P.]'s Articles
[Calvin K.]'s Articles
[Nkem J.]'s Articles
CSDL cross search
Similar articles in CSDL Cross Search
[Smith P.]‘s Articles
[Calvin K.]‘s Articles
[Nkem J.]‘s Articles
Related Copyright Policies
Null
收藏/分享
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

Items in IR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.