The governance of land use strategies: Institutional and social dimensions of land sparing and land sharing

被引:35
|
作者
Jiren, Tolera S. [1 ]
Dorresteijn, Ine [1 ]
Schultner, Jannik [1 ]
Fischer, Joern [1 ]
机构
[1] Leuphana Univ Lueneburg, Fac Sustainabil, Scharnhorststr 1, D-21335 Luneburg, Germany
来源
CONSERVATION LETTERS | 2018年 / 11卷 / 03期
关键词
biodiversity; conservation; food security; governance; institutions; intensification; land sharing; land sparing; land use strategy; AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION; TRADE-OFFS; CONSERVATION; BIODIVERSITY;
D O I
10.1111/conl.12429
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Agricultural land use is a key interface between the goals of ensuring food security and protecting biodiversity. Land sparing supports intensive agriculture to save land for conservation, whereas land sharing integrates production and conservation on the same land. The framing around sparing versus sharing has been extensively debated. Here, we focused on a frequently missing yet crucial component, namely the governance dimension. Through a case-study in Ethiopia, we uncovered stakeholder preferences for sparing versus sharing, the underlying rationale, and implementation capacity challenges. Policy stakeholders preferred sparing whereas implementation stakeholders preferred sharing, which aligned with existing informal institutions. Implementation of both strategies was limited by social, biophysical, and institutional factors. Land use policies need to account for both ecological patterns and social context. The findings from simple analytical frameworks (e.g., sparing vs. sharing) therefore need to be interpreted carefully, and in a social-ecological context, to generate meaningful recommendations for conservation practice.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Land Sharing vs Land Sparing to Conserve Biodiversity: How Agricultural Markets Make the Difference
    Marion Desquilbet
    Bruno Dorin
    Denis Couvet
    Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 2017, 22 : 185 - 200
  • [42] Land sharing vs. land sparing in the dry Caribbean lowlands: A dung beetles' perspective
    Montoya-Molina, S.
    Giraldo-Echeverri, C.
    Montoya-Lerma, J.
    Chara, J.
    Escobar, F.
    Calle, Z.
    APPLIED SOIL ECOLOGY, 2016, 98 : 204 - 212
  • [43] How imperfect can land sparing be before land sharing is more favourable for wild species?
    Balmford, Ben
    Green, Rhys E.
    Onial, Malvika
    Phalan, Ben
    Balmford, Andrew
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, 2019, 56 (01) : 73 - 84
  • [44] Land Sharing vs Land Sparing to Conserve Biodiversity: How Agricultural Markets Make the Difference
    Desquilbet, Marion
    Dorin, Bruno
    Couvet, Denis
    ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING & ASSESSMENT, 2017, 22 (03) : 185 - 200
  • [45] Landscape connectivity in extensive livestock farming: an adaptive approach to the land sharing and land sparing dilemma
    Pulido-Herrera, Luz Astrid
    Sepulveda, Claudia
    Jimenez, Jose Antonio
    Betanzos Simon, Juan Eduardo
    Perez-Sanchez, Edwin
    Nino, Larry
    FRONTIERS IN SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEMS, 2024, 8
  • [46] The Governance of Land Use: A Conceptual Framework
    Krawchenko, Tamara
    Tomaney, John
    LAND, 2023, 12 (03)
  • [47] Dimensions of land use conversion in California
    Farrell, Kenneth
    Report - University of California Water Resources Center, 1991, (75):
  • [48] Land and land use
    Brown, PE
    SCIENCE, 1936, 83 : 337 - 343
  • [49] Using optimization methods to align food production and biodiversity conservation beyond land sharing and land sparing
    Butsic, Van
    Kuemmerle, Tobias
    ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2015, 25 (03) : 589 - 595
  • [50] Land-sharing versus land-sparing logging: reconciling timber extraction with biodiversity conservation
    Edwards, David P.
    Gilroy, James J.
    Woodcock, Paul
    Edwards, Felicity A.
    Larsen, Trond H.
    Andrews, David J. R.
    Derhe, Mia A.
    Docherty, Teegan D. S.
    Hsu, Wayne W.
    Mitchell, Simon L.
    Ota, Takahiro
    Williams, Leah J.
    Laurance, William F.
    Hamer, Keith C.
    Wilcove, David S.
    GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2014, 20 (01) : 183 - 191