Loading…

Agricultural development and the conservation of avian biodiversity on the Eurasian steppes: a comparison of land‐sparing and land‐sharing approaches

The break‐up of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to the abandonment of >40 million ha of cropland, a collapse in livestock numbers and the recovery of depleted biodiversity on the steppe grasslands of Kazakhstan and southern Russia. More recently, large‐scale reclamation of abandoned cropland and int...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of applied ecology 2015-12, Vol.52 (6), p.1578-1587
Main Authors: Kamp, Johannes, Urazaliev, Ruslan, Balmford, Andrew, Donald, Paul F, Green, Rhys E, Lamb, Anthony J, Phalan, Ben, McKenzie, Ailsa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4637-e4028fc21a7f1f4fec17251b3a41fa337211add9c35f928e204da1cad089109b3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4637-e4028fc21a7f1f4fec17251b3a41fa337211add9c35f928e204da1cad089109b3
container_end_page 1587
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1578
container_title The Journal of applied ecology
container_volume 52
creator Kamp, Johannes
Urazaliev, Ruslan
Balmford, Andrew
Donald, Paul F
Green, Rhys E
Lamb, Anthony J
Phalan, Ben
McKenzie, Ailsa
description The break‐up of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to the abandonment of >40 million ha of cropland, a collapse in livestock numbers and the recovery of depleted biodiversity on the steppe grasslands of Kazakhstan and southern Russia. More recently, large‐scale reclamation of abandoned cropland and intensification of agriculture are observed, highlighting a need for strategies to reconcile agricultural development and biodiversity. We related bird densities along a land‐use gradient to yield estimates from arable and livestock systems in central Kazakhstan to decide whether a land‐sparing, a land‐sharing or an intermediate strategy would result in the largest benefits for biodiversity. For ‘loser species’ (whose population size is reduced by farming), land sparing was predicted to support higher total populations of more species than was land sharing, at all production targets. ‘Winners’ (species benefitting from agriculture) profited from land sharing when judged from food energy or protein. Intermediate yields were best for very few species. Heavily grazed steppe grassland was important for several globally threatened and biome‐restricted species. Government statistics suggested that over 50% of abandoned cropland has been reclaimed since 2000 and crop yields have increased. In the same period, there was significant progress towards the designation of new protected areas, but the total area in Kazakhstan still falls short of the Convention on Biological Diversity's 17% target. Policy implications. Further increases in agricultural production are likely to reduce populations of most birds, especially if they are achieved by conversion of abandoned cropland, or grassland. Our results suggest that production increases would do least harm if they resulted from increasing the output of existing cropland, using approaches such as snow accumulation, no‐till and more efficient grain harvesting and storage, rather than from further reclamation of abandoned land that is now reverting back to steppe. Production increases should be offset by improved conservation planning through the designation of protected areas on land potentially suitable for cropland expansion.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/1365-2664.12527
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1753460612</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>43869335</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>43869335</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4637-e4028fc21a7f1f4fec17251b3a41fa337211add9c35f928e204da1cad089109b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUstu1DAUtRBIDIU1K4QlNmzS-vqZsKuq4aVKIEHXlsexOx5l4mAng2bHJ7Dl9_gSnKbtggV4Y-m87pXOReg5kFMo7wyYFBWVkp8CFVQ9QKt75CFaEUKhqhsCj9GTnHeEkEYwtkK_zq9TsFM3Tsl0uHUH18Vh7_oRm77F49ZhG_vs0sGMIfY4emwOwfR4E2IbDi7lMB5xIWblumTkmcyjGwaX32BT3PvBpJAXb1dCf__4mWeov74ZcQdtb6FhSNHYrctP0SNvuuye3f4n6Ort-uvF--ry07sPF-eXleWSqcpxQmtvKRjlwXPvLCgqYMMMB28YUxTAtG1jmfANrR0lvDVgTUvqBkizYSfo9ZJbBn-bXB71PmTrurKYi1PWoATjkkigRfrqL-kuTqkv22mohVK8YVT9U6WY5CWMiqI6W1Q2xZyT83pIYW_SUQPRc6F6rk_P9embQotDLI7voXPH_8n1x8_rO9-LxbfLY0z3Ps5q2TA2b_Jy4b2J2pRzyPrqCyUg5yOhpJzJH5WBuIQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1736446025</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Agricultural development and the conservation of avian biodiversity on the Eurasian steppes: a comparison of land‐sparing and land‐sharing approaches</title><source>Wiley</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Kamp, Johannes ; Urazaliev, Ruslan ; Balmford, Andrew ; Donald, Paul F ; Green, Rhys E ; Lamb, Anthony J ; Phalan, Ben ; McKenzie, Ailsa</creator><creatorcontrib>Kamp, Johannes ; Urazaliev, Ruslan ; Balmford, Andrew ; Donald, Paul F ; Green, Rhys E ; Lamb, Anthony J ; Phalan, Ben ; McKenzie, Ailsa</creatorcontrib><description>The break‐up of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to the abandonment of &gt;40 million ha of cropland, a collapse in livestock numbers and the recovery of depleted biodiversity on the steppe grasslands of Kazakhstan and southern Russia. More recently, large‐scale reclamation of abandoned cropland and intensification of agriculture are observed, highlighting a need for strategies to reconcile agricultural development and biodiversity. We related bird densities along a land‐use gradient to yield estimates from arable and livestock systems in central Kazakhstan to decide whether a land‐sparing, a land‐sharing or an intermediate strategy would result in the largest benefits for biodiversity. For ‘loser species’ (whose population size is reduced by farming), land sparing was predicted to support higher total populations of more species than was land sharing, at all production targets. ‘Winners’ (species benefitting from agriculture) profited from land sharing when judged from food energy or protein. Intermediate yields were best for very few species. Heavily grazed steppe grassland was important for several globally threatened and biome‐restricted species. Government statistics suggested that over 50% of abandoned cropland has been reclaimed since 2000 and crop yields have increased. In the same period, there was significant progress towards the designation of new protected areas, but the total area in Kazakhstan still falls short of the Convention on Biological Diversity's 17% target. Policy implications. Further increases in agricultural production are likely to reduce populations of most birds, especially if they are achieved by conversion of abandoned cropland, or grassland. Our results suggest that production increases would do least harm if they resulted from increasing the output of existing cropland, using approaches such as snow accumulation, no‐till and more efficient grain harvesting and storage, rather than from further reclamation of abandoned land that is now reverting back to steppe. Production increases should be offset by improved conservation planning through the designation of protected areas on land potentially suitable for cropland expansion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2664</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12527</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JAPEAI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications</publisher><subject>abandoned land ; Agricultural landscapes ; Agricultural production ; Biodiversity ; Birds ; Conservation ; conservation areas ; crop yield ; cropland ; energy ; farming systems ; grazing ; grazing intensity ; harvesting ; issues and policy ; Kazakhstan ; Land use ; land‐use policy ; livestock ; no-tillage ; planning ; population size ; protected areas ; snow ; statistics ; steppe birds ; steppes ; sustainable intensification ; Wildlife conservation ; wildlife‐friendly farming ; yield gap</subject><ispartof>The Journal of applied ecology, 2015-12, Vol.52 (6), p.1578-1587</ispartof><rights>2015 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>2015 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2015 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Dec 2015</rights><rights>Journal of Applied Ecology © 2015 British Ecological Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4637-e4028fc21a7f1f4fec17251b3a41fa337211add9c35f928e204da1cad089109b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4637-e4028fc21a7f1f4fec17251b3a41fa337211add9c35f928e204da1cad089109b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/43869335$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/43869335$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kamp, Johannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Urazaliev, Ruslan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balmford, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donald, Paul F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Rhys E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lamb, Anthony J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phalan, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKenzie, Ailsa</creatorcontrib><title>Agricultural development and the conservation of avian biodiversity on the Eurasian steppes: a comparison of land‐sparing and land‐sharing approaches</title><title>The Journal of applied ecology</title><description>The break‐up of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to the abandonment of &gt;40 million ha of cropland, a collapse in livestock numbers and the recovery of depleted biodiversity on the steppe grasslands of Kazakhstan and southern Russia. More recently, large‐scale reclamation of abandoned cropland and intensification of agriculture are observed, highlighting a need for strategies to reconcile agricultural development and biodiversity. We related bird densities along a land‐use gradient to yield estimates from arable and livestock systems in central Kazakhstan to decide whether a land‐sparing, a land‐sharing or an intermediate strategy would result in the largest benefits for biodiversity. For ‘loser species’ (whose population size is reduced by farming), land sparing was predicted to support higher total populations of more species than was land sharing, at all production targets. ‘Winners’ (species benefitting from agriculture) profited from land sharing when judged from food energy or protein. Intermediate yields were best for very few species. Heavily grazed steppe grassland was important for several globally threatened and biome‐restricted species. Government statistics suggested that over 50% of abandoned cropland has been reclaimed since 2000 and crop yields have increased. In the same period, there was significant progress towards the designation of new protected areas, but the total area in Kazakhstan still falls short of the Convention on Biological Diversity's 17% target. Policy implications. Further increases in agricultural production are likely to reduce populations of most birds, especially if they are achieved by conversion of abandoned cropland, or grassland. Our results suggest that production increases would do least harm if they resulted from increasing the output of existing cropland, using approaches such as snow accumulation, no‐till and more efficient grain harvesting and storage, rather than from further reclamation of abandoned land that is now reverting back to steppe. Production increases should be offset by improved conservation planning through the designation of protected areas on land potentially suitable for cropland expansion.</description><subject>abandoned land</subject><subject>Agricultural landscapes</subject><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>conservation areas</subject><subject>crop yield</subject><subject>cropland</subject><subject>energy</subject><subject>farming systems</subject><subject>grazing</subject><subject>grazing intensity</subject><subject>harvesting</subject><subject>issues and policy</subject><subject>Kazakhstan</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>land‐use policy</subject><subject>livestock</subject><subject>no-tillage</subject><subject>planning</subject><subject>population size</subject><subject>protected areas</subject><subject>snow</subject><subject>statistics</subject><subject>steppe birds</subject><subject>steppes</subject><subject>sustainable intensification</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><subject>wildlife‐friendly farming</subject><subject>yield gap</subject><issn>0021-8901</issn><issn>1365-2664</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFUstu1DAUtRBIDIU1K4QlNmzS-vqZsKuq4aVKIEHXlsexOx5l4mAng2bHJ7Dl9_gSnKbtggV4Y-m87pXOReg5kFMo7wyYFBWVkp8CFVQ9QKt75CFaEUKhqhsCj9GTnHeEkEYwtkK_zq9TsFM3Tsl0uHUH18Vh7_oRm77F49ZhG_vs0sGMIfY4emwOwfR4E2IbDi7lMB5xIWblumTkmcyjGwaX32BT3PvBpJAXb1dCf__4mWeov74ZcQdtb6FhSNHYrctP0SNvuuye3f4n6Ort-uvF--ry07sPF-eXleWSqcpxQmtvKRjlwXPvLCgqYMMMB28YUxTAtG1jmfANrR0lvDVgTUvqBkizYSfo9ZJbBn-bXB71PmTrurKYi1PWoATjkkigRfrqL-kuTqkv22mohVK8YVT9U6WY5CWMiqI6W1Q2xZyT83pIYW_SUQPRc6F6rk_P9embQotDLI7voXPH_8n1x8_rO9-LxbfLY0z3Ps5q2TA2b_Jy4b2J2pRzyPrqCyUg5yOhpJzJH5WBuIQ</recordid><startdate>201512</startdate><enddate>201512</enddate><creator>Kamp, Johannes</creator><creator>Urazaliev, Ruslan</creator><creator>Balmford, Andrew</creator><creator>Donald, Paul F</creator><creator>Green, Rhys E</creator><creator>Lamb, Anthony J</creator><creator>Phalan, Ben</creator><creator>McKenzie, Ailsa</creator><general>Blackwell Scientific Publications</general><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201512</creationdate><title>Agricultural development and the conservation of avian biodiversity on the Eurasian steppes: a comparison of land‐sparing and land‐sharing approaches</title><author>Kamp, Johannes ; Urazaliev, Ruslan ; Balmford, Andrew ; Donald, Paul F ; Green, Rhys E ; Lamb, Anthony J ; Phalan, Ben ; McKenzie, Ailsa</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4637-e4028fc21a7f1f4fec17251b3a41fa337211add9c35f928e204da1cad089109b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>abandoned land</topic><topic>Agricultural landscapes</topic><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>conservation areas</topic><topic>crop yield</topic><topic>cropland</topic><topic>energy</topic><topic>farming systems</topic><topic>grazing</topic><topic>grazing intensity</topic><topic>harvesting</topic><topic>issues and policy</topic><topic>Kazakhstan</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>land‐use policy</topic><topic>livestock</topic><topic>no-tillage</topic><topic>planning</topic><topic>population size</topic><topic>protected areas</topic><topic>snow</topic><topic>statistics</topic><topic>steppe birds</topic><topic>steppes</topic><topic>sustainable intensification</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><topic>wildlife‐friendly farming</topic><topic>yield gap</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kamp, Johannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Urazaliev, Ruslan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balmford, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donald, Paul F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Rhys E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lamb, Anthony J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phalan, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKenzie, Ailsa</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kamp, Johannes</au><au>Urazaliev, Ruslan</au><au>Balmford, Andrew</au><au>Donald, Paul F</au><au>Green, Rhys E</au><au>Lamb, Anthony J</au><au>Phalan, Ben</au><au>McKenzie, Ailsa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Agricultural development and the conservation of avian biodiversity on the Eurasian steppes: a comparison of land‐sparing and land‐sharing approaches</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle><date>2015-12</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1578</spage><epage>1587</epage><pages>1578-1587</pages><issn>0021-8901</issn><eissn>1365-2664</eissn><coden>JAPEAI</coden><abstract>The break‐up of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to the abandonment of &gt;40 million ha of cropland, a collapse in livestock numbers and the recovery of depleted biodiversity on the steppe grasslands of Kazakhstan and southern Russia. More recently, large‐scale reclamation of abandoned cropland and intensification of agriculture are observed, highlighting a need for strategies to reconcile agricultural development and biodiversity. We related bird densities along a land‐use gradient to yield estimates from arable and livestock systems in central Kazakhstan to decide whether a land‐sparing, a land‐sharing or an intermediate strategy would result in the largest benefits for biodiversity. For ‘loser species’ (whose population size is reduced by farming), land sparing was predicted to support higher total populations of more species than was land sharing, at all production targets. ‘Winners’ (species benefitting from agriculture) profited from land sharing when judged from food energy or protein. Intermediate yields were best for very few species. Heavily grazed steppe grassland was important for several globally threatened and biome‐restricted species. Government statistics suggested that over 50% of abandoned cropland has been reclaimed since 2000 and crop yields have increased. In the same period, there was significant progress towards the designation of new protected areas, but the total area in Kazakhstan still falls short of the Convention on Biological Diversity's 17% target. Policy implications. Further increases in agricultural production are likely to reduce populations of most birds, especially if they are achieved by conversion of abandoned cropland, or grassland. Our results suggest that production increases would do least harm if they resulted from increasing the output of existing cropland, using approaches such as snow accumulation, no‐till and more efficient grain harvesting and storage, rather than from further reclamation of abandoned land that is now reverting back to steppe. Production increases should be offset by improved conservation planning through the designation of protected areas on land potentially suitable for cropland expansion.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Scientific Publications</pub><doi>10.1111/1365-2664.12527</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8901
ispartof The Journal of applied ecology, 2015-12, Vol.52 (6), p.1578-1587
issn 0021-8901
1365-2664
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1753460612
source Wiley; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection
subjects abandoned land
Agricultural landscapes
Agricultural production
Biodiversity
Birds
Conservation
conservation areas
crop yield
cropland
energy
farming systems
grazing
grazing intensity
harvesting
issues and policy
Kazakhstan
Land use
land‐use policy
livestock
no-tillage
planning
population size
protected areas
snow
statistics
steppe birds
steppes
sustainable intensification
Wildlife conservation
wildlife‐friendly farming
yield gap
title Agricultural development and the conservation of avian biodiversity on the Eurasian steppes: a comparison of land‐sparing and land‐sharing approaches
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-03-08T11%3A18%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Agricultural%20development%20and%20the%20conservation%20of%20avian%20biodiversity%20on%20the%20Eurasian%20steppes:%20a%20comparison%20of%20land%E2%80%90sparing%20and%20land%E2%80%90sharing%20approaches&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20applied%20ecology&rft.au=Kamp,%20Johannes&rft.date=2015-12&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1578&rft.epage=1587&rft.pages=1578-1587&rft.issn=0021-8901&rft.eissn=1365-2664&rft.coden=JAPEAI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12527&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E43869335%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4637-e4028fc21a7f1f4fec17251b3a41fa337211add9c35f928e204da1cad089109b3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1736446025&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=43869335&rfr_iscdi=true