Peer-reviewed publications

The past few years have been an important time for food systems. Numerous studies (1, 2) have pointed to the sweeping benefits of a global food system transformation, the first ever United Nations Food Systems Summit brought together a broad group to stakeholders to accelerate action on food systems, and global scientific bodies, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (3) and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (4), have highlighted the central importance of food systems in achieving global goals. Despite these positive trends at the global level, national-level action on food system transformation has lagged, and the world is off course to meet many global nutrition targets (5), which in turn will also have disastrous consequences for the environment.

Wildlife conservation in the Anthropocene requires bold conservation solutions including restoration of ecosystems and species. The recovery of large carnivore populations is a conservation goal which can generate significant benefits in terms of ecosystem services, ecological functionality, and human well-being. Tigers Panthera tigris, Asia’s most iconic species, are currently restricted to less than 10% of their historic range with recent national extinctions from a number of countries in mainland Southeast Asia. Tiger recovery through range expansion requires suitable habitat, a robust prey base, and high levels of institutional support for conservation. We explored government support for conservation to produce a ranking of the political opportunities for tiger restoration across current and former tiger range countries. We used this analysis, in combination with globally remotely sensed data-sets on human impact, to show that there is potential for significant tiger range expansion. We identified large expanses of currently unoccupied, but potentially suitable, habitat in at least 14 countries including all extant tiger range countries and four countries with extirpated tiger populations – Cambodia, Lao PDR, Viet Nam, and Kazakhstan. Thirty-two percent of expansion areas were within 50-km, and 50% within 100-km, of current tiger populations highlighting that in many landscapes range expansion could be driven by the natural dispersal of tigers provided connectivity is maintained or enhanced. The proportion of potential range within existing protected areas varied between <5% in India, Indonesia, and China, to >60% in Thailand and Cambodia. As such socially appropriate conservation approaches, in collaboration with local communities, will be necessary to support tiger recovery in many areas. We recommend that some of the areas which we have identified should be highlighted as significant for future tiger conservation by tiger range country governments. Whilst the landscapes and sites which we identify will require detailed ground-truthing, and all tiger reintroductions need extensive planning and feasibility assessments, safeguarding these areas for human-carnivore coexistence could provide significant planetary benefits and support both tiger recovery and Global Sustainable Development Goals.

Sustaining ecosystem services (ES) critical to human well-being is hindered by many practitioners lacking access to ES models (“the capacity gap”) or knowledge of the accuracy of available models (“the certainty gap”), especially in the world’s poorer regions. We developed ensembles of multiple models at an unprecedented global scale for five ES of high policy relevance. Ensembles were 2 to 14% more accurate than individual models. Ensemble accuracy was not correlated with proxies for research capacity, indicating that accuracy is distributed equitably across the globe and that countries less able to research ES suffer no accuracy penalty. By making these ES ensembles and associated accuracy estimates freely available, we provide globally consistent ES information that can support policy and decision-making in regions with low data availability or low capacity for implementing complex ES models. Thus, we hope to reduce the capacity and certainty gaps impeding local- to global-scale movement toward ES sustainability.

Harmful fisheries subsidies contribute to overfishing leading to environmental and societal impacts. If only fisheries and ecosystems within the subsidising nations’ jurisdiction were affected, then unilateral actions might be sufficient to help safeguard our ocean and the people reliant upon it. However, just as fish move between jurisdictions, so too do the subsidised fishing fleets that target them. As such, the impacts and solutions to subsidies-induced overfishing are often matters of international concern. Mapping the distribution and flows of harmful subsidies is therefore key to understanding these concerns, informing multilateral reform, and empowering impacted nations to strengthen the terms of access to their waters and resources. Here we quantify the amount of harmful fisheries subsidies that supports fishing in the high seas, domestic and foreign waters. We estimate that between 20% and 37% of all harmful fisheries subsidies support fishing in foreign waters or the high seas, that is outside the jurisdictions of the subsidising nations. We show that harmful subsidies primarily originate from nations with high-Human Development Index (HDI), strong fisheries management capacity and relatively sustainable fish stocks, yet disproportionately impact nations with low or very low-HDI, lower management capacity and more vulnerable fish stocks—40% of the harmful subsidies that support fishing in very low-HDI nations waters originate from high-HDI and very-high HDI nations. We show that Asia, Europe, and North America, are net subsidy sources; they provide more harmful subsidies to their fishing fleets than their respective ecosystems are impacted by; while Africa, South, Central America and Caribbean, and Oceania are net subsidy-sinks. This discrepancy between the source of harmful subsidies and the nations that are ultimately impacted is unsustainable and unjust. Prohibiting all harmful subsidies to distant-water fishing and fishing in the high seas—with narrow exceptions for Small Island Developing States—should be prioritised to support the advancement of sustainable and equitable fisheries worldwide.

Dams have often been constructed for hydropower, water storage and to support socio-economic development, particularly in areas of water stress. In many places, the water stored in human-made reservoirs is essential to meet the development objectives of water supply, agriculture, industry, energy generation and other sectors. However, in the absence of adequate foresight and planning, many past dams have had considerable negative impacts on ecosystems and the livelihoods of affected communities, resulting in conflicts and health hazards. While enhanced human health and well-being could be considered as the ultimate outcome of development programs, the public health impact of dams remains an issue that is often neglected by policy makers and investors. National policies and international guidelines, such as those of the World Commission on Dams, have been used to improve planning and impact assessment of dams. Here, we provide an analysis of four large dams, across three continents, and show that they had limited consistency with World Commission on Dams principles and guidelines. Moreover, health aspects were largely neglected during planning, construction and operation of these dams, but seriously undermine their intended benefits. This perspective paper discusses impacts of dams on energy and food, ecosystem health, inclusion, and ultimately human health and wellbeing. We argue that a One Health perspective, based on these four categories, can support the systematic consideration of environmental, animal, and human health determinants. A dedicated One Health approach to dams and reservoirs remains to be developed but could potentially improve how dams, both existing and future, support more inclusive development.

The great expansion of economic activity since the end of World War II has caused an unprecedented rise in living standards, but it has also caused rapid changes in earth systems. Nearly all types of natural capital—the world’s stock of resources and services provided by nature—are in decline. Clean air, abundant and clean water, fertile soils, productive fisheries, dense forests, and healthy oceans are critical for healthy lives and healthy economies. Mounting pressures, however, suggest that the trend of declining natural capital may cast a long shadow into the future.Nature’s Frontiers: Achieving Sustainability, Efficiency, and Prosperity with Natural Capital presents a novel approach to address these foundational challenges of sustainability. A methodology combining innovative science, new data sources, and cutting-edge biophysical and economic models builds sustainable resource efficiency frontiers to assess how countries can sustainably use their natural capital more efficiently. The analysis provides recommendations on how countries can better use their natural capital to achieve their economic and environ mental goals.The report indicates that significant efficiency gaps exist in nearly every country. Closing these gaps can address many of the world’s pressing economic and environmental problems—economic productivity, health, food and water security, and climate change. Although the approach outlined in this report will entail demanding policy reforms, the costs of inaction will be far higher.

Aquaculture production is projected to surpass wild-capture fisheries as the primary source of aquatic animal protein in the near future. Farmed shrimp—which are amongst the most valuable aquaculture commodities—are raised predominantly in Southeast Asia and Latin America in a variety of production systems, spanning from extensive to intensive farming. Shrimp aquaculture has been widely criticized for causing mangrove forest degradation and loss, leading to calls for more sustainable aquaculture approaches that protect mangroves. Here we examine an approach promoted as more sustainable—integrated mangrove aquaculture (IMA): a type of farming where mangroves are planted in or alongside shrimp ponds. We argue that mangroves within IMA shrimp systems provide biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services that are, at best, compromised, especially when compared to intact mangrove forests. Given the rapid adoption of IMA approaches, including advocacy for uptake from many governments and non-governmental organizations, there is an urgent need to ensure that these and other aquaculture systems do not result in any conversion of intact mangrove ecosystems into aquaculture ponds, and to identify any benefits (or lack thereof) provided by IMA systems. The increasing adoption of IMA may offer false promises for managing trade-offs between increasing aquaculture productivity and mangrove forest conservation.

Climate change, globalization, and increasing industrial and urban activities threaten the sustainability and viability of small-scale fisheries. How those affected can collectively mobilize their actions, share knowledge, and build their local adaptive capacity will shape how best they respond to these changes. This paper examines the changes experienced by small-scale fishing actors, social and governance complexities, and the sustainability challenges within the fisheries system in Limbe, Cameroon. Drawing on the fish-as-food framework, we discuss how ineffective fishery management in light of a confluence of global threats has resulted in changes to fish harvesters’ activities, causing shortages in fish supply and disruptions in the fish value chain. The paper uses focus group discussions with fish harvesters and fishmongers to present three key findings. First, we show that changes in the fisheries from increased fishing activities and ineffective fishery management have disrupted fish harvesting and supply, impacting the social and economic well-being of small-scale fishing actors and their communities. Second, there are complexities in the fisheries value chain due to shortages in fish supply, creating conflicts between fisheries actors whose activities are not regulated by any specific set of rules or policies. Third, despite the importance of small-scale fisheries in Limbe, management has been abandoned by fishing actors who are not well-equipped with the appropriate capacity to design and enforce effective fishery management procedures and protections against illegal fishing activities. Empirical findings from this understudied fishery make scholarly contributions to the literature on the fish-as-food framework and demonstrate the need to support small-scale actors’ fishing activities and the sustainability of the fisheries system in Limbe.

Coastal communities are on the frontlines of three accelerating global change drivers, climate change, blue growth, and the expansion of area-based conservation, leading to a “triple exposure” scenario. Despite efforts to maximize social benefits from climate, development, and conservation, externally driven processes can converge to amplify vulnerabilities and inequalities. Pre-existing social injustices increase the sensitivity of affected individuals to change and limit their capacity to adapt or benefit from the interacting impacts of triple exposure. We argue that external implementors cannot effectively and equitably achieve climate, economic, and conservation goals without prioritizing social justice and building general resilience. We therefore recommend that implementors: (1) address root causes of vulnerability, namely pre-existing social injustices; (2) use participatory systems approaches to improve understanding of local contexts and potential consequences of proposed initiatives; and (3) leverage inclusive partnerships to facilitate collaborative design and implementation. These strategies—applied together and adapted to local contexts—can support well-being, justice, and resilience within coastal communities experiencing rapid change.

Jaguars (Panthera onca) exert critical top-down control over large vertebrates across the Neotropics. Yet, this iconic species have been declining due to multiple threats, such as habitat loss and hunting, which are rapidly increasing across the New World tropics. Based on geospatial layers, we extracted socio-environmental variables for 447 protected areas across the Brazilian Amazon to identify those that merit short-term high-priority efforts to maximize jaguar persistence. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and comparisons of measures of central tendency. Our results reveal that areas containing the largest jaguar densities and the largest estimated population sizes are precisely among those confronting most anthropogenic threats. Jaguars are threatened in the world’s largest tropical forest biome by deforestation associated with anthropogenic fires, and the subsequent establishment of pastures. By contrasting the highest threats with the highest jaguar population sizes in a bivariate plot, we provide a shortlist of the top-10 protected areas that should be prioritized for immediate jaguar conservation efforts and 74 for short-term action. Many of these are located at the deforestation frontier or in important boundaries with neighboring countries (e.g., Peruvian, Colombian and Venezuelan Amazon). The predicament of a safe future for jaguars can only be ensured if protected areas persist and resist downgrading and downsizing due to both external anthropogenic threats and geopolitical pressures (e.g., infrastructure development and frail law enforcement).