BONN, Germany (Landscape News) Is sustainable intensification really the solution to the world’s growing demand for food, energy and water? Adrian Martin of Britain’s University of East Anglia suggests we may need to re-think our response to this challenge.
We don’t really know how to define or measure sustainable intensification, Martin argues, which hinders our ability to analyze interventions effectively.
The limited studies that do examine the impact of sustainable intensification often reveal negative consequences – not the “win-win” scenarios that many researchers expect, Martin says.
For instance, yields may increase but the environment and ecosystems suffer; communities and ecosystems both suffer; or there are social trade-offs — wealthier groups who invest in intensification prosper but these investments generate environmental problems for poorer neighbors who are also left further behind.
If sustainable intensification is not a “blue-print” for filling growing demand-supply gaps, what are the alternative options?
Martin suggests the following: changing consumer efforts – in particular encouraging people to eat less meat; reducing wastage and inefficiencies in supply; and improving distribution systems so that the needs of the global elite are not met at the expense of the global poor.
Finally…
…thank you for reading this story. Our mission is to make them freely accessible to everyone, no matter where they are.
We believe that lasting and impactful change starts with changing the way people think. That’s why we amplify the diverse voices the world needs to hear – from local restoration leaders to Indigenous communities and women who lead the way.
By supporting us, not only are you supporting the world’s largest knowledge-led platform devoted to sustainable and inclusive landscapes, but you’re also becoming a vital part of a global movement that’s working tirelessly to create a healthier world for us all.
Every donation counts – no matter the amount. Thank you for being a part of our mission.
