Conclusions (Synthesis)

{"Glossary":{"51":{"name":"agricultural tree crops","description":"Trees cultivated for their food, cultural, or economic values. These include oil palm, rubber, cocoa, cashew, mango, oranges (citrus), plantain, banana, and coconut.\r\n"},"141":{"name":"agroforestry","description":"A diversified set of agricultural or agropastoral production systems that integrate trees in the agricultural landscape.\r\n"},"101":{"name":"albedo","description":"The ability of surfaces to reflect sunlight.\u0026nbsp;Light-colored surfaces return a large part of the sunrays back to the atmosphere (high albedo). Dark surfaces absorb the rays from the sun (low albedo).\r\n"},"94":{"name":"biodiversity intactness","description":"The proportion and abundance of a location\u0027s original forest community (number of species and individuals) that remain.\u0026nbsp;\r\n"},"95":{"name":"biodiversity significance","description":"The importance of an area for the persistence of forest-dependent species based on range rarity.\r\n"},"142":{"name":"boundary plantings","description":"Trees planted along boundaries or property lines to mark them well.\r\n"},"98":{"name":"carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)","description":"Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a measure used to aggregate emissions from various greenhouse gases (GHGs) on the basis of their 100-year global warming potentials by equating non-CO2 GHGs to the equivalent amount of CO2.\r\n"},"99":{"name":"CO2e","description":"Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a measure used to aggregate emissions from various greenhouse gases (GHGs) on the basis of their 100-year global warming potentials by equating non-CO2 GHGs to the equivalent amount of CO2.\r\n"},"1":{"name":"deforestation","description":"The change from forest to another land cover or land use, such as forest to plantation or forest to urban area.\r\n"},"77":{"name":"deforested","description":"The change from forest to another land cover or land use, such as forest to plantation or forest to urban area.\r\n"},"76":{"name":"degradation","description":"The reduction in a forest\u2019s ability to perform ecosystem services, such as carbon storage and water regulation, due to natural and anthropogenic changes.\r\n"},"75":{"name":"degraded","description":"The reduction in a forest\u2019s ability to perform ecosystem services, such as carbon storage and water regulation, due to natural and anthropogenic changes.\r\n"},"79":{"name":"disturbances","description":"A discrete event that changes the structure of a forest ecosystem.\r\n"},"68":{"name":"disturbed","description":"A discrete event that changes the structure of a forest ecosystem.\r\n"},"65":{"name":"driver of tree cover loss","description":"The direct cause of forest disturbance.\r\n"},"70":{"name":"drivers of loss","description":"The direct cause of forest disturbance.\r\n"},"81":{"name":"drivers of tree cover loss","description":"The direct cause of forest disturbance.\r\n"},"102":{"name":"evapotranspiration","description":"When solar energy hitting a forest converts liquid water into water vapor (carrying energy as latent heat) through evaporation and transpiration.\r\n"},"2":{"name":"forest","description":"Forests include tree cover greater than 30 percent tree canopy density and greater than 5 meters in height as mapped at a 30-meter Landsat pixel scale.\r\n"},"3":{"name":"forest concession","description":"A legal agreement allowing an entity the right to manage a public forest for production purposes.\r\n"},"90":{"name":"forest concessions","description":"A legal agreement allowing an entity the right to manage a public forest for production purposes.\r\n"},"53":{"name":"forest degradation","description":"The reduction in a forest\u2019s ability to perform ecosystem services, such as carbon storage and water regulation, due to natural and anthropogenic changes.\r\n"},"54":{"name":"forest disturbance","description":"A discrete event that changes the structure of a forest ecosystem.\r\n"},"100":{"name":"forest disturbances","description":"A discrete event that changes the structure of a forest ecosystem.\r\n"},"5":{"name":"forest fragmentation","description":"The breaking of large, contiguous forests into smaller pieces, with other land cover types interspersed.\r\n"},"6":{"name":"forest management plan","description":"A plan that documents the stewardship and use of forests and other wooded land to meet environmental, economic, social, and cultural objectives. Such plans are typically implemented by companies in forest concessions.\r\n"},"62":{"name":"forests","description":"Forests include tree cover greater than 30 percent tree canopy density and greater than 5 meters in height as mapped at a 30-meter Landsat pixel scale.\r\n"},"69":{"name":"fragmentation","description":"The breaking of large, contiguous forests into smaller pieces, with other land cover types interspersed.\r\n"},"80":{"name":"fragmented","description":"The breaking of large, contiguous forests into smaller pieces, with other land cover types interspersed.\r\n"},"74":{"name":"gain","description":"The establishment of tree canopy in an area that previously had no tree cover. Tree cover gain may indicate a number of potential activities, including natural forest growth or the crop rotation cycle of tree plantations.\r\n"},"143":{"name":"global land squeeze","description":"Pressure on finite land resources to produce food, feed and fuel for a growing human population while also sustaining biodiversity and providing ecosystem services.\r\n"},"7":{"name":"hectare","description":"One hectare equals 100 square meters, 2.47 acres, or 0.01 square kilometers and is about the size of a rugby field. A football pitch is slightly smaller than a hectare (pitches are between 0.62 and 0.82 hectares).\r\n"},"66":{"name":"hectares","description":"One hectare equals 100 square meters, 2.47 acres, or 0.01 square kilometers and is about the size of a rugby field. A football pitch is slightly smaller than a hectare (pitches are between 0.62 and 0.82 hectares).\r\n"},"67":{"name":"intact","description":"A forest that contains no signs of human activity or habitat fragmentation as determined by remote sensing images and is large enough to maintain all native biological biodiversity.\r\n"},"78":{"name":"intact forest","description":"A forest that contains no signs of human activity or habitat fragmentation as determined by remote sensing images and is large enough to maintain all native biological biodiversity.\r\n"},"8":{"name":"intact forests","description":"A forest that contains no signs of human activity or habitat fragmentation as determined by remote sensing images and is large enough to maintain all native biological biodiversity.\r\n"},"55":{"name":"land and environmental defenders","description":"People who peacefully promote and protect rights related to land and\/or the environment.\r\n"},"9":{"name":"loss driver","description":"The direct cause of forest disturbance.\r\n"},"10":{"name":"low tree canopy density","description":"Less than 30 percent tree canopy density.\r\n"},"84":{"name":"managed forest concession","description":"Areas where governments have given rights to private companies to harvest timber and other wood products from natural forests on public lands.\r\n"},"83":{"name":"managed forest concession maps for nine countries","description":"Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Indonesia, Liberia, and the Republic of the Congo\r\n"},"104":{"name":"managed natural forests","description":"Naturally regenerated forests with signs of management, including logging, clear cuts, etc.\r\n"},"91":{"name":"megacities","description":"A city with more than 10 million people.\r\n"},"57":{"name":"megacity","description":"A city with more than 10 million people."},"56":{"name":"mosaic restoration","description":"Restoration that integrates trees into mixed-use landscapes, such as agricultural lands and settlements, where trees can support people through improved water quality, increased soil fertility, and other ecosystem services. This type of restoration is more likely in deforested or degraded forest landscapes with moderate population density (10\u2013100 people per square kilometer). "},"86":{"name":"natural","description":"A forest that is grown without human intervention.\r\n"},"12":{"name":"natural forest","description":"A forest that is grown without human intervention.\r\n"},"63":{"name":"natural forests","description":"A forest that is grown without human intervention.\r\n"},"144":{"name":"open canopy systems","description":"Individual tree crowns that do not overlap to form a continuous canopy layer.\r\n"},"82":{"name":"persistent gain","description":"Forests that have experienced one gain event from 2001 to 2016.\r\n"},"13":{"name":"persistent loss and gain","description":"Forests that have experienced one loss or one gain event from 2001 to 2016."},"97":{"name":"plantation","description":"An area in which trees have been planted, generally for commercial purposes.\u0026nbsp;\r\n"},"93":{"name":"plantations","description":"An area in which trees have been planted, generally for commercial purposes.\u0026nbsp;\r\n"},"88":{"name":"planted","description":"A forest composed of trees that have been deliberately planted and\/or seeded by humans.\r\n"},"14":{"name":"planted forest","description":"A forest composed of trees that have been deliberately planted and\/or seeded by humans.\r\n"},"73":{"name":"planted forests","description":"A forest composed of trees that have been deliberately planted and\/or seeded by humans.\r\n"},"15":{"name":"primary forest","description":"Old-growth forests that are typically high in carbon stock and rich in biodiversity. The GFR uses a humid tropical primary rainforest data set, representing forests in the humid tropics that have not been cleared in recent years.\r\n"},"64":{"name":"primary forests","description":"Old-growth forests that are typically high in carbon stock and rich in biodiversity. The GFR uses a humid tropical primary rainforest data set, representing forests in the humid tropics that have not been cleared in recent years.\r\n"},"58":{"name":"production forest","description":"A forest where the primary management objective is to produce timber, pulp, fuelwood, and\/or nonwood forest products."},"89":{"name":"production forests","description":"A forest where the primary management objective is to produce timber, pulp, fuelwood, and\/or nonwood forest products.\r\n"},"87":{"name":"seminatural","description":"A managed forest modified by humans, which can have a different species composition from surrounding natural forests.\r\n"},"59":{"name":"seminatural forests","description":"A managed forest modified by humans, which can have a different species composition from surrounding natural forests. "},"96":{"name":"shifting agriculture","description":"Temporary loss or permanent deforestation due to small- and medium-scale agriculture.\r\n"},"103":{"name":"surface roughness","description":"Surface roughness of forests creates\u0026nbsp;turbulence that slows near-surface winds and cools the land as it lifts heat from low-albedo leaves and moisture from evapotranspiration high into the atmosphere and slows otherwise-drying winds. \r\n"},"17":{"name":"tree cover","description":"All vegetation greater than five meters in height and may take the form of natural forests or plantations across a range of canopy densities. Unless otherwise specified, the GFR uses greater than 30 percent tree canopy density for calculations.\r\n"},"71":{"name":"tree cover canopy density is low","description":"Less than 30 percent tree canopy density.\r\n"},"60":{"name":"tree cover gain","description":"The establishment of tree canopy in an area that previously had no tree cover. Tree cover gain may indicate a number of potential activities, including natural forest growth or the crop rotation cycle of tree plantations.\u0026nbsp;As such, tree cover gain does not equate to restoration.\r\n"},"18":{"name":"tree cover loss","description":"The removal or mortality of tree cover, which can be due to a variety of factors, including mechanical harvesting, fire, disease, or storm damage. As such, loss does not equate to deforestation.\r\n"},"19":{"name":"tree plantation","description":"An agricultural plantation of fast-growing tree species on short rotations for the production of timber, pulp, or fruit.\r\n"},"72":{"name":"tree plantations","description":"An agricultural plantation of fast-growing tree species on short rotations for the production of timber, pulp, or fruit.\r\n"},"85":{"name":"trees outside forests","description":"Trees found in urban areas, alongside roads, or within agricultural land\u0026nbsp;are often referred to as Trees Outside Forests (TOF).\u202f\r\n"},"105":{"name":"unmanaged natural forests","description":"Naturally regenerated forests without any signs of management, including primary forest.\r\n"}}}

Conclusions (Synthesis)

Creating a sustainable food future—simultaneously feeding a more populous world, fostering development and poverty reduction, and mitigating climate change and other environmental damage—presents a set of deeply intertwined challenges. Our report offers several insights that differ in direction or emphasis from much prior work.

Productivity gains are critical. Productivity gains in land, animals, and chemical inputs already in our baseline are responsible for closing two-thirds of the GHG mitigation gap and more than 80 percent of the land gap that would exist absent productivity gains after 2010. When adding in the various additional productivity gains required to meet our 4 Gt CO2e/year emissions target by 2050, the role of productivity gains grows even larger. Productivity gains also provide the most important potential synergy between income, food security, and environmental goals. Thus, new molecular crop-breeding methods will need to be exploited. Moreover, every hectare of global pasture that is capable of and appropriate for sustainable intensification must fully exploit its potential to increase milk or meat output severalfold.

Slowing demand growth is critical too. Despite the major contribution that productivity gains can make to closing our three gaps, they will not be enough. The largest diet-related opportunity lies in limiting the global growth in demand for beef, as well as sheep and goat meat. A 30 percent global shift from ruminant meat to other foods—achieved by the world’s highest consumers reducing their consumption by roughly 40 percent relative to 2010 levels—would, by itself, nearly close the land gap and halve the GHG mitigation gap. A 10 percent shift from all animal-based foods by the world’s wealthy would benefit human health and open up space for the great majority of poorer consumers to modestly increase their consumption. Moving more rapidly toward replacement-level fertility rates in sub-Saharan Africa would greatly reduce the risks of hunger in the region, provide multiple social and economic benefits, and reduce environmental challenges. Global plans to greatly increase the use of modern bioenergy derived from energy or food crops grown on land dedicated to that purpose, however, would make a sustainable food future unachievable.

Innovation in farm management will also be necessary to mitigate emissions. To implement management measures known to reduce emissions, governments need to develop systems to analyze mitigation potential and track progress across their agriculture sectors, increase incentives, and phase in mandatory performance standards. To stimulate promising management innovations, governments need to boost R&D, and encourage the private sector by requiring that farms use innovative technologies when those technologies demonstrate cost-effective mitigation.

Productivity gains must be linked to protection of carbon-rich ecosystems. Shifting of agricultural land both among and within regions presents a major carbon and biodiversity challenge. Governments therefore must make efforts to avoid such shifts and place more emphasis on reforesting abandoned agricultural land to natural forests when shifts do occur. Because productivity gains can sometimes encourage land-shifting, ensuring that yield gains protect forests and other carbon-rich and biodiverse ecosystems requires that governments and private parties explicitly link efforts to boost yields with protection for those ecosystems through financing, lending conditions, supply chain commitments, and public policies. The forest frontier should be closed to agriculture wherever feasible. New roads must also be located in ways that minimize the incentives to convert natural areas to agriculture.

Reforestation of some lands, and restoration of peatlands, should proceed immediately, but larger-scale reforestation depends on technological innovation and changes in consumption patterns. Marginal agricultural lands that cannot realistically be intensified are appropriate for reforestation right now. However, the scale of reforestation necessary to fully achieve climate goals requires that much more land be liberated from agriculture. Freeing up hundreds of millions of hectares of land can only be achieved through highly successful implementation of the measures proposed in our demand-reducing and productivity-boosting menu items.

Regulation and technological innovation will be essential to achieve the most ambitious levels of our menu items. Regulations must be crafted to spur innovation while allowing flexibility to develop cost-effective solutions. They should apply mostly to manufacturers of agricultural inputs and to managers of concentrated livestock facilities. Many categories of technological innovations are needed but promising options have emerged for menu items in all our courses. Governments will need to give far more weight to R&D and encourage the private sector with a range of policy instruments.

We believe that the challenge of sustainably feeding nearly 10 billion people by 2050 is greater than commonly appreciated. Growth in food demand is high due to population growth and the rapid rise of a global middle class. The strength of competition for land, particularly pastureland, has often been underestimated. Proposed land-use solutions often involve double counting, and the climate implications of land-shifting are not fully recognized. Sub-Saharan Africa presents unique and formidable challenges because of the region’s high population growth and low agricultural yields.

Despite the challenges, we believe that a sustainable food future is achievable. Our menu proposed in this synthesis report can create a world with sufficient, nutritious food for everyone. It also offers the chance to generate the broader social, environmental, and economic benefits that are the foundation of sustainable development. But such a future will only be achieved if governments, the private sector, and civil society act upon the entire menu quickly and with conviction.