Biodiversity, the variety of life on Earth, is essential for the functioning and resilience of ecosystems, as well as for the provision of numerous benefits to human societies, such as food, medicine, clean air and water, and cultural and spiritual values. However, biodiversity is under severe threat from human activities, with an estimated 1 million species facing extinction in the coming decades, many within years (IPBES, 2019).
Agriculture, particularly in its modern, intensive, and industrialized form, is one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss worldwide. It is estimated that agriculture accounts for around 70% of the projected loss of terrestrial biodiversity by 2050, through land-use change, habitat fragmentation, pollution, and other pressures (Tilman et al., 2017). The expansion and intensification of agriculture, driven by population growth, changing diets, and increasing demand for food and other agricultural products, has led to the conversion of natural habitats, the simplification of agricultural landscapes, and the decline of many species, from soil microbes to pollinators and large mammals.
The loss of biodiversity from farming not only affects the intrinsic value and evolutionary potential of species but also the functioning and resilience of agroecosystems and the provision of ecosystem services that support agricultural production and human well-being. It can lead to the loss of genetic resources, the disruption of ecological processes, such as nutrient cycling and pest control, and the increased vulnerability of agricultural systems to climate change, pests, and diseases.
Addressing the challenge of biodiversity loss from farming requires a transformative change in the way we produce, consume, and value food and other agricultural products, as well as in the way we manage and conserve biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. This includes the adoption of more sustainable and biodiversity-friendly farming practices, such as agroecology, organic farming, and agroforestry, as well as the integration of biodiversity conservation into agricultural policies, markets, and supply chains.
Challenges and Drivers of Biodiversity Loss from Farming
Land-Use Change and Habitat Loss
One of the main drivers of biodiversity loss from farming is land-use change and habitat loss, which occur when natural habitats, such as forests, grasslands, and wetlands, are converted to agricultural land. Agriculture is the largest user of land worldwide, occupying around 38% of the Earth's land surface, and is expected to expand further in the coming decades, particularly in developing countries (FAO, 2020).
The conversion of natural habitats to agricultural land leads to the loss and fragmentation of habitats, which can cause the extinction or decline of many species, particularly those that are endemic, specialized, or sensitive to disturbance. For example, the expansion of soybean and cattle production in the Brazilian Amazon has led to the loss of around 20% of the forest cover since the 1970s, affecting many species, such as the jaguar, the giant anteater, and the harpy eagle (Barona et al., 2010).
The impacts of land-use change and habitat loss on biodiversity depend on various factors, such as the type and intensity of agriculture, the location and configuration of agricultural landscapes, and the sensitivity and adaptability of different species. For example, a meta-analysis of 138 studies found that the impacts of land-use change on biodiversity were highest in tropical regions, in areas with high crop yields, and for mammals and birds (Newbold et al., 2015).
Agricultural Intensification and Homogenization
Another major driver of biodiversity loss from farming is agricultural intensification and homogenization, which occur when agricultural systems become more simplified, specialized, and dependent on external inputs, such as fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation. Agricultural intensification has increased dramatically since the mid-20th century, driven by the Green Revolution, which introduced high-yielding crop varieties, chemical inputs, and mechanization to boost agricultural productivity and feed a growing population.
While agricultural intensification has contributed to increased food production and food security, it has also led to the homogenization of agricultural landscapes, the loss of crop and genetic diversity, and the decline of many species that depend on diverse and heterogeneous habitats. For example, the intensification of rice production in Southeast Asia has led to the loss of many traditional rice varieties, as well as the decline of aquatic biodiversity in rice paddies, such as fish, frogs, and insects (Settle et al., 1996).
The impacts of agricultural intensification and homogenization on biodiversity depend on various factors, such as the type and intensity of management practices, the spatial and temporal scale of intensification, and the vulnerability and resilience of different species. For example, a study in Europe found that the impacts of agricultural intensification on farmland birds were highest in areas with high levels of pesticide use, low crop diversity, and large field sizes (Guerrero et al., 2012).
Pollution and Eutrophication
A third major driver of biodiversity loss from farming is pollution and eutrophication, which occur when agricultural activities release excess nutrients, pesticides, and other contaminants into the environment, causing the degradation of soil, water, and air quality. Agriculture is a major source of pollution worldwide, accounting for around 70% of global freshwater withdrawals, 50% of soil erosion, and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions (FAO, 2020).
The pollution and eutrophication from agriculture can have severe impacts on biodiversity, both within and beyond agricultural landscapes. For example, the excessive use of fertilizers and manure in agriculture can lead to the eutrophication of aquatic ecosystems, such as lakes, rivers, and coastal zones, causing algal blooms, oxygen depletion, and fish kills. A study in China found that the eutrophication of Lake Taihu, the third-largest freshwater lake in the country, was largely caused by agricultural pollution, leading to the decline of many aquatic species, such as the finless porpoise and the Chinese mitten crab (Qin et al., 2007).
The impacts of pollution and eutrophication on biodiversity depend on various factors, such as the type and amount of pollutants, the sensitivity and resilience of different species and ecosystems, and the effectiveness of pollution control and mitigation measures. For example, a study in Europe found that the impacts of pesticides on aquatic biodiversity were highest in areas with intensive agriculture, poor soil quality, and low levels of riparian vegetation (Schäfer et al., 2007).
Climate Change and Extreme Weather
A fourth major driver of biodiversity loss from farming is climate change and extreme weather, which are increasingly affecting agricultural systems and biodiversity worldwide. Agriculture is both a contributor to and a victim of climate change, accounting for around 23% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and being highly vulnerable to changes in temperature, precipitation, and extreme weather events (IPCC, 2019).
Climate change and extreme weather can have direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity in agricultural landscapes, by altering the distribution, abundance, and behavior of species, as well as the structure and functioning of ecosystems. For example, rising temperatures and changing rainfall patterns can cause the shift or loss of suitable habitats for many species, particularly those with narrow thermal tolerances or limited dispersal abilities. A study in Europe found that climate change could cause the loss of up to 60% of the current range of some butterfly species by 2050, with the highest losses in the Mediterranean region (Settele et al., 2008).
Extreme weather events, such as droughts, floods, and heat waves, can also have severe impacts on biodiversity in agricultural landscapes, by causing the mortality, displacement, or disruption of many species, as well as the degradation of soil, water, and other resources. For example, the severe drought in Australia in 2018-2019 caused the death of millions of fish in the Murray-Darling Basin, the largest river system in the country, affecting many species, such as the Murray cod, the silver perch, and the freshwater catfish (Vertessy et al., 2019).
The impacts of climate change and extreme weather on biodiversity in agricultural landscapes depend on various factors, such as the magnitude and frequency of climate stressors, the vulnerability and adaptive capacity of different species and ecosystems, and the effectiveness of climate adaptation and mitigation measures. For example, a study in the United States found that the impacts of climate change on crop yields and biodiversity were highest in the Midwest and the Great Plains, and could be partially mitigated by the adoption of soil conservation practices and crop diversification (Bowles et al., 2020).
Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Agriculture and Food Systems
Ecosystem Services and Productivity
One of the main impacts of biodiversity loss on agriculture and food systems is the decline of ecosystem services, which are the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems, such as pollination, pest control, soil fertility, and water regulation. Biodiversity is essential for the provision and stability of ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes, as it supports the complex interactions and processes that underpin the functioning and resilience of agroecosystems.
For example, pollinators, such as bees, butterflies, and birds, are critical for the production of many crops, such as fruits, vegetables, and oilseeds, which account for around 35% of global food production (IPBES, 2016). However, many pollinator species are declining worldwide, due to habitat loss, pesticide use, and climate change, which can affect crop yields and quality. A study in the United States found that the loss of wild bees could cause a 3-8% decline in crop production, with an economic cost of around $4 billion per year (Koh et al., 2016).
Similarly, natural enemies, such as predatory insects and spiders, are important for the control of crop pests, which can cause significant yield losses and economic damages. However, many natural enemy species are also declining, due to the simplification and intensification of agricultural landscapes, which can affect the stability and resilience of pest control services. A study in Europe found that the loss of semi-natural habitats, such as hedgerows and field margins, could cause a 50% decline in natural enemy populations, and a 10-20% increase in pest damage (Rusch et al., 2016).
The impacts of biodiversity loss on ecosystem services and productivity in agriculture depend on various factors, such as the type and intensity of management practices, the spatial and temporal scale of biodiversity loss, and the vulnerability and resilience of different species and ecosystems. For example, a meta-analysis of 89 studies found that the impacts of biodiversity loss on crop yields were highest in simplified and homogeneous landscapes, and for pollinator-dependent crops, such as fruits and oilseeds (Dainese et al., 2019).
Food Security and Nutrition
Another major impact of biodiversity loss on agriculture and food systems is the decline of food security and nutrition, which are essential for human health and well-being. Biodiversity is critical for the availability, accessibility, and quality of food, as it provides the genetic resources, ecological functions, and cultural values that support diverse and nutritious diets.
For example, crop genetic diversity, which is the variety of genes and traits within and among crop species, is essential for the development of new and improved crop varieties, which can enhance crop yields, resilience, and nutritional quality. However, many crop genetic resources are being lost, due to the replacement of traditional varieties with modern, high-yielding ones, as well as the loss of wild relatives and landraces. A study by the FAO (2010) found that around 75% of crop genetic diversity has been lost since the 1900s, which can affect the capacity of agriculture to adapt to changing environmental and market conditions.
Similarly, wild foods, which are the plant and animal species that are harvested from natural and semi-natural ecosystems, are important for the food security and nutrition of many rural and indigenous communities, particularly in developing countries. However, many wild food species are also declining, due to habitat loss, overharvesting, and climate change, which can affect the availability and accessibility of diverse and nutritious foods. A study in Madagascar found that the loss of wild yams, which are a staple food for many rural households, could cause a 20-30% decline in food security, and a 10-20% increase in malnutrition (Golden et al., 2011).
The impacts of biodiversity loss on food security and nutrition depend on various factors, such as the type and extent of biodiversity loss, the socio-economic and cultural context of food systems, and the effectiveness of food and nutrition policies and interventions. For example, a study in India found that the impacts of biodiversity loss on food security and nutrition were highest in marginal and rainfed areas, and for small and medium farmers, who have limited access to alternative food sources and markets (Sundar et al., 2017).
Livelihoods and Well-Being
A third major impact of biodiversity loss on agriculture and food systems is the decline of livelihoods and well-being, which are essential for the social and economic sustainability of rural communities. Biodiversity is critical for the income, employment, and resilience of many rural households, as it provides the natural resources, ecosystem services, and cultural values that support diverse and sustainable livelihoods.
For example, agrobiodiversity, which is the diversity of crops, livestock, and associated species that are managed by farmers, is important for the food security, income, and adaptive capacity of many smallholder farmers, particularly in marginal and rainfed areas. However, many agrobiodiversity resources are being lost, due to the intensification and specialization of agriculture, as well as the loss of traditional knowledge and practices. A study in the Andes found that the loss of agrobiodiversity, particularly of native potato varieties, could cause a 30-50% decline in household income, and a 20-30% increase in vulnerability to climate and market risks (Hellin et al., 2006).
Similarly, biodiversity-based livelihoods, such as agroforestry, beekeeping, and ecotourism, are important for the income, employment, and resilience of many rural communities, particularly in biodiverse and remote areas. However, many biodiversity-based livelihoods are also declining, due to habitat loss, overexploitation, and competition with other land uses. A study in Mexico found that the loss of forest biodiversity, particularly of non-timber forest products, could cause a 20-40% decline in household income, and a 10-20% increase in migration and urbanization (López-Feldman, 2014).
The impacts of biodiversity loss on livelihoods and well-being depend on various factors, such as the type and extent of biodiversity loss, the socio-economic and cultural context of rural communities, and the effectiveness of rural development and conservation policies and interventions. For example, a study in Brazil found that the impacts of biodiversity loss on livelihoods and well-being were highest in the Amazon and the Cerrado, and for indigenous and traditional communities, who have limited access to alternative income sources and social services (Vieira et al., 2019).
Solutions and Ways Forward
Agroecology and Sustainable Intensification
Agroecology and sustainable intensification are two promising approaches to reconcile biodiversity conservation with agricultural production and food security. Agroecology is a holistic approach that applies ecological principles to the design and management of sustainable and resilient agroecosystems, while sustainable intensification aims to increase agricultural productivity and efficiency while minimizing negative environmental and social impacts.
Both approaches emphasize the importance of biodiversity for the functioning and resilience of agroecosystems and seek to optimize the use of natural resources, ecosystem services, and local knowledge while reducing the reliance on external inputs and fossil fuels. For example, agroecological practices, such as crop diversification, agroforestry, and integrated pest management, can enhance the biodiversity and productivity of agroecosystems, while providing multiple ecosystem services, such as pollination, pest control, and soil fertility (Altieri & Nicholls, 2012).
Similarly, sustainable intensification practices, such as precision agriculture, conservation agriculture, and integrated crop-livestock systems, can increase crop yields and resource efficiency, while reducing the negative impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems, such as land-use change, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions (Garnett et al., 2013).
The adoption and scaling-up of agroecology and sustainable intensification require supportive policies, investments, and partnerships, as well as the participation and empowerment of farmers and local communities. For example, a study in Malawi found that the adoption of agroecological practices, such as legume intercropping and agroforestry, could increase crop yields by 30-50%, and household income by 20-30%, while enhancing biodiversity and ecosystem services (Kansanga et al., 2019).
Biodiversity-Friendly Agriculture and Certification
Biodiversity-friendly agriculture and certification are other important solutions to promote the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Biodiversity-friendly agriculture refers to a range of practices and systems that aim to maintain or enhance the biodiversity and ecosystem services of agricultural landscapes while providing economic and social benefits to farmers and local communities.
Examples of biodiversity-friendly agriculture include organic farming, which avoids the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, and promotes the use of crop rotations, cover crops, and biological pest control; high nature value farming, which maintains traditional and extensive farming practices that support high levels of biodiversity and cultural heritage; and wildlife-friendly farming, which adopts specific measures to protect and restore habitats and species, such as bird-friendly coffee and cacao (Kremen & Merenlender, 2018).
Certification schemes, such as Rainforest Alliance, Fairtrade, and Bird-Friendly, can provide market incentives and recognition for biodiversity-friendly agriculture, by setting standards for biodiversity conservation, social responsibility, and product quality, and by enabling consumers to make informed and ethical choices. For example, a study in Colombia found that certified coffee farms had 10-20% higher levels of bird diversity and abundance, compared to non-certified farms, while providing 20-30% higher prices and incomes to farmers (Rueda & Lambin, 2013).
However, the effectiveness and scaling-up of biodiversity-friendly agriculture and certification also face several challenges and limitations, such as the high costs and complexity of certification, the limited demand and willingness to pay for certified products, and the potential trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and agricultural productivity and profitability. Therefore, supportive policies, investments, and partnerships are needed to overcome these barriers and to mainstream biodiversity-friendly agriculture and certification in agricultural and food systems (Tayleur et al., 2017).
Agro-biodiversity Conservation and Use
Agro-biodiversity conservation and use is a third critical solution to address the loss of biodiversity from farming while enhancing the resilience and sustainability of agricultural and food systems. Agro-biodiversity refers to the diversity of crops, livestock, and associated species that are managed and used by farmers, as well as the diversity of wild species that provide ecosystem services and genetic resources for agriculture.
Agro-biodiversity conservation and use involve a range of strategies and practices, such as in-situ conservation, which maintains and enhances the diversity of crops and livestock in farmers' fields and landscapes; ex-situ conservation, which collects and stores the genetic resources of crops and livestock in gene banks and other facilities; and participatory plant breeding, which involves farmers in the selection and improvement of crop varieties and breeds, based on their local knowledge, preferences, and conditions (Bellon et al., 2017).
The benefits of agro-biodiversity conservation and use include the enhancement of food security and nutrition, by providing a diverse and nutritious range of foods and diets; the improvement of agricultural productivity and resilience, by providing genetic resources and traits for breeding and adaptation to changing environmental and market conditions; and the maintenance of cultural heritage and identity, by preserving the traditional knowledge, practices, and values associated with agro-biodiversity (Zimmerer et al., 2019).
However, agro-biodiversity conservation and use also face several challenges and constraints, such as the loss and erosion of crop and livestock diversity, due to the replacement of traditional varieties and breeds with modern and uniform ones; the limited capacity and incentives for farmers and communities to conserve and use agro-biodiversity, due to the lack of resources, markets, and policies; and the inadequate recognition and support for the multiple values and benefits of agro-biodiversity, in agricultural and conservation policies and programs (Wale & Yalew, 2007).
Therefore, supportive policies, investments, and partnerships are needed to promote and mainstream agro-biodiversity conservation and use in agricultural and food systems, by providing incentives, capacity building, and market opportunities for farmers and communities, and by integrating agro-biodiversity in agricultural research, education, and extension (Sthapit et al., 2012).
Policy and Governance Reforms
Policy and governance reforms are a fourth essential solution to address the loss of biodiversity from farming, by creating an enabling environment and incentives for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in agricultural and food systems. Policy and governance refer to the formal and informal rules, norms, and institutions that shape the behavior and decisions of actors and stakeholders in agriculture and biodiversity, such as farmers, agribusinesses, consumers, and policymakers.
Policy and governance reforms can involve a range of instruments and approaches, such as:
- Regulations and standards, which set mandatory or voluntary requirements for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in agriculture, such as pesticide and fertilizer use, land-use change, and habitat protection;
- Economic incentives and payments, which provide financial rewards or compensations for biodiversity-friendly practices and outcomes, such as agri-environment schemes, payments for ecosystem services, and biodiversity offsets;
- Capacity building and extension, which provide training, information, and support for farmers and other stakeholders, to adopt and implement biodiversity-friendly practices and innovations;
- Multi-stakeholder partnerships and platforms, bring together different actors and stakeholders, to share knowledge, resources, and responsibilities for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in agriculture (Kok et al., 2020).
However, policy and governance reforms also face several challenges and limitations, such as the complexity and diversity of agricultural and biodiversity contexts and needs, which require tailored and adaptive approaches; the potential trade-offs and synergies between biodiversity conservation and other policy objectives, such as food security, poverty reduction, and climate change mitigation; and the limited political will, resources, and capacities for policy and governance reforms, at different levels and scales (Visseren-Hamakers, 2018).
Therefore, policy and governance reforms need to be based on sound science, participatory processes, and adaptive management, and involve multiple actors and stakeholders, from local to global levels. They also need to be coherent and integrated with other policy domains and agendas, such as the Sustainable Development Goals, the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (Maron et al., 2018).
Conclusion
Biodiversity loss from farming is a complex and pressing challenge that threatens the sustainability and resilience of agricultural and food systems, as well as the health and well-being of people and the planet. It is driven by multiple and interacting factors, such as land-use change, habitat loss, agricultural intensification and homogenization, pollution and eutrophication, and climate change and extreme weather, which affect the diversity, abundance, and distribution of species and ecosystems in agricultural landscapes.
The impacts of biodiversity loss on agriculture and food systems are also multifaceted and far-reaching, affecting the productivity and stability of agroecosystems, the availability and quality of food and nutrition, and the livelihoods and well-being of rural communities. These impacts are likely to worsen in the future, as the demand for food and other agricultural products continues to grow, while the pressures on biodiversity and ecosystems intensify, due to population growth, urbanization, and climate change.
Addressing the loss of biodiversity from farming requires a transformative change in the way we produce, consume, and value food and other agricultural products, as well as in the way we manage and conserve biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. This change needs to be based on a holistic and integrated approach, that recognizes the multiple values and benefits of biodiversity for agriculture and food systems, and that involves multiple actors and stakeholders, from farmers and consumers to policymakers and researchers.
The solutions and ways forward highlighted in this article, such as agroecology and sustainable intensification, biodiversity-friendly agriculture and certification, agro-biodiversity conservation and use, and policy and governance reforms, offer a range of options and pathways for reconciling biodiversity conservation with agricultural production and food security. However, their adoption and scaling-up require significant investments, capacities, and commitments, from all actors and stakeholders, as well as supportive policies, markets, and partnerships.
Moreover, these solutions need to be adapted and tailored to the specific contexts and needs of different regions, cultures, and communities, and to be based on the active participation and empowerment of farmers, indigenous peoples, and local communities, who are the stewards and beneficiaries of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. They also need to be aligned with other global and national priorities and agendas, such as the Sustainable Development Goals, the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, which provide a framework and momentum for transformative change.
In conclusion, addressing the loss of biodiversity from farming is not only an environmental imperative but also a social and economic one. It is essential for the resilience, sustainability, and equity of agricultural and food systems, as well as for the achievement of multiple global goals and targets, such as ending hunger and malnutrition, conserving and sustainably using biodiversity, and combating climate change and land degradation.
Therefore, it is urgent and critical to scale up and accelerate the efforts and investments in biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in agriculture, and to foster a new paradigm and narrative of agriculture as a provider and steward of biodiversity and ecosystem services, rather than a driver and threat. This requires collective and concerted action from all actors and stakeholders, from local to global levels, and a shared vision and commitment to a world where people and nature can thrive together, in harmony and prosperity.