Land is a vital resource that sustains life on Earth, providing essential ecosystem services such as food production, water regulation, carbon sequestration, and biodiversity conservation. However, land resources are under increasing pressure from human activities, such as agriculture, urbanization, and resource extraction, which can lead to land degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change. According to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), over 75% of the Earth's land area is already degraded, and over 90% could become degraded by 2050, affecting the livelihoods and well-being of billions of people, particularly in developing countries (UNCCD, 2017).
Sustainable Land Management (SLM) is a holistic approach to land use and management that aims to achieve multiple social, economic, and environmental objectives while maintaining or enhancing the productivity, resilience, and ecological integrity of land resources. SLM involves a range of strategies, practices, and technologies that are adapted to the specific biophysical, socio-economic, and cultural contexts of different landscapes and land users, and that are based on the principles of participation, integration, and adaptability (Liniger et al., 2011).
The environmental impact of SLM is multifaceted and far-reaching, as it can affect various ecosystem services and processes, such as soil quality, water availability and quality, biodiversity, and climate change mitigation and adaptation. SLM practices can help to prevent or reverse land degradation, conserve soil and water resources, enhance biodiversity and ecosystem resilience, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and increase carbon sequestration (Schwilch et al., 2012).
However, the effectiveness and sustainability of SLM practices depend on various factors, such as the biophysical conditions, the socio-economic and institutional contexts, and the capacities and incentives of land users and other stakeholders (Nkonya et al., 2016).
Strategies and Practices of Sustainable Land Management
Soil and Water Conservation
Soil and water conservation is a key strategy of Sustainable Land Management that aims to prevent or reduce soil erosion, maintain soil fertility and structure, and optimize water availability and quality for crop production and other ecosystem services. Soil erosion is a major form of land degradation that affects over 20% of the world's agricultural land, causing significant losses of soil, nutrients, and productivity, as well as off-site impacts such as sedimentation, eutrophication, and flooding (FAO, 2019). Water scarcity and quality are also major challenges for agriculture and other land uses, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions, where over 40% of the world's population lives (WWAP, 2018).
Soil and water conservation practices can be classified into three main categories: agronomic, vegetative, and structural measures (Liniger et al., 2011). Agronomic measures involve the management of soil, water, and vegetation to improve soil quality and water use efficiency, such as conservation tillage, cover cropping, crop rotation, and agroforestry. Conservation tillage, which includes no-till, reduced-till, and mulch-till practices, can reduce soil erosion by 60-90%, improve soil organic matter and water retention, and reduce labor and energy costs, compared to conventional tillage (Kassam et al., 2019).
Cover cropping, which involves growing crops or crop residues to cover the soil surface during fallow periods, can reduce erosion by 40-70%, improve soil fertility and structure, and suppress weeds and pests (Blanco-Canqui et al., 2015). Crop rotation, which involves growing different crops in sequence on the same land, can reduce erosion by 20-50%, improve soil health and fertility, and break pest and disease cycles (Dias et al., 2015).
Vegetative measures involve the use of plant cover and biomass to protect the soil surface, reduce runoff and erosion, and improve soil fertility and biodiversity. Examples of vegetative measures include contour hedgerows, grass strips, and buffer zones, which can reduce erosion by 50-90%, improve water infiltration and retention, and provide habitat and food for wildlife (Njeri et al., 2018). Agroforestry, which involves the integration of trees and shrubs with crops and livestock, can reduce erosion by 40-80%, improve soil fertility and water availability, and provide multiple products and services, such as food, fodder, fuelwood, and carbon sequestration (Nair et al., 2009).
Structural measures involve the construction of physical barriers or structures to control runoff, reduce erosion, and conserve soil and water resources. Examples of structural measures include terraces, check dams, and water harvesting systems, which can reduce erosion by 50-90%, increase water availability and productivity, and prevent downstream flooding and sedimentation (Liniger et al., 2011).
Terraces, which are level or slightly sloping platforms constructed along the contour of a hill or slope, can reduce erosion by 80-95%, increase water infiltration and retention, and enable cultivation on steep slopes (Wei et al., 2016). Check dams, which are small dams constructed across gullies or streams, can reduce erosion by 70-90%, trap sediments, and nutrients, and increase water availability for irrigation and groundwater recharge (Nyssen et al., 2009).
The environmental impact of soil and water conservation practices is significant and multidimensional, as they can affect various ecosystem services and processes, such as soil quality, water availability and quality, biodiversity, and climate change mitigation and adaptation. For example, a meta-analysis of 89 studies found that conservation tillage can increase soil organic carbon by 3-8%, soil nitrogen by 5-12%, and soil microbial biomass by 20-30%, compared to conventional tillage, while reducing soil erosion by 60-90% and surface runoff by 20-50% (Luo et al., 2010).
Another meta-analysis of 39 studies found that cover cropping can increase soil organic carbon by 4-12%, soil nitrogen by 8-16%, and soil microbial biomass by 20-40%, compared to no cover cropping, while reducing soil erosion by 40-70% and nitrate leaching by 50-90% (Blanco-Canqui et al., 2015).
Sustainable Agricultural Intensification
Sustainable Agricultural Intensification (SAI) is another key strategy of Sustainable Land Management that aims to increase agricultural productivity and profitability while minimizing negative environmental and social impacts and maximizing synergies and co-benefits. SAI is particularly important in the context of growing global food demand, declining natural resources, and increasing climate change impacts, which require a paradigm shift from input-intensive and resource-depleting agriculture to knowledge-intensive and resource-conserving agriculture (Pretty et al., 2018).
SAI practices can be classified into three main categories: genetic intensification, ecological intensification, and socio-economic intensification (Weltin et al., 2018). Genetic intensification involves the use of improved crop varieties and animal breeds that are more productive, resilient, and resource-efficient, such as drought-tolerant, pest-resistant, and nutrient-efficient varieties. For example, the adoption of drought-tolerant maize varieties in Africa can increase yields by 20-30% under moderate drought stress, and by 70-90% under severe drought stress, compared to traditional varieties (Fisher et al., 2015).
Ecological intensification involves the management of ecological processes and biodiversity to enhance crop productivity and resilience, such as integrated pest management, agroforestry, and conservation agriculture. For example, the adoption of integrated pest management in rice production in Asia can reduce pesticide use by 50-70%, increase yields by 5-10%, and increase farmer profits by 10-20%, compared to conventional pest control (Pretty & Bharucha, 2015).
Socio-economic intensification involves the enhancement of human and social capital, institutional support, and market access to enable the adoption and scaling of SAI practices. For example, the participation of farmers in agricultural innovation platforms in West Africa can increase the adoption of SAI practices by 20-40%, increase yields by 10-30%, and increase farmer incomes by 20-50%, compared to non-participating farmers (Tambo & Wünscher, 2017).
The environmental impact of SAI practices is also multidimensional and context-specific, as they can affect various ecosystem services and processes, such as biodiversity, water quality and quantity, soil health, and greenhouse gas emissions. For example, a meta-analysis of 85 studies found that ecological intensification practices, such as agroforestry and integrated pest management, can increase crop yields by 10-20%, reduce pesticide use by 50-70%, and increase biodiversity by 15-30%, compared to conventional practices (Garibaldi et al., 2017).
Sustainable Pastoralism
Pastoralism is a land use system that involves the grazing of livestock on natural or semi-natural vegetation, and that supports the livelihoods and food security of over 500 million people in the world's drylands and mountainous regions (Jenet et al., 2016). However, pastoralism is facing multiple challenges, such as land degradation, climate change, population growth, and conflicts with other land uses, which threaten its sustainability and resilience. Sustainable pastoralism is a strategy of Sustainable Land Management that aims to balance the social, economic, and environmental objectives of pastoralism, while enhancing its adaptive capacity and contribution to ecosystem services (Niamir-Fuller, 2016).
Sustainable pastoralism practices can be classified into three main categories: rangeland management, livestock management, and livelihood diversification. Rangeland management involves the sustainable use and conservation of rangeland resources, such as vegetation, soil, and water, through practices such as rotational grazing, resting and rehabilitation of degraded areas, and fire management. For example, the adoption of rotational grazing in the Sahel can increase vegetation cover by 20-40%, reduce soil erosion by 30-50%, and increase livestock productivity by 10-20%, compared to continuous grazing (Briske et al., 2008).
Livestock management involves the improvement of livestock health, nutrition, and genetics, through practices such as vaccination, supplementary feeding, and breeding. For example, the adoption of improved cattle breeds in East Africa can increase milk yields by 50-100%, reduce calving intervals by 20-30%, and increase household incomes by 30-50%, compared to local breeds (Bebe et al., 2003).
Livelihood diversification involves the development of alternative or complementary income sources and skills, such as ecotourism, handicrafts, and value addition, to reduce the dependence on livestock and enhance the resilience of pastoral households. For example, the participation of pastoralists in community-based ecotourism in Mongolia can increase household incomes by 10-30%, reduce livestock grazing pressure by 20-40%, and increase wildlife populations by 30-50%, compared to non-participating households (Leisher et al., 2016).
The environmental impact of sustainable pastoralism practices is also multidimensional and context-specific, as they can affect various ecosystem services and processes, such as biodiversity, carbon sequestration, water regulation, and cultural heritage. For example, a case study in the Tibetan plateau found that sustainable rangeland management practices, such as rotational grazing and restoration of degraded areas, can increase plant species richness by 10-20%, increase soil carbon by 20-40%, and reduce soil erosion by 30-50%, compared to conventional practices (Wang et al., 2018).
Sustainable Forest Management
Forests cover over 30% of the world's land area and provide essential ecosystem services, such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, water regulation, and timber and non-timber forest products (FAO, 2020). However, forests are under increasing pressure from human activities, such as deforestation, forest degradation, and unsustainable forest management, which threaten their sustainability and resilience. Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) is a strategy of Sustainable Land Management that aims to balance the social, economic, and environmental objectives of forest use and conservation, while maintaining or enhancing forest ecosystem services (Sayer et al., 2013).
SFM practices can be classified into three main categories: forest conservation, forest restoration, and sustainable forest use. Forest conservation involves the protection of natural or semi-natural forests from human disturbance and degradation, through practices such as protected areas, payment for ecosystem services, and community-based forest management. For example, the establishment of protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon can reduce deforestation by 50-80%, increase forest carbon stocks by 10-20%, and maintain biodiversity and ecosystem services, compared to unprotected areas (Soares-Filho et al., 2010)
Forest restoration involves the active or passive recovery of degraded or deforested areas, through practices such as natural regeneration, assisted natural regeneration, and reforestation. For example, the adoption of assisted natural regeneration in the Philippines can increase tree density by 50-100%, increase soil organic carbon by 20-40%, and reduce soil erosion by 30-50%, compared to unassisted areas (Chazdon et al., 2016).
Sustainable forest use involves the management of forests for multiple products and services, such as timber, fuelwood, non-timber forest products, and ecotourism, through practices such as reduced-impact logging, forest certification, and community forestry. For example, the adoption of reduced-impact logging in Indonesia can reduce canopy damage by 50-70%, reduce soil disturbance by 30-50%, and maintain biodiversity and carbon stocks, compared to conventional logging (Putz et al., 2008). The environmental impact of SFM practices is also multidimensional and context-specific, as they can affect various ecosystem services and processes, such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, water regulation, and soil protection. For example, a meta-analysis of 86 studies found that SFM practices, such as reduced impact logging and forest certification, can increase carbon stocks by 10-30%, increase biodiversity by 5-15%, and reduce soil erosion by 20-40%, compared to unsustainable practices (Putz et al., 2012).
Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Land Management
Barriers and Enablers
The adoption and scaling of Sustainable Land Management practices face multiple challenges and opportunities, which vary across different contexts and scales. Some of the key barriers to SLM adoption include:
- Lack of awareness, knowledge, and capacity of land users and other stakeholders about SLM practices and their benefits (Cordingley et al., 2015).
- Lack of access to financial resources, inputs, and markets for SLM practices and products (Nkonya et al., 2016).
- Insecure land tenure and property rights, discourage long-term investments in SLM practices (Robinson et al., 2014).
- Inadequate institutional and policy support for SLM, such as extension services, incentives, and regulations (Liniger et al., 2011).
- Cultural and social barriers, such as gender inequality, power imbalances, and conflicts over land and resources (Westermann et al., 2016).
Some of the key enablers of SLM adoption include:
- Increased awareness, knowledge, and capacity of land users and other stakeholders through education, training, and extension services (Cordingley et al., 2015).
- Improved access to financial resources, inputs, and markets through credit, subsidies, and value chain development (Nkonya et al., 2016).
- Secure land tenure and property rights through land titling, registration, and community-based land governance (Robinson et al., 2014).
- Supportive institutional and policy frameworks, such as cross-sectoral coordination, multi-stakeholder partnerships, and integrated landscape management (Liniger et al., 2011).
- Empowerment and participation of marginalized groups, such as women, youth, and indigenous peoples, in SLM decision-making and benefit-sharing (Westermann et al., 2016).
Addressing these barriers and enablers requires a holistic and integrated approach that engages multiple stakeholders, sectors, and scales, and that is based on the principles of participation, equity, and sustainability (Reed et al., 2015).
Monitoring and Evaluation
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is a critical component of Sustainable Land Management that aims to assess the performance, impact, and sustainability of SLM interventions, and to provide feedback and learning for adaptive management and scaling up. M&E of SLM practices is challenging due to the complex and multi-dimensional nature of land use and management, which involves multiple stakeholders, scales, and indicators (Schwilch et al., 2012).
Some of the key principles and methods of M&E for SLM include:
- Participatory and inclusive M&E involves land users, communities, and other stakeholders in the design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation of M&E (Reed et al., 2015).
- Multi-scale and multi-indicator M&E captures the biophysical, socio-economic, and institutional aspects of SLM at different spatial and temporal scales (Liniger et al., 2011).
- Integrated and adaptive M&E that links SLM interventions with broader landscape and development goals, and that uses M&E results for learning and adjustment (Schwilch et al., 2012).
- Science-based and evidence-based M&E uses appropriate and robust methods and tools, such as remote sensing, field measurements, surveys, and modeling, to generate credible and relevant data and knowledge (Nkonya et al., 2016).
Some examples of M&E frameworks and tools for SLM include:
- The World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT), is a global network and database of SLM practices and case studies, which provides standardized tools and methods for documenting, assessing, and sharing SLM knowledge (Liniger et al., 2011).
- The Land Degradation Surveillance Framework (LDSF), is a multi-scale and multi-indicator approach for assessing and monitoring land degradation and restoration, and it combines biophysical, socio-economic, and remote sensing data (Vågen et al., 2013).
- The Resilience, Adaptation Pathways, and Transformation Assessment (RAPTA) framework, which is a participatory and systems-based approach for assessing and enhancing the resilience and adaptive capacity of social-ecological systems, and which integrates SLM with climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction (O'Connell et al., 2016).
Effective M&E of SLM practices can provide multiple benefits, such as:
- Improved understanding and awareness of the impacts, trade-offs, and synergies of SLM practices on different ecosystem services and stakeholders (Schwilch et al., 2012).
- Enhanced learning and innovation among land users, researchers, and policymakers, and increased capacity for adaptive management and scaling up of SLM practices (Reed et al., 2015).
- Increased accountability, transparency, and trust among stakeholders, and improved governance and decision-making for SLM (Liniger et al., 2011).
- Contribution to global and national monitoring and reporting frameworks, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) (Nkonya et al., 2016).
Governance and Policy
Governance and policy are critical enablers of Sustainable Land Management, as they shape the incentives, institutions, and innovations that influence land use and management decisions and outcomes. Governance refers to the processes, rules, and structures that determine how decisions are made, how resources are allocated, and how power is exercised about land and natural resources (Brouwer et al., 2016). Policy refers to the laws, regulations, and programs that guide and support the sustainable use and management of land and natural resources (Nkonya et al., 2016).
Some of the key challenges and opportunities for SLM governance and policy include:
- Fragmentation and lack of coordination among different sectors, scales, and stakeholders involved in land use and management, such as agriculture, forestry, water, energy, and conservation (Brouwer et al., 2016).
- Inadequate or inconsistent policies and institutions that fail to provide clear and coherent signals and incentives for SLM, or that create perverse subsidies and distortions that encourage unsustainable land use practices (Nkonya et al., 2016).
- Limited participation and empowerment of land users, communities, and marginalized groups in SLM decision-making and benefit-sharing, and lack of recognition of their local knowledge, innovations, and rights (Tengö et al., 2014).
- Insufficient funding, capacity, and accountability for SLM implementation, monitoring, and enforcement, and lack of effective mechanisms for financing and scaling up SLM practices (Liniger et al., 2011).
To address these challenges and opportunities, some of the key principles and approaches for SLM governance and policy include:
- Integrated and landscape-scale governance that promotes cross-sectoral coordination, multi-stakeholder partnerships, and adaptive co-management of land and natural resources (Reed et al., 2015).
- Coherent and enabling policies that provide clear and consistent signals and incentives for SLM, such as payments for ecosystem services, land tenure security, and market-based instruments, and that remove perverse subsidies and distortions (Nkonya et al., 2016).
- Participatory and inclusive governance empowers land users, communities, and marginalized groups to participate in SLM decision-making and benefit-sharing, and recognizes and supports their local knowledge, innovations, and rights (Tengö et al., 2014).
- Innovative and sustainable financing mechanisms that mobilize and blend public, private, and community resources for SLM implementation, monitoring, and scaling up, such as green bonds, impact investing, and crowd-funding (Liniger et al., 2011).
Some examples of SLM governance and policy frameworks and initiatives include:
- The Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (VGGT), provide principles and practices for improving the governance of tenure and ensuring equitable access to and control over land and natural resources (FAO, 2012).
- The Economics of Land Degradation (ELD) Initiative, aims to raise awareness of the economic benefits of SLM and the costs of land degradation and to support the integration of SLM into national and international policy frameworks (Nkonya et al., 2016).
- The TerrAfrica Partnership, which is a multi-stakeholder platform that supports the scaling up of SLM practices in Sub-Saharan Africa, through knowledge sharing, capacity building, and policy dialogue (Liniger et al., 2011).
Effective governance and policy for SLM can provide multiple benefits, such as:
- Improved coordination, synergy, and efficiency in the use and management of land and natural resources, and reduced conflicts and trade-offs among different sectors and stakeholders (Brouwer et al., 2016).
- Enhanced adoption, scaling up, and sustainability of SLM practices, through clear and consistent incentives, institutions, and innovations that support land users and communities (Nkonya et al., 2016).
- Increased participation, empowerment, and equity in SLM decision-making and benefit-sharing, and recognition and support of local knowledge, innovations, and rights (Tengö et al., 2014).
- Mobilization and leveraging of public, private, and community resources for SLM implementation, monitoring, scaling up, and creation of new opportunities for green growth and sustainable development (Liniger et al., 2011).
Conclusion
Sustainable Land Management is a holistic and integrated approach to land use and management that aims to achieve multiple social, economic, and environmental objectives while maintaining or enhancing the productivity, resilience, and ecological integrity of land resources. SLM practices, such as soil and water conservation, sustainable agricultural intensification, sustainable pastoralism, and sustainable forest management, can provide multiple benefits for ecosystem services, livelihoods, and sustainable development while addressing land degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change.
However, the adoption and scaling up of SLM practices face multiple challenges and opportunities, such as lack of awareness, knowledge, and capacity, inadequate access to resources and markets, insecure land tenure and property rights, and weak institutional and policy support. Addressing these challenges and opportunities requires a participatory, multi-stakeholder, and landscape-scale approach that engages land users, communities, researchers, policymakers, and other stakeholders in the co-design, co-implementation, and co-evaluation of SLM interventions.
Monitoring and evaluation, governance, and policy are critical enablers of SLM that can provide the knowledge, incentives, and innovations needed to support the adoption and scaling up of SLM practices. Effective M&E can improve the understanding, learning, and adaptive management of SLM practices, while effective governance and policy can enhance the coordination, participation, and financing of SLM interventions.
In conclusion, Sustainable Land Management is a key pathway for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. It requires a transformative change in the way we use, manage, and value land resources, and a collective action and partnership among all stakeholders and sectors. By investing in SLM practices, knowledge, and institutions, we can create a more sustainable, resilient, and equitable future for people and nature.