How to make land use policy decisions: Integrating science and economics to deliver connected climate, biodiversity, and food objectives

Bateman, Ian J., Binner, Amy, Addicott, Ethan T., Balmford, Ben, Cho, Frankie H. T., Daily, Gretchen C., De-Gol, Anthony, Eisenbarth, Sabrina, Faccioli, Michela, Ferguson-Gow, Henry, Ferrini, Silvia, Fezzi, Carlo, Gannon, Kate, Groom, Ben, Harper, Anna B., Harwood, Amii, Hillier, Jon, Hulme, Mark F., Lee, Christopher F., Liuzzo, Lorena, Lovett, Andrew, Mancini, Mattia C., Matthews, Robert, Morison, James I. L., Owen, Nathan, Pearson, Richard G., Polasky, Stephen, Siriwardena, Gavin, Smith, Pete, Snowdon, Pat Pat, Tippett, Peter, Vetter, Sylvia H., Vinjili, Shailaja, Vossler, Christian A., Watson, Robert T., Williamson, Daniel and Day, Brett H. (2024) How to make land use policy decisions: Integrating science and economics to deliver connected climate, biodiversity, and food objectives. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 121 (49). ISSN 0027-8424

[thumbnail of Bateman-et-al-2024-PNAS]
Preview
PDF (Bateman-et-al-2024-PNAS) - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (2MB) | Preview

Abstract

Land use change is crucial to addressing the existential threats of climate change and biodiversity loss while enhancing food security [M. Zurek et al., Science 376, 1416-1421 (2022)]. The interconnected and spatially varying nature of the impacts of land use change means that these challenges must be addressed simultaneously [H.-O. Pörtner et al., Science 380, eabl4881 (2023)]. However, governments commonly focus on single issues, incentivizing land use change via "Flat-Rate"subsidies offering constant per hectare payments, uptake of which is determined by the economic circumstances of landowners rather than the integrated environmental outcomes that will be delivered [G. Q. Bull et al., Forest Policy Econ. 9, 13-31 (2006)]. Here, we compare Flat-Rate subsidies to two alternatives: "Land Use Scenario"allocation of subsidies through consultation across stakeholders and interested parties; and a "Natural Capital"approach which targets subsidies according to expected ecosystem service response. This comparison is achieved by developing a comprehensive decision support system, integrating new and existing natural, physical, and economic science models to quantify environmental, agricultural, and economic outcomes. Applying this system to the United Kingdom's net zero commitment to increase carbon storage via afforestation, we show that the three approaches result in significantly different outcomes in terms of where planting occurs, their environmental consequences, and economic costs and benefits. The Flat-Rate approach actually increases net carbon emissions while Land Use Scenario allocation yields poor economic outcomes. The Natural Capital targeted approach outperforms both alternatives, providing the highest possible social values while satisfying net zero commitments.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Data, Materials, and Software Availability: Outputs from the Natural Environment Valuation (NEV) tool quantifying different aspects of market and non-market value for each of the decision-making approaches (Flat-Rate payment, Land Use Scenario and Natural Capital targeted) are available for download at the Harvard Dataverse (https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/POGPP2).
Uncontrolled Keywords: biodiversity,climate change,decision-making,land use,natural capital,sdg 2 - zero hunger,sdg 13 - climate action,sdg 15 - life on land ,/dk/atira/pure/sustainabledevelopmentgoals/zero_hunger
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Science > School of Environmental Sciences
UEA Research Groups: Faculty of Science > Research Centres > Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE)
Faculty of Science > Research Groups > Environmental Social Sciences
Related URLs:
Depositing User: LivePure Connector
Date Deposited: 13 Jun 2025 15:30
Last Modified: 01 Jul 2025 00:58
URI: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/99502
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2407961121

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item