17 Upcoming Challenges in Land Use Science—An International Perspective
323
public expression of needs to start quickly with instruments to realize the outcomes
and of the Paris Agreement in 2015 (van den Bergh 2017) originates and is conducted
mostly in the developed world and not in the Global South, where CC impacts
are much more dramatic and relevant for peoples survival. Land use systems as an
intrinsic factor in regulating the global climate through carbon sequestration are not
really in the focus of the public perception and adapted behaviour (van de Ven et al.
2018) yet, even if certification systems that could further afforestation or halt losses
of tropical forest areas are known and proven to be highly efficient (Brancalion et al.
2017; Kongsager et al. 2016). In contrast, policy changes, for instance in Brazil,
foster the degradation and destruction of the Amazonian forest (Freitas et al. 2018),
while in the boreal forests, large areas are burnt, for instance, in Russia in the recent
years through missing monitoring and mismanagement, whose capacities to regulate the large subsurface Carbon resources in permafrost soils are now destroyed
(Schaphoff et al. 2016; Shuman et al. 2017. The current debates on stopping CC are
more focussing on replacing the critical use of fossil energy and related technologies by other critical technologies (e-Mobility) with increasingly disastrous social
and ecological impacts on land use systems through the extraction of rare metals
and particularly of lithium (Agusdinata et al. 2018; Lee and Wen 2017). In contrast,
approved and traditionally developed strategies related to land use as a means to mitigate CC or to adapt to the not-anymore manageable impacts are lost in the societal
and political discourse (Eguavoen et al. 2015; Knutti et al. 2016).
Global change and tele-coupling are not yet publicly perceived topics but anyhow
found entrance in the political discourse on equitable polycentric international governance and the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
(Bowen et al. 2017; Vasseur et al. 2017), but also in the discussion on global migration trends and how to co-manage them between Global North and Global South
(Oberlack et al. 2018; Radel et al. 2019). Known interactions are the increasing
consumption of meat in developed and transitioning economies, the globalization of
production processes, land grabbing for resource extraction, the cultivation of renewable resources for energy production and the compensation of CO 2 emissions trough
certificate trade (e.g. Fiske and Paladino 2016; Garrett and Rueda 2019; Harvey and
Pilgrim, 2011; Hull and Liu 2018). These lead to highly negative impacts particularly
on land use systems in the Global South and here particularly in weak economies
in Africa or transitioning economies in Latin America, South-East and Central Asia
(Liu et al. 2013; Gasparri et al. 2016). In result, highly valuable and native ecosystems
are irreversibly degraded with huge consequences for the global loss of biodiversity
(IPBES 2019) and its relevance for climate regulation, regulation of CC impacts and
the intergenerational equity in the access to highly relevant natural resources (Cardinale et al. 2012; Redclift and Sage 1998; Tacconi and Bennett 1995). Since the role
of all organisms threatened by the degradation of land use systems is not fully understood, negative consequences for the resilience not only of singular ecosystems, but
the system earth and for the vulnerability of land use systems from local to global
scale are not yet known (Bonan and Doney 2018).
The 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; UN SDGs 2015) address
directly or indirectly land use systems, such as SDG 17 “Life on Land”. Anyhow,
323
public expression of needs to start quickly with instruments to realize the outcomes
and of the Paris Agreement in 2015 (van den Bergh 2017) originates and is conducted
mostly in the developed world and not in the Global South, where CC impacts
are much more dramatic and relevant for peoples survival. Land use systems as an
intrinsic factor in regulating the global climate through carbon sequestration are not
really in the focus of the public perception and adapted behaviour (van de Ven et al.
2018) yet, even if certification systems that could further afforestation or halt losses
of tropical forest areas are known and proven to be highly efficient (Brancalion et al.
2017; Kongsager et al. 2016). In contrast, policy changes, for instance in Brazil,
foster the degradation and destruction of the Amazonian forest (Freitas et al. 2018),
while in the boreal forests, large areas are burnt, for instance, in Russia in the recent
years through missing monitoring and mismanagement, whose capacities to regulate the large subsurface Carbon resources in permafrost soils are now destroyed
(Schaphoff et al. 2016; Shuman et al. 2017. The current debates on stopping CC are
more focussing on replacing the critical use of fossil energy and related technologies by other critical technologies (e-Mobility) with increasingly disastrous social
and ecological impacts on land use systems through the extraction of rare metals
and particularly of lithium (Agusdinata et al. 2018; Lee and Wen 2017). In contrast,
approved and traditionally developed strategies related to land use as a means to mitigate CC or to adapt to the not-anymore manageable impacts are lost in the societal
and political discourse (Eguavoen et al. 2015; Knutti et al. 2016).
Global change and tele-coupling are not yet publicly perceived topics but anyhow
found entrance in the political discourse on equitable polycentric international governance and the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
(Bowen et al. 2017; Vasseur et al. 2017), but also in the discussion on global migration trends and how to co-manage them between Global North and Global South
(Oberlack et al. 2018; Radel et al. 2019). Known interactions are the increasing
consumption of meat in developed and transitioning economies, the globalization of
production processes, land grabbing for resource extraction, the cultivation of renewable resources for energy production and the compensation of CO 2 emissions trough
certificate trade (e.g. Fiske and Paladino 2016; Garrett and Rueda 2019; Harvey and
Pilgrim, 2011; Hull and Liu 2018). These lead to highly negative impacts particularly
on land use systems in the Global South and here particularly in weak economies
in Africa or transitioning economies in Latin America, South-East and Central Asia
(Liu et al. 2013; Gasparri et al. 2016). In result, highly valuable and native ecosystems
are irreversibly degraded with huge consequences for the global loss of biodiversity
(IPBES 2019) and its relevance for climate regulation, regulation of CC impacts and
the intergenerational equity in the access to highly relevant natural resources (Cardinale et al. 2012; Redclift and Sage 1998; Tacconi and Bennett 1995). Since the role
of all organisms threatened by the degradation of land use systems is not fully understood, negative consequences for the resilience not only of singular ecosystems, but
the system earth and for the vulnerability of land use systems from local to global
scale are not yet known (Bonan and Doney 2018).
The 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; UN SDGs 2015) address
directly or indirectly land use systems, such as SDG 17 “Life on Land”. Anyhow,