Delivering food security without increasing pressure on land

By Pete Smith. 2013

355 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Plant Science, Water Science and Technology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/eeb0917175318eaaa44dfe648073445c270df04f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. E. Röös
2. M. Patel
3. T. Garnett
4. Z. Bharucha
5. Pete Smith
6. J. Pretty
7. D. Little
8. B. Bajzelj

In Plant Science

1. J. Pretty
2. Z. Bharucha
3. D. Byerlee
4. Pete Smith
5. Mark D. Rounsevell
6. T. Garnett
7. D. Little

In Water Science and Technology

1. J. Pretty
2. Z. Bharucha

Citations in the corpus

• Could consumption of insects, cultured meat or imitation meat reduce global agricultural land use? (2017, background): “The combination of land use change and other emissions increases the share of agriculture in all global anthropogenic GHG emissions to between 17% and 32% (Smith and Gregory, 2013).”
• Greedy or needy? Land use and climate impacts of food in 2050 under different livestock futures (2017, background): “Sustainable intensification is a term that has been coined to describe this concept (Garnett et al., 2013; Smith, 2013; The Royal Society, 2009).”
• Sustainable intensification in agricultural systems. (2014, background): “The concept is thus relatively open, in that it does not articulate or privilege any particular vision of agricultural production (Garnett and Godfray, 2012; Smith, 2013).”
• Does intensification slow crop land expansion or encourage deforestation (2014, background): “Defining intensification and its pathways to land use changes Intensification is defined in different ways (e.g., Smith, 2013), often adding to confusion in discussing its impacts on land use.”
• Global urbanization and food production in direct competition for land: Leverage places to mitigate impacts on SDG2 and on the Earth System (2019, background): “Nevertheless, owing to the expectation that tradeoffs and amplifying dynamics will significantly increase environmental, economic, and social costs, converting previously uncultivated terrestrial ecosystems for agricultural food production is not a viable solution to build food security (Phalan et a”
• The impact of population growth and climate change on food security in Africa: looking ahead to 2050 (2017, background): “…that environmentally sensitive techniques are made an integral part of the intensification process and we do not carry the most destructive practices into the future, in other words making the transition from ‘intensification’ to ‘sustainable intensification’ (Garnett et al., 2013; Smith, 2013).”