Feeding the world without destroying it: Should We Spare or Share?

As the festive season approaches, we will gather with loved ones to celebrate and most likely over-eat. However, where does all that food come from, and how can we produce enough food to feed billions of people without destroying the nature that provides us with clean water, fresh air, and a stable climate? Scientists are debating two main approaches to tackle this challenge: land sparing and land sharing.

What is land-sparing and sharing?

Last week, I came across a recent article by Kremen & Geladi (2024) titled “Land-Sparing and Sharing: Identifying Areas of Consensus, Remaining Debate and Alternatives”. The authors discuss the status of land-sparing and sharing debates in academia, two opposite approaches for conserving biodiversity while supporting food security. Briefly, land sparing involves growing as much food as possible on a smaller area of land by using high-yield farming techniques. In contrast, land sharing mixes farming with conservation on the same land. The latter approach promotes wildlife-friendly farming practices, such as agroforestry and maintaining natural vegetation patches, to create heterogeneous landscapes supporting agriculture and biodiversity.

Which Is Better for biodiversity conservation and food security?

Experts have mixed opinions. Some scientists (i.e., Bateman & Balmford, 2023) argue that land sparing is better for protecting wildlife, especially species that need undisturbed habitats. By concentrating farming in smaller areas, more land can be set aside just for nature. Others (i.e., Tamburini, 2020; Beillouin et al., 2021; Ricciardi et al., 2021) say land sharing is better for ensuring food security while maintaining biodiversity conservation. Additionally, Kremen (2015) suggests that land sharing brings benefits like pollination and pest control, which are crucial for farming.

A Middle Ground?

Many researchers (e.g., Selinske et al.,2023) now believe that the best solution might be a combination of both strategies. For example, intensive farming could be used in some areas, while wildlife-friendly practices could be applied elsewhere to create a balanced approach.

The “elephant in the room”: Consumption

No matter how we grow food—land sparing, sharing, or a perfect balance between sparing and sharing—we cannot ignore a vital issue: how much we consume. The growing demand for food, often driven by overconsumption and waste, puts extra pressure on our planet. Simple changes—like eating less meat (consumption sparing), reducing food waste (consumption sparing), and supporting a sustainable food market (consumption sharing)—can make a huge difference.

What choice to make?

There is no one-size-fits-all answer to the sparing vs. sharing debate. What works in one place might not work in another. Some areas might benefit from leaving nature untouched (land sparing), while others might thrive by blending farming and conservation (land sharing). What is clear is that we need to rethink how we produce and consume food to ensure a future where both people and nature can thrive.

Every choice counts

As we enjoy this holiday season, let us reflect on how our choices impact the planet. Whether we spare or share our food consumption modes, every small action counts in building a sustainable world.

References

Bateman, I. J., & Balmford, A. (2023). Land sparing versus sharing: A critical review of the evidence. Nature Sustainability, 6(2), 123–131.

Beillouin, D., Ben‐Ari, T., Malézieux, E., Seufert, V., & Makowski, D. (2021). Positive but variable effects of crop diversification on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Global change biology, 27(19), 4697-4710.

Kremen, C., & Geladi, I. (2024). Land-Sparing and Sharing: Identifying Areas of Consensus, Remaining Debate and Alternatives.

Ricciardi, V., Mehrabi, Z., Wittman, H., James, D., & Ramankutty, N. (2021). Higher yields and more biodiversity on smaller farms. Nature Sustainability, 4(7), 651-657.

Selinske, M. J., et al. (2023). Integrating land sparing and sharing for biodiversity and food security: A socio-ecological perspective. Conservation Letters, 16(1), e12904.

Tamburini, G., Bommarco, R., Wanger, T. C., Kremen, C., Van Der Heijden, M. G., Liebman, M., & Hallin, S. (2020). Agricultural diversification promotes multiple ecosystem services without compromising yield. Science advances, 6(45), eaba1715.