There is an urgent need for countries to transition their national food and land-use systems toward food and nutritional security, climate stability, and environmental integrity. How can countries satisfy their demands while jointly delivering the required transformative change to achieve global sustainability targets? Here, we present a collaborative approach developed with the FABLE—Food, Agriculture, Biodiversity, Land, and Energy—Consortium to reconcile both global and national elements for developing national food and land-use system pathways. This approach includes three key features: (1) global targets, (2) country-driven multi-objective pathways, and (3) multiple iterations of pathway refinement informed by both national and international impacts. This approach strengthens policy coherence and highlights where greater national and international ambition is needed to achieve global goals (e.g., the SDGs). We discuss how this could be used to support future climate and biodiversity negotiations and what further developments would be needed.

No abstract

No abstract

The analysis of the costs for action versus inaction in addressing land degradation at national and sub-national (regional and district) levels in Russia showed that the total annual costs of land degradation due to land use and cover change only are about 189 billion USD in 2009 as compared with 2001, i.e. about 23.6 billion USD annually, or about 2 % of Russia's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2010. These land use and land cover changes occurred in the area of 130 million ha. The area of arable lands decreased by 25 % during the period of the economic reforms between 1990 and 2009. The total economic value of ecosystem goods and services is estimated to equal about 3700 billion USD in Russia, exceeding the conventional GDP by 3 times. The costs of action against land degradation are lower than the costs of inaction in Russia by 5-6 times over a 30-year horizon. Almost 92 % of the costs of action are made up of the opportunity costs of action. The methodology of the economics of land degradation can be successfully applied in peculiar socioeconomic conditions of Russia, but the lack of harmonization of methods and indicators brings uncertainty to quantitative assessments.

No abstract