Rethinking land-use Strategies: A multi-objective analysis of combined sparing and sharing approaches applied across great britain

The land-sharing versus land-sparing debate represents a critical juncture in agricultural policy development. However, applying either of these approaches uniformly at a national scale has been challenged suggesting that more effective strategies may require a context-dependent mix of methods. This study evaluates plausible strategies of land sparing and land sharing at regional scale in Great Britain using the Long-Term Large Scale integrated modelling framework. We consider these strategies in various combinations to get national scale outcomes for nutrient losses to freshwater and agricultural productivity. By simulating various land-use configurations across 11 International Territorial Level regions, we generated over 1.79 trillion scenarios with differing regional distributions of arable and semi-natural land. We used multiple objective optimization to find an optimal solution set. Our analysis identified 24,412 Pareto-optimal solutions that also improved on business-as-usual. The Pareto-optimal solutions all favoured combining land-sparing and land-sharing approaches. These optimized scenarios achieved increases of up to 9.7 % in livestock calories and 5.2 % in crop calories, while reducing phosphorus losses by 6.9 % and nitrate losses by 11.9 % in comparison to a business-as-usual scenario. Our findings demonstrate that spatially differentiated land-use strategies tailored to regional characteristics outperform uniform national sharing or sparing approaches. However, these modest improvements suggest that transformative change will require complementary innovations beyond land allocation strategies alone. This approach advances landscape planning from binary sharing-sparing debates towards a multidimensional optimization of food production and environmental quality that acknowledges the inherent complexity of dynamic landscapes while supporting evidence-based agricultural policy development.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Environmental Management
Published
2025-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.128389
Primary Topic
Agricultural Economics and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rethinking land-use Strategies: A multi-objective analysis of combined sparing and sharing approaches applied across great britain

K. Coleman, Alice E. Milne, imane el fartassi, John W. Redhead et al.
Journal of Environmental Management
Agricultural Economics and Policy
article

Rethinking land-use Strategies: A multi-objective analysis of combined sparing and sharing approaches applied across great britain

K. Coleman, Alice E. Milne, imane el fartassi, John W. Redhead, Jonathan Storkey, Nathan Missault, Theo Jackson, Ryan T. Sharp, Helen Metcalfe, Helen Davies, David M. Cooper, Victoria A. Bell, Andrew P. Whitmore
article en

Abstract

The land-sharing versus land-sparing debate represents a critical juncture in agricultural policy development. However, applying either of these approaches uniformly at a national scale has been challenged suggesting that more effective strategies may require a context-dependent mix of methods. This study evaluates plausible strategies of land sparing and land sharing at regional scale in Great Britain using the Long-Term Large Scale integrated modelling framework. We consider these strategies in various combinations to get national scale outcomes for nutrient losses to freshwater and agricultural productivity. By simulating various land-use configurations across 11 International Territorial Level regions, we generated over 1.79 trillion scenarios with differing regional distributions of arable and semi-natural land. We used multiple objective optimization to find an optimal solution set. Our analysis identified 24,412 Pareto-optimal solutions that also improved on business-as-usual. The Pareto-optimal solutions all favoured combining land-sparing and land-sharing approaches. These optimized scenarios achieved increases of up to 9.7 % in livestock calories and 5.2 % in crop calories, while reducing phosphorus losses by 6.9 % and nitrate losses by 11.9 % in comparison to a business-as-usual scenario. Our findings demonstrate that spatially differentiated land-use strategies tailored to regional characteristics outperform uniform national sharing or sparing approaches. However, these modest improvements suggest that transformative change will require complementary innovations beyond land allocation strategies alone. This approach advances landscape planning from binary sharing-sparing debates towards a multidimensional optimization of food production and environmental quality that acknowledges the inherent complexity of dynamic landscapes while supporting evidence-based agricultural policy development.

Journal of Environmental ManagementVol. 398
Bangor University (GB), Rothamsted Research (GB), UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (GB)
Directorate for Biological Sciences, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, Natural Environment Research Council
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Agricultural Economics and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.