Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41271714›Full record

ArticleNature communications2025

Reconciling crop production, climate action and nature conservation in Europe by agricultural intensification and extensification.

Ting Hua, Xiangping Hu, Gunnar Austrheim, James D M Speed, Bob van Oort, Francesco Cherubini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ting HuaIndustrial Ecology Programme, Department for Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. ting.hua@ntnu.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1605-9010
Xiangping HuIndustrial Ecology Programme, Department for Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3468-8248
Gunnar AustrheimDepartment of Natural History, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3909-6666
James D M SpeedDepartment of Natural History, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0633-5595
Bob van OortCICERO Center for International Climate Research, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9508-1162
Francesco CherubiniIndustrial Ecology Programme, Department for Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7147-4292

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Agricultural production in areas characterized by low productivity, steep slopes, and high fragmentation is usually associated with higher-than-average management costs and environmental impacts. Abandoning this suboptimal cropland to vegetation regrowth, while optimizing crop production in other locations, is an attractive strategy for supporting climate and biodiversity targets without compromising food security. However, it has not yet been explored within the specific context of European agriculture. Here, we identify the area extent of suboptimal cropland in Europe and assess if crop production losses from its revegetation can be compensated by implementing scenarios of cropland intensification or extensification elsewhere. We found 24.2 million hectares of suboptimal cropland, of which 66% is at degradation risk and about 50% is within biodiversity priority areas. Reducing agricultural intensity in 16.4-30.9 million hectares of the remaining cropland by introducing parcels of trees into the agricultural landscape (extensification), together with strategic crop-switching optimization, can entirely offset crop production losses from revegetation of suboptimal cropland. This scenario has the potential to mitigate up to 40% of European agricultural emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce cropland pressure on biodiversity by 20%. In contrast, cropland intensification achieves lower carbon-biodiversity benefits, with risks that crop losses are not fully compensated.

Indexed as

AgricultureConservation of Natural ResourcesCrop ProductionCrops, AgriculturalBiodiversityClimateClimate ChangeEuropeGreenhouse GasesGreenhouse Gases

Identifiers

PMID41271714
PMCPMC12638777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.