Intensive agriculture has led to significant soil degradation and nutrient surpluses in the EU, prompting the need for more sustainable practices. Organic agriculture is often considered a strategy to produce food more sustainably, albeit with challenges such as yield reduction. Here, we estimate the impacts of expanding organic agriculture to 25% of agricultural land in the EU and UK-a key target of the European Commission's Farm to Fork Strategy-using a spatially explicit biogeochemical model, focusing on changes in crop yields in combination with C, N, and P fluxes and stocks. Achieving the 25% target could improve 0.8%-1.4% of degraded soil areas (out of ~49.0 million ha that exceed at least one degradation criterion based on N surplus, excess soil P, or soil erosion thresholds), quantifiably reduce dependency on mineral fertilizers (P by 15.8%-16.0% and N by 15.2%-15.7%), and either lessen or maintain current eutrophication impacts on freshwater fish. However, these benefits come with a trade-off of about 6.5% reduction in average yields of grain and tuber, partly due to increased fodder production replacing grain and tuber crops in the rotation. Applying the 25% target area EU-wide or per member state minimally affects the overall results. An additional cover crop scenario demonstrated the benefits of increased N fixation, improved yields, and mitigating SOC decline, but also resulted in higher impacts on freshwater biodiversity due to increased N losses. Thus, it highlights the importance of considering interconnected N, P, and C cycles alongside crop yields and potential feedbacks. This approach offers valuable insights into the synergies and trade-offs between agricultural practices and environmental consequences at high spatial resolution.

Diets low in quality represent a large risk for global mortality, morbidity, and environmental deterioration. In 2019, the EAT-Lancet commission published a universal reference diet, the ‘planetary health diet’ (PHD), focusing on human health and sustainability. We aimed to compare the average Swiss diet, four Swiss dietary patterns, and the sex- and language-specific dietary habits with the PHD with respect to adherence and sustainability. Data of the cross-sectional population-based National Nutrition Survey menuCH (2014–2015, n = 2057) were used. Food consumption was assessed with 24-hours dietary recalls. Using the multiple source method, the usual dietary intake was determined. Sustainability impacts were examined by determining Greenhouse Gas emissions, total land and grassland use, the Social Hotspots Index, and diet’s costs. Adherence and sustainability of the Swiss diet were analyzed descriptively. Participants consumed on average more red meat, dairy products, and added sugar and less whole grains, vegetables, legumes, nuts, and unsaturated fats than recommended by the PHD. None or few of the participants adhered to the whole grains (0.0

Agri-food systems are essential for food security, yet they are major drivers of biodiversity loss through land conversion, intensification, and related emissions, threatening long-term stability of food production. To design food systems that sustain biodiversity while ensuring food provision, biodiversity impacts must be systematically assessed at food system level. This study integrates a food system model (SOLm) with biodiversity characterization factors from the global life cycle impact assessment method (GLAM), enabling consistent biodiversity impact assessment across multiple drivers. The analysis focuses on four drivers of biodiversity loss—land use, eutrophication, acidification, and climate change—and evaluates contributions to biodiversity impacts across alternative production scenarios in Switzerland. Results show that all alternative scenarios reduce biodiversity impacts from domestic production. Scenarios aligning livestock populations with grassland availability and reducing feed-food competition achieved the most substantial reductions, driven by lower pressures from climate change, eutrophication, and acidification, while maintaining calorie and protein supply. Land-use impacts decreased less, particularly in organic systems, due to lower yields, risking externalization of biodiversity impacts through increased imports. Impacts from imports were dominated by products such as coffee and cocoa, which exert substantial external pressures, although biodiversity impacts per unit area were lower for organic production than conventional. Thus, lower yields in organic systems necessitate additional measures, such as reducing feed-food competition and food loss and waste, to improve biodiversity outcomes. Coupling production-side measures with food supply shifts and food loss and waste reductions can lower biodiversity impacts without compromising food availability. The proposed model for integrating biodiversity indicators with food system modelling provides a globally applicable framework for analysing trade-offs between food supply and biodiversity. However, due to lack of data, global biodiversity indicators lack relevant aspects, e.g. related to soil microbiome or eco-toxicity from plant protection means. Assessing significance and potential bias from missing aspects is required to ensure balanced conclusions.

Food production contributes significantly to environmental degradation, accounting for an estimated 78% of global ocean and freshwater eutrophication (Poore & Nemecek, 2018), being the leading driver of biodiversity loss, and representing a major driver of soil health loss (EUSO, 2024). Organic farming is often proposed as a strategy to mitigate these impacts by enhancing biodiversity, reducing nutrient losses at large-scale adoption, and improving multiple soil quality parameters (Seufert & Ramankutty, 2017). Consequently, policy initiatives such as the European Green Deal’s Farm to Fork strategy aimed to expand organic farming across Europe (European Commission, 2020). However, the sustainability benefits of organic agriculture depend strongly on local conditions. For example, transitioning to organic management can risk decreasing soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks (Gaudaré et al., 2023), reducing yields, and potentially increasing greenhouse gas emissions per unit of product due to lower productivity (Meier et al., 2015). These outcomes depend on region-specific factors such as soil properties, climatic conditions, management practices, and nutrient availability.This study evaluates how a transition to organic agriculture influences SOC and nutrient (N, P) dynamics across the EU by comparing a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario with a scenario in which 25% of agricultural land is managed organically by 2030. We employed the spatially explicit, process-based biogeochemical model DayCent at a 1 km2 scale across the EU, which has been calibrated and tested for European conditions (Muntwyler et al., 2023), to simulate SOC turnover, nutrient cycling, and crop yields across diverse soil and climate gradients. The model integrates detailed representations of mineralization, stabilization, plant uptake, and nutrient losses, thus capturing key processes. To evaluate broader environmental consequences, model outputs were combined with a life cycle assessment (LCA) framework using regionalized characterization factors that quantify N- and P-related impacts on freshwater fish biodiversity (Zhou et al., 2024).Achieving the 25% organic target showed potential to improve degraded soils (defined by nutrient surplus/excess), reduce reliance on mineral fertilizers, and maintain or lessen current eutrophication impacts on freshwater fish. The spatially explicit modelling framework enabled identification of hotspot regions where transitions to organic agriculture yield environmental benefits with minimal productivity losses. However, these benefits were accompanied by reduced average yields of grain and tuber crops, partly driven by increased fodder crop production in organic rotations. A complementary cover crop scenario highlighted the benefits of increased N fixation, improved yields, and mitigation of SOC decline, but also led to higher impacts on freshwater biodiversity due to increased N losses.These results underscore the importance of jointly considering interconnected N, P, and C cycles, yield responses, and potential feedbacks when evaluating management transitions. The approach provides valuable insights into the synergies and trade-offs between agricultural practices and environmental consequences at high spatial resolution, supporting evidence-based decisions for sustainable land management and policy.

Preserving soil health is a global priority for achieving sustainable food systems. Although crop rotation is widely recognised as an effective soil-conserving practice, adoption remains limited in many countries due to persistent profitability gaps relative to monoculture. Using an agent-based model and Northeast China as a case, we estimate the subsidy levels and policy portfolios required to scale up maize-soybean rotation. The simulations show that an annual rotation consistently outperforms a biennial system, and adoption increases with subsidy intensity but exhibits diminishing marginal returns. On average, each additional 1000 Chinese Yuan (CNY) is associated with a 7% increase in the adoption rate. Importantly, farmers' awareness of rotation benefits and their willingness to adopt substantially promote diffusion, demonstrating that non-monetary measures-such as education, demonstrations, and extension services-greatly enhance the effectiveness of financial incentives. At a subsidy level of 9000 CNY/ha, the adoption rate of the combined non-monetary measures is 23.0% higher than that of monetary subsidies alone. Our analysis indicates that subsidy programs become effective only when monetary incentives are integrated with these non-monetary measures. Without such complementary support, financial incentives not only have limited influence on adoption but also risk imposing a substantial fiscal burden.

Livestock production is a major driver of phosphorus (P) surpluses, threatening nutrient-sensitive regions, such as the watershed of Lake Sempach in Switzerland. While reducing livestock density may alleviate these impacts, it risks undermining food production and rural livelihoods. This study investigates regionally adapted strategies to reduce livestock-related P excretion while maintaining animal-source protein (ASP) production. Using the dynamic LEAF.livestock model, we simulated nearly five million combinations of herd structures and management practices. Each scenario was assessed across five key indicators: P excretion, ASP output, land use, food-feed competition, and manure fertilizing potential. Region-specific ecological and production constraints were applied, including limits on P excretion, maintenance of ASP output, and adherence to available land. No scenario fulfilled all constraints simultaneously. When the land-use constraint was relaxed, over 514'000 viable and 7'174 Pareto-optimal scenarios emerged, showing clear trade-offs between livestock density, herd composition, feed sourcing, and nutrient outputs. Pareto-optimal scenarios consistently required reduced livestock density (65%-90% of business-as-usual (BAU)), pig shares >= 20%, and fewer suckler cows. Pig-dominated scenarios performed best on P excretion and ASP output but required more arable land and intensified feed-food competition. Dairy-dominated scenarios used less arable land and had better N:P ratios, but produced less ASP, though equal or greater than BAU. Similar results emerged therefore from different strategies, highlighting the importance to identify local optima rather than rely on a single global solution. In all scenarios, more plant-source protein than ASP could be produced if the same land were used directly for food production. To maintain the current ASP production, many scenarios relied on external land for feed production, manure export, or off-site rearing, shifting environmental burdens beyond the catchment. This study provides a model-based foundation for designing ecologically sound and socially acceptable livestock transition pathways, highlighting region-specific trade-offs and actionable strategies to reduce P surpluses while maintaining food production within environmental limits.

Food self-sufficiency (FSS) and healthy diets are high on policy agendas to ensure food security under increasing global pressures. A global shift towards self-sufficient production of healthy diets would represent a radical departure from today's globalised food system. Representing such scenarios in a biophysically consistent way requires accounting for multiple resource constraints and feedback loops—including feed, fertiliser, and trade flows—while allowing flexible reallocation of crop areas, livestock numbers, and biomass streams. We use the global biophysical optimisation model CiFoS (Circular Food Systems) to evaluate the potential for self-sufficient production of multiple food groups and nutrients in 70 regions by 2050 under a business-as-usual diet (BAU-MinTrade) and a Planetary Health Diet (PHD-MinTrade). FSS is assessed by minimising biomass and nutrient trade while fulfilling dietary requirements, with trade only balancing shortages. Results show that total trade could fall by 62% to 618 million tonnes in BAU-MinTrade and by 79% to 343 million tonnes in PHD-MinTrade. Many regions—including Europe, the Americas, Oceania, and China—could be almost self-sufficient under both scenarios. Several African regions, India, and parts of Asia would still rely on imports, especially under BAU-MinTrade. Most food groups and nutrients show potential for increased FSS, though trade in some animal-source products and nutrients may rise. Self-sufficient systems can keep land use and GHG emissions within planetary boundaries, but nitrogen and phosphorus inputs remain high. PHD self-sufficiency is consistently more sustainable than BAU. Aligning production with dietary shifts towards a PHD supports self-sufficiency while reducing environmental trade-offs.

Nature-based solutions (NBS) are widely promoted to address climate, biodiversity, and sustainability challenges in agriculture. However, their transformative potential is often overstated through "win-win" framings that obscure trade-offs, power asymmetries, and institutional misalignment. Here, we propose a principles-based, scenario-informed framework that reframes agricultural NBS as socio-ecological interventions whose outcomes depend on system dynamics, governance capacities, and learning processes. Four scenarios alongside ten guiding principles and four scaling strategies are used to explore how temporal, spatial, and institutional dynamics shape NBS persistence, equity, and scalability across contexts. Rather than prescribing optimal solutions, the framework functions as a heuristic tool to diagnose constraints, surface trade-offs, and support adaptive, context-responsive governance. In doing so, we shift the evaluation of NBS beyond site-level effectiveness toward their capacity to remain viable, equitable, and ecologically grounded under conditions of uncertainty, contestation, and diversity.

Agricultural land-use change is a key driver of biodiversity loss. Two alternative strategies have been discussed to align biodiversity conservation with agricultural production in landscapes containing agriculture: (i) land sparing, with intensive agriculture strictly separated from natural land, and (ii) land sharing, a mosaic of low-intensity agriculture and natural elements. Sparing builds on high-yielding intensive production to provide more area for natural habitats; sharing aims to support biodiversity within agricultural landscapes by employing wildlife-friendly farming practices. A considerable body of literature addresses conceptual aspects of these strategies, but empirical evidence on how they support biodiversity is scarce. We assessed the empirical evidence by analyzing 57 peer-reviewed articles identified in a systematic literature review, of which only 17 allowed a comparison of the strategies. These 17 articles contained 27 cases of comparisons, of which 52% reported that context-specific solutions combining sharing and sparing performed best, and exclusively focusing on one strategy cannot balance the competing demands of food production and biodiversity. In 41% cases, land sparing performed best and in 7% land sharing. However, these 17 studies almost exclusively focus on specific contexts and metrics (e.g. species population density of tropical forest birds) and the other 40 studies lack important elements for a comparison, such as the assessment of agricultural production performance. The empirical basis is thus sparse and does not support statements claiming that, in general, either land sharing or land sparing strategies are unequivocally better. It rather highlights the importance of context-specific solutions for aligning agricultural production and biodiversity conservation.

There have been great advances in many aspects of organic dairy farming, which has become increasingly efficient and productive with a strong market. However, in some cases this has occurred through increasing specialization and scale of production, which risks the sector not being able to fully address the major challenges of environmental and social sustainability, animal welfare and the ability to deliver affordable and nutritious products. These challenges can be addressed by referencing the core organic principles of health, ecology, fairness and care, by adopting a more holistic, systems-based perspective and with organic dairy farming being viewed as an important part of wider rural communities and landscapes. This chapter explores some of these ecological, social and food-system frameworks and what they mean for the future of organic dairy farming. Key elements include a focus on pasture-based production, reduced dependency on feed imports and incentives reflecting organic farming’s aims and aspirations.

Transforming the global food system is essential to avoid exceeding Earth’s environmental limits. A robust evidence base is crucial to assess the scale and combination of interventions required for a sustainable transformation. We developed a risk assessment framework, underpinned by an evidence synthesis of global food system modeling studies, to quantify the potential of individual and combined interventions to mitigate the risk of exceeding global environmental limits for agricultural area, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, surface water flows, and nutrient cycles by 2050. GHG emissions and nutrient cycles are the most difficult limits to avoid exceeding and are conditional on shifts toward diets with a low proportion of animal-source foods; steep reductions in emissions intensity; substantial improvements in nutrient management, feed-conversion ratios, and crop yields; and efforts to limit overconsumption and food waste. Ambitious actions across the global food system are needed to ensure the required level of risk mitigation.

Visions of circular food systems have become increasingly central to debates about sustainability, guiding strategies to reduce waste and regenerate resources. Among the at times conflicting visions that diverge in values and priorities, the transition toward circular food systems remains uncertain. We examine how everyday future-making practices reconfigure relations with waste and shape circular transitions in Switzerland. Drawing on Social Practice Theory and the concept of transformativity, we analyze how actors perform practices that reshape how waste is encountered, valued, and integrated into circular material flows in everyday life. Based on qualitative fieldwork conducted in 2023 with four cases from the Swiss food system including fertilizer production from urine, urban aquaponics, food waste redistribution, and biodynamic CSA farming, we show how different practices render alternative waste values tangible and engage people in circular futures-in-the-making through habitual, planned, and experimental modes of practices. In doing so, we highlight the everyday as a key site where contested circularity visions are negotiated, adapted, and implemented.

Agricultural landscapes are multifunctional and closely connected to the much wider food system. In our review, we explore three specific aspects of modelling approaches for agricultural landscape assessments: (a) how multifunctionality is commonly analysed to support decision-making for sustainable agricultural land management; (b) how the modelling approaches relate to the wider food systems; and (c) how gaps in the existing modelling approaches might be addressed. For this, we identified key elements of agricultural landscape assessments, including ecosystem services (ESS) provided, driving factors, and linkages between crop and livestock production, and to the wider food system. We reviewed 238 publications with respect to these elements. While biodiversity and the ESS ‘water conditions’ and ‘atmospheric composition/conditions’ are widely covered, they are rarely used in combination. Other ESS, such as ‘pest and disease control’, are largely missing. Our results further indicate strong differences between individual approaches regarding model parameterisation and consideration of abiotic, biotic, and management driving factors. Our analysis also shows that the interconnectedness of crop and livestock production is rarely considered and that return flows from the food system are not considered. Furthermore, impacts from the production of external inputs and off-site effects are not considered. Consequently, existing models might overlook trade-offs and synergies between landscape functions. Failure to consider variations in relevant driving factors and food system linkages likely results in studying incorrect levers for change and failing to show decision-makers the full scope of available action. We thus suggest adopting more encompassing modelling approaches to ensure coverage of the full scope of potential actions, whilst hedging against overly costly data requirements by, e.g. employing well-designed sensitivity analyses. In this way, the most relevant components and thus the most important leverage points for interventions can be identified.

Bioenergy from energy crops is a source of negative emissions and carbon-neutral fuels in many 1.5/2 ^∘ C IPCC pathways. This may compete with other land uses. In contrast, ancillary biomass like by-products and waste is not primarily grown for energy and thus without land/food/feed competition. Here, we examine the availability and environmental impacts of ancillary bioenergy from agricultural sources under 190 circular agroecological strategies using the global food-system model SOLm for the year 2050. We find that there is a diverse option space for the future food and energy system to meet both global warming targets (1.5 ^∘ C) and food system sustainability (medium to highly organic) – a similar range of ancillary bioenergy global potential (55–65 EJ)from very different food systems (50%–75% organic agriculture and various levels of waste and concentrate feeding reduction). We find three trade-offs between food system sustainability and ancillary bioenergy provision. First, there is a clear trade-off between nutrient recycling and negative emissions potential. 1.4–2.6 GTCO _2 eq of negative emissions supplied through ancillary bioenergy with carbon capture and storage comes at the cost of nutrient deficits and resulting incompatibility with even a medium degree of organic farming. Second, reducing feed from croplands increases the ancillary bioenergy production with low shares of organic agriculture and reduces it for high shares. Third, food waste reduction reduces ancillary bioenergy provision. Hence, the sustainable transformation of the food system towards a less animal-based diet and waste reduction may conflict with a higher ancillary bioenergy provision, especially when the organic share is high as well. The policy implication of our results is that ancillary bioenergy can provide a similar range of future bioenergy as foreseen in IPCC AR6 illustrative pathways (±10% ) without additional land use or compromising food availability. However, higher ancillary bioenergy provision or additional negative emissions compete with food system sustainability; hence, we recommend policymakers consider aligning energy system planning with the compatibility of sustainable food systems simultaneously.

Transforming the global food system is necessary to avoid exceeding planetary boundaries. A robust evidence base is crucial to assess the scale and combination of interventions required for a sustainable transformation. We developed a risk assessment framework, underpinned by a meta-regression of 60 global food system modeling studies, to quantify the potential of individual and combined interventions to mitigate the risk of exceeding the boundaries for land-system change, freshwater use, climate change, and biogeochemical flows by 2050. Limiting the risk of exceedance across four key planetary boundaries requires a high but plausible level of ambition in all demand-side (diet, population, waste) and most supply-side interventions. Attaining the required level of ambition for all interventions relies on embracing synergistic actions across the food system.

The aim of this study was to analyze the acceptance of different policy measures affecting meat consumption in Switzerland. We conducted qualitative interviews with leading stakeholders and elaborated 37 policy measures for reducing meat consumption. In a standardized survey, we analyzed the acceptance of these mea-sures and important preconditions for their implementation. Measures with potentially the biggest direct leverage, such as a VAT increase on meat products, were highly rejected. We found high levels of acceptance for measures that do not directly affect meat consumption but have the potential for significant changes of meat consumption in the longer run - such as research investment and sustainable diet education. Furthermore, some measures with considerable short-term effects were widely accepted (e.g., stricter animal welfare standards, ban of meat advertisements). These measures could be a promising starting point for policy makers aiming at a transformation of the food system toward lower levels of meat consumption.

Biomass is a growing renewable energy source in Europe and is envisioned to play a role for realising carbon neutrality, predominantly using dedicated energy crops. However, dedicated biomass is controversial for reasons including its competition with food production or its land-use and emissions impacts. Here we examine the potential role of a land-free alternative: ancillary bioenergy (AB) from biomass sources not primarily grown for energy and without land/food/feed competition. We provide the first dataset of 2050 ancillary biomass potential using the agricultural system model SOLm, which encompasses untapped by-/co-products and detailed agricultural residues. Results show that there is a limited future potential for AB in Europe (2394–10 342 PJ, which is 3–6 times lower than other estimates including dedicated biomass). We design and investigate alternative scenarios where this bioenergy resource can be fully utilised, not utilised at all, or utilised optimally by the sector-coupled energy system model Euro-Calliope. We find that fully utilising ancillary biomass can help phase out controversial nuclear or land-intensive dedicated biomass, so might achieve higher societal acceptability. Using all ancillary biomass as a negative-emissions source at stationary bioenergy carbon capture and storage plants in a nuclear-free system provides additional climate benefits. It is also possible to leave the AB potential completely unused, which barely increases total system cost, but would preserve agricultural nutrients. We conclude that there are synergies and trade-offs among possible strategic uses of AB, which can provide guidelines for a more coherent European bioenergy strategy. Although the 2050 potential of AB is limited, our findings suggest that it could fill critical strategic niches for realising carbon-neutrality.

SummarySuccessful transitions to agroecology require shared understanding of the sustainability implications of transitions for food systems. To gain such understanding, a transdisciplinary approach is increasingly called for by funders, end users of research and scientists. Transdisciplinary processes were used in the UNISECO project to develop strategic pathways that enable transitions to agroecology in case studies across Europe. These strategic pathways were combined with scenarios of EU food systems in 2050, in which combinations of agroecological farming and food consumption practices were assessed. These were then reviewed considering selected UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a reference for discussing the sustainability implications of transitions to agroecology. Sustainability implications were identified for several SDGs including Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Quality Education (SDG 4), Responsible Consumption and Production (SDG 12), Climate Action (SDG 13) and Life on Land (SDG 15). Key factors contributing to the sustainability of transitions to agroecology are: i) mature social capital and improved farmer knowledge of the benefits of agroecological practices; ii) strengthened collaborative actions and collective institutions to increase negotiating power within the value‐chain; and, iii) changes in consumer behaviour and diets. These factors highlight the need for a food system perspective in transitions to agroecology and supporting policies. This in turn highlights the meaningful role of transdisciplinary research in strengthening the sustainability of European food systems.