In an incredible story of human adaptation, the aggregate global risk of mortality to extreme weather declined by over two orders of magnitude over the past century. Yet the data show that large losses of lives to extreme weather disasters persist in nations typified by poor economic development, weak institutions, and political instability. And currently we are seeing spikes in mortality from extreme heat events in rich nations, including a wave of new reported deaths in Japan, Europe, and Canada during 2018. These events and future projections of increasing exposure suggest that we need to revisit adaptation strategies to deal with the adverse effects of extreme weather disasters across the world.
In an incredible story of human adaptation, the aggregate global risk of mortality to extreme weather declined by over two orders of magnitude over the past century. Yet the data show that large losses of lives to extreme weather disasters persist in nations typified by poor economic development, weak institutions, and political instability. And currently we are seeing spikes in mortality from extreme heat events in rich nations, including a wave of new reported deaths in Japan, Europe, and Canada during 2018. These events and future projections ofincreasing exposure suggest that we need to revisit adaptation strategies to deal with the adverse effects of extreme weather disasters across the world.
In an incredible story of human adaptation, the aggregate global risk of mortality to extreme weather declined by over two orders of magnitude over the past century. Yet the data show that large losses of lives to extreme weather disasters persist in nations typified by poor economic development, weak institutions, and political instability. And currently we are seeing spikes in mortality from extreme heat events in rich nations, including a wave of new reported deaths in Japan, Europe, and Canada during 2018. These events and future projections ofincreasing exposure suggest that we need to revisit adaptation strategies to deal with the adverse effects of extreme weather disasters across the world.
In an incredible story of human adaptation, the aggregate global risk of mortality to extreme weather declined by over two orders of magnitude over the past century. Yet the data show that large losses of lives to extreme weather disasters persist in nations typified by poor economic development, weak institutions, and political instability. And currently we are seeing spikes in mortality from extreme heat events in rich nations, including a wave of new reported deaths in Japan, Europe, and Canada during 2018. These events and future projections of increasing exposure suggest that we need to revisit adaptation strategies to deal with the adverse effects of extreme weather disasters across the world. ; Arts, Faculty of ; Science, Faculty of ; Other UBC ; Non UBC ; Geography, Department of ; Liu Institute for Global Issues ; Resources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute for ; Reviewed ; Faculty ; Researcher
In: Mehrabi , Z , McDowell , M J , Ricciardi , V , Levers , C , Martinez , J D , Mehrabi , N , Wittman , H , Ramankutty , N & Jarvis , A 2021 , ' The global divide in data-driven farming ' , Nature Sustainability , vol. 4 , no. 2 , pp. 154-160 . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00631-0
Big data and mobile technology are widely claimed to be global disruptive forces in agriculture that benefit small-scale farmers. Yet the access of small-scale farmers to this technology is poorly understood. We show that only 24–37% of farms of 200 ha in size. Furthermore, croplands with severe yield gaps, climate-stressed locations and food-insecure populations have poor service coverage. Across many countries in Africa, less than ~40% of farming households have Internet access, and the cost of data remains prohibitive. We recommend a digital inclusion agenda whereby governments, the development community and the private sector focus their efforts to improve access so that data-driven agriculture is available to all farmers globally.
Big data and mobile technology are widely claimed to be global disruptive forces in agriculture that benefit small-scale farm-ers. Yet the access of small-scale farmers to this technology is poorly understood. We show that only 24–37% of farms of 200 ha in size. Furthermore, croplands with severe yield gaps, climate-stressed locations and food-insecure populations have poor service coverage. Across many countries in Africa, less than ~40% of farming households have Internet access, and the cost of data remains prohibitive. We recommend a digital inclusion agenda whereby governments, the development community and the private sector focus their efforts to improve access so that data-driven agriculture is available to all farmers globally. ; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada ; Canadian Institutes of Health Research ; University of British Columbia ; Horizon 2020 ; Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada ; Peer Review
International agreements aim to conserve 17% of Earth's land area by 2020 but include no area-based conservation targets within the working landscapes that support human needs through farming, ranching, and forestry. Through a review of country-level legislation, we found that just 38% of countries have minimum area requirements for conserving native habitats within working landscapes. We argue for increasing native habitats to at least 20% of working landscape area where it is below this minimum. Such target has benefits for food security, nature's contributions to people, and the connectivity and effectiveness of protected area networks in biomes in which protected areas are underrepresented. We also argue for maintaining native habitat at higher levels where it currently exceeds the 20% minimum, and performed a literature review that shows that even more than 50% native habitat restoration is needed in particular landscapes. The post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework is an opportune moment to include a minimum habitat restoration target for working landscapes that contributes to, but does not compete with, initiatives for expanding protected areas, the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
International agreements aim to conserve 17% of Earth's land area by 2020 but include no area‐based conservation targets within the working landscapes that support human needs through farming, ranching, and forestry. Through a review of country‐level legislation, we found that just 38% of countries have minimum area requirements for conserving native habitats within working landscapes. We argue for increasing native habitats to at least 20% of working landscape area where it is below this minimum. Such target has benefits for food security, nature's contributions to people, and the connectivity and effectiveness of protected area networks in biomes in which protected areas are underrepresented. We also argue for maintaining native habitat at higher levels where it currently exceeds the 20% minimum, and performed a literature review that shows that even more than 50% native habitat restoration is needed in particular landscapes. The post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework is an opportune moment to include a minimum habitat restoration target for working landscapes that contributes to, but does not compete with, initiatives for expanding protected areas, the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals.