Richard McMillin via iStock
Research led by scientists at UC Santa Barbara, UC Berkeley and Conservation International reveals that protecting nature may depend as much on where agriculture occurs as on how it is practiced. While large-scale demographic, economic and climate trends strongly shape future land use, the study shows that strategic decisions about agricultural expansion, abandonment and restoration can still meaningfully influence habitat connectivity, biodiversity and carbon storage.
Ashley Larsen, associate professor at UCSB’s Bren School of Environmental Science & Management and senior author on the paper, emphasizes the power—and limits—of these choices. “It is hard to get away from these large-scale drivers of land use change,” she said. “Still, we were a bit surprised just how much the climate pathway dominated.” Her work highlights how global forces set the boundaries for land-use outcomes, even as local decisions shape what happens within them.
The study examined future land-use scenarios in the southeastern United States using U.S. Geological Survey projections through 2050. By tracking habitat fragmentation, connectivity, biodiversity and carbon storage potential, the researchers assessed how agricultural land abandonment, recultivation and rewilding could affect natural landscapes. Larsen’s expertise in managed ecosystems helped frame agriculture as both a challenge and an opportunity for conservation.
A key finding is that strategic recultivation—bringing abandoned farmland back into production—can reduce pressure to convert intact natural habitats elsewhere. At the same time, rewilding abandoned fields offers substantial benefits for biodiversity and habitat connectivity, though it often takes decades for ecosystems to fully recover. Larsen notes that these tradeoffs underscore the importance of planning land use with clear environmental metrics in mind.
The research also demonstrates that prioritizing high-carbon or highly biodiverse areas when making land-use decisions can significantly reduce habitat fragmentation. Within certain scenarios, targeted strategies reduced fragmentation by as much as 17%. “Having specific metrics to point to can help justify policy decisions made in order to prioritize connectivity and avoid further fragmentation,” Larsen said, highlighting the study’s relevance for policymakers and land managers.
Larsen stresses that while land-use decisions alone cannot override global trends, they remain a critical lever for improving environmental outcomes. “The paper reveals the extent to which strategic land-use decisions can impact biodiversity and carbon within a given climate trajectory,” she said. By quantifying these impacts, the research fills key gaps in understanding how future scenarios translate into real ecological consequences.
This work is part of the broader Arnhold UC Santa Barbara–Conservation International Climate Solutions Collaborative, which seeks to balance future food production, energy needs and biodiversity conservation. Larsen’s ongoing research continues to explore how managed landscapes—particularly in regions facing agricultural abandonment—can be strategically designed to support both human and ecological well-being.
