Managing agricultural landscapes to support biodiversity conservation requires profound structural changes worldwide. Often, discussions are centered on management at the field level. However, a wide and growing body of evidence calls for zooming out and targeting agricultural policies, research, and interventions at the landscape level to halt and reverse the decline in biodiversity, increase biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes, and improve the resilience and adaptability of these ecosystems. We conducted the most comprehensive assessment to date on landscape complexity effects on nondomesticated terrestrial biodiversity through a meta-analysis of 1,134 effect sizes from 157 peer-reviewed articles. Increasing landscape complexity through changes in composition, configuration, or heterogeneity significatively and positively affects biodiversity. More complex landscapes host more biodiversity (richness, abundance, and evenness) with potential benefits to sustainable agricultural production and conservation, and effects are likely underestimated. The few articles that assessed the combined contribution of linear (e.g., hedgerows) and areal (e.g., woodlots) elements resulted in a near-doubling of the effect sizes (i.e., biodiversity level) compared to the dominant number of studies measuring these elements separately. Similarly, positive effects on biodiversity are stronger in articles monitoring biodiversity for at least 2 y compared to the dominant 1-y monitoring efforts. Besides, positive and stronger effects exist when monitoring occurs in nonoverlapping landscapes, highlighting the need for long-term and robustly designed monitoring efforts. Living in harmony with nature will require shifting paradigms toward valuing and promoting multifunctional agriculture at the farm and landscape levels with a research agenda that untangles complex agricultural landscapes’ contributions to people and nature under current and future conditions.

With the Convention on Biological Diversity conference (COP15), United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26), and United Nations Food Systems Summit, 2021 is a pivotal year for transitioning towards sustainable food systems. Diversified farming systems are key to more sustainable food production. Here we present a global dataset documenting outcomes of diversified farming practices for biodiversity and yields compiled following best standards for systematic review of primary studies and specifically designed for use in meta-analysis. The dataset includes 4076 comparisons of biodiversity outcomes and 1214 of yield in diversified farming systems compared to one of two reference systems. It contains evidence from 48 countries of effects on species from 33 taxonomic orders (spanning insects, plants, birds, mammals, eukaryotes, annelids, fungi, and bacteria) of diversified farming systems producing annual or perennial crops across 12 commodity groups. The dataset presented provides a resource for researchers and practitioners to easily access information on where diversified farming systems effectively contribute to biodiversity and food production outcomes.

The expansion and intensification of agriculture have led to global declines in biodiversity. This paper presents a systematic review protocol to clarify under what management and landscape contexts diversified farming practices are effective at improving outcomes for terrestrial biodiversity, and potential trade-offs or synergies with agricultural yields. The systematic review will be developed following the Reporting Standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses (ROSES). The review will include articles that compare levels of diversity (e.g., abundance, richness, Shannon’s diversity index) of any terrestrial taxon (e.g., arthropods, mammals) in diversified farming systems to levels in simplified farming systems and/or natural habitats, prioritising articles that also report agricultural yields. We will search for relevant peer-reviewed primary studies in two global repositories: Scopus and Web of Science, and among primary studies included in previous meta-analyses that are retrieved from the search. Full-texts of identified articles will be screened using a clear inclusion/exclusion eligibility criteria. All included articles will be assessed to determine their internal validity. A narrative synthesis will be performed to summarize, describe and present the results, and where the articles provide sufficient and appropriate data, we will conduct a quantitative meta-analysis.

Diversified farming systems are increasingly recognised for their potential to enhance the sustainability and resilience of food systems. Yet it remains unclear whether empirical research adequately captures the drivers and constraints shaping farmers' decisions regarding diversified farming systems across stages of decision‐making, influencing factors, practices and contexts. We present a systematic evidence map of 354 regression models from 193 peer‐reviewed studies (1982–2023) examining how multiple factors relate to five decision‐making stages (awareness, interest, adoption, intensity of adoption and dis‐adoption) across 10 diversified farming practices in 45 countries. Factors were classified into 14 categories spanning biophysical, socio‐economic, psychological, institutional and contextual dimensions. To identify geographic gaps, we compared the spatial distribution of decision‐making research with country and subregional suitability for profitable diversified farming systems. The literature overwhelmingly focuses on the adoption stage (82% of studies), with limited evidence on factors influencing farmers' awareness of, interest in or dis‐adoption of diversified practices. Coverage is uneven across practices, factors and regions. Agroforestry dominates the literature (39% of studies), while crop–animal integrated practices are rarely assessed. Models most often include human (95%), natural (77%) and financial capital (71%), with limited representation of political and institutional conditions and psychological factors (e.g. perceptions and social norms). Among the 70 countries with very high suitability for profitable diversification, only 17 (24%) are represented, with particularly limited evidence in Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean. While the literature provides robust evidence on factors influencing adoption, gaps across other decision‐making stages, institutional and psychological dimensions, complex practices and high‐suitability regions constrain its relevance for policy and investment. More holistic, theory‐informed research capturing decision‐making across stages and contexts is needed to support the implementation and long‐term viability of diversified farming systems. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.