[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"item-1272":3,"related-1272":83},{"id":4,"title":5,"url":6,"summary":7,"summary_zh":8,"content":8,"source_name":9,"source_url":6,"published_at":10,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":14,"score_detail":15,"sources":22,"tags":24,"primary_topic":29,"secondary_topics":35,"classification":41,"search_phrases":59,"slug":62,"view_count":19,"doi":63,"paper":64,"created_at":82},1272,"Biodiversity isn’t measured in tons: Making sense of nature in the context of sustainable agriculture","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.32942\u002Fx28t1r","In this review, we articulate several important, but often overlooked concepts, trends, and perspectives in the biodiversity monitoring space, specifically in the context of transforming agriculture and the wider food system. We describe the common approaches to biodiversity monitoring — those focused on species, communities, functions, habitats, etc — and the methods and tools commonly used to track change. We then describe a set of fundamental ecological principles that are often overlooked by practitioners entering the agrobiodiversity space for the first time, particularly those with technical, industrial, and policy expertise in agriculture-adjacent fields who seek to incorporate biodiversity into their research and operations. For these practitioners, we discuss the importance of abundance, the timelines along which population trends can be quantitatively established, the geographical scales at which ecological interactions play out, and the implications therein for anyone looking to monitor the effect of farm management practices. We attempt to describe the complexities that arise when navigating the intersection of ecological, agricultural, and social systems, highlighting the multiple sets of voices, values, and priorities that come into play in this space. From intergovernmental panels to individual farmers, the agrobiodiversity space holds a multitude of arenas of where decisions are made. We raise the question of “why, how, and for whom are we monitoring biodiversity?” to encourage practitioners new to this space to consider the implications of their approach. Finally, we discuss the conflicts and trade-offs that emerge in the intersection of productivity, profits, carbon and biodiversity, and explore the challenges in finding a balance between them in the transition toward a more sustainable form of agriculture.",null,"OpenAlex","2026-08-28T00:00:00Z","论文",10,false,73,{"impact":16,"substance":17,"depth":16,"authority":18,"freshness":19,"relevant":20,"comment":21},18,22,12,3,1,"综述性论文，系统梳理农业生物多样性监测的概念、方法与挑战，对农业可持续发展有参考价值。",[23],{"name":9,"url":6},[25,26,27,28],"可持续农业","农业生态","生物多样性","监测方法",{"code":30,"slug":31,"name":32,"path":33,"parent_code":34},"H6","biodiversity","生态保护与生物多样性","\u002Ftopic\u002Fenvironment\u002Fbiodiversity","H",[36],{"code":37,"slug":38,"name":39,"path":40,"parent_code":34},"H8","sustainable-agriculture","可持续与保护性农业","\u002Ftopic\u002Fenvironment\u002Fsustainable-agriculture",{"status":42,"locked":13,"version":43,"method":44,"evidence":45},"classified","2026-10-22.2","rules",{"candidates":46,"agricultural_evidence":49},[47,53],{"code":30,"score":48,"supported":49,"title":50,"abstract":51,"tags":52},13,true,[31],[31],[26,27],{"code":37,"score":54,"supported":49,"title":55,"abstract":57,"tags":58},9,[56],"sustainable agriculture",[],[25],[60,61],"可持续农业 生物多样性 农业生态 监测方法","可持续农业 生物多样性","可持续农业生物多样性农业生态监测方法-1272","10.32942\u002Fx28t1r",{"doi":63,"openalex_id":65,"authors":66,"venue":8,"cited_by_count":72,"oa_url":73,"card":74,"direction":80,"ingested_from":81},"W7204518041",[67,70],{"name":68,"orcid":69},"Iqbal Singh Bhalla","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-5611-8361",{"name":71,"orcid":8},"Philip Loring",0,"https:\u002F\u002Fecoevorxiv.org\u002Frepository\u002Fobject\u002F14661\u002Fdownload\u002F25513\u002F",{"tldr":75,"method":76,"finding":77,"direction":78,"opportunity":79},"综述农业生物多样性监测的概念、方法、原则及权衡，强调监测目的与尺度。","综述常见监测方法（物种、群落等）及工具，讨论生态原则与多系统交叉。","监测需关注丰度、时间尺度、地理尺度，并权衡生产力、碳与生物多样性。","农业绿色发展与碳","可研究农业管理措施对生物多样性的多尺度影响，及权衡碳与生物多样性的决策模型。","智慧农业 \u002F 农业物联网","openalex","2026-09-01T04:03:13.203738Z",{"total":84,"page":20,"page_size":84,"items":85},6,[86,192,245,317,400,477],{"id":87,"title":88,"url":89,"summary":90,"summary_zh":91,"content":8,"source_name":92,"source_url":89,"published_at":93,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":94,"score_detail":95,"sources":100,"tags":102,"primary_topic":108,"secondary_topics":109,"classification":111,"search_phrases":174,"slug":177,"view_count":20,"doi":178,"paper":179,"created_at":191},4528,"Integrating indigenous knowledge systems into regenerative agriculture for sustainable crop production in southern Africa","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs43621-026-04926-8","Abstract Agricultural production in Southern Africa is increasingly constrained by climate variability, declining soil fertility, water scarcity, biodiversity loss, and rising pest pressures, particularly within rain-fed smallholder farming systems. Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS), developed through generations of interaction between communities and local agroecosystems, offer context-specific approaches that align closely with the principles of regenerative agriculture. This review synthesizes evidence from 37 publications examining the contribution of IKS to sustainable crop production across Southern Africa. Particular attention is given to soil health, soil biological activity, water-use efficiency, ecological pest regulation, crop productivity, and climate resilience. The synthesis demonstrates that indigenous regenerative practices, including organic soil amendments, residue retention, crop diversification, intercropping, agroforestry, water harvesting, and botanical pest management, improve soil organic carbon, enhance microbial activity, increase water retention, and stabilize yields under climatic stress. Evidence further indicates that indigenous pest management strategies frequently maintain pest populations below economic injury thresholds, thereby reducing dependence on synthetic pesticides while supporting ecosystem services. The review highlights the convergence between IKS, agroecology, integrated pest management, conservation agriculture, and regenerative agriculture, and proposes pathways for integrating indigenous ecological indicators into decision-support systems, crop models, and precision agriculture technologies. Despite growing recognition of indigenous knowledge within sustainability and climate adaptation agendas, significant gaps remain in quantitative validation, longitudinal assessment, and integration into formal agricultural research and policy frameworks. The findings demonstrate that Indigenous Knowledge Systems constitute a scientifically credible and economically viable foundation for regenerative agriculture and contribute directly to Sustainable Development Goals 2 (Zero Hunger), 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), 13 (Climate Action), and 15 (Life on Land). Strengthening the integration of indigenous and scientific knowledge systems will be essential for building resilient, productive, and sustainable agricultural systems across Southern Africa and the broader Global South.","摘要 南部非洲的农业生产日益受到气候变异性、土壤肥力下降、水资源短缺、生物多样性丧失和病虫害压力上升的制约，这在雨养小农耕作系统中尤为突出。本土知识体系（Indigenous Knowledge Systems, IKS）通过社区与地方农业生态系统数代互动而发展形成，提供了与再生农业原则高度契合的情境化方法。本综述综合了37篇文献的证据，考察了IKS在南部非洲可持续作物生产中的贡献。研究特别关注土壤健康、土壤生物活性、水分利用效率、生态病虫害调控、作物生产力及气候韧性。综合结果表明，本土再生实践——包括有机土壤改良、残茬保留、作物多样化、间作、农林业、集水和植物源病虫害管理——能够提高土壤有机碳、增强微生物活性、增加持水量并在气候胁迫下稳定产量。证据进一步表明，本土病虫害管理策略常能将病虫害种群维持在经济危害阈值以下，从而减少对合成农药的依赖，同时支持生态系统服务。本综述强调了IKS与农业生态学、病虫害综合治理、保护性农业和再生农业之间的趋同性，并提出了将本土生态指标纳入决策支持系统、作物模型和精准农业技术的路径。尽管本土知识在可持续发展和气候适应议程中日益受到认可，但在定量验证、长期评估以及纳入正式农业研究和政策框架方面仍存在显著空白。研究结果表明，本土知识体系构成了再生农业的科学可信且经济可行的基础，并直接有助于实现可持续发展目标2（零饥饿）、12（负责任消费和生产）、13（气候行动）和15（陆地生物）。加强本土知识与科学知识体系的整合，对于在南部非洲及更广泛的全球南方构建韧性、高产和可持续的农业系统至关重要。","Discover Sustainability","2026-10-08T00:00:00Z",75,{"impact":96,"substance":97,"depth":16,"authority":48,"freshness":98,"relevant":20,"comment":99},15,21,8,"综述整合37篇文献，论证土著知识对再生农业与气候韧性的科学价值，具区域政策参考意义。",[101],{"name":92,"url":89},[103,104,105,106,107],"小农户","气候韧性","土壤健康","再生农业","土著知识",{"code":37,"slug":38,"name":39,"path":40,"parent_code":34},[110],{"code":30,"slug":31,"name":32,"path":33,"parent_code":34},{"status":42,"locked":13,"version":43,"method":44,"evidence":112},{"candidates":113,"agricultural_evidence":49},[114,120,126,134,141,148,155,162,168],{"code":37,"score":16,"supported":49,"title":115,"abstract":117,"tags":119},[116],"regenerative agriculture",[106,118,116],"conservation agriculture",[106],{"code":30,"score":54,"supported":49,"title":121,"abstract":122,"tags":125},[],[27,26,123,31,124],"生态系统服务","agroecology",[],{"code":127,"score":128,"supported":49,"title":129,"abstract":130,"tags":133},"H2",7,[],[131,132],"土壤","soil",[105],{"code":135,"score":128,"supported":49,"title":136,"abstract":137,"tags":140},"H7",[],[138,139],"气候适应","climate resilience",[104],{"code":142,"score":84,"supported":49,"title":143,"abstract":144,"tags":147},"A7",[],[145,146],"间作","intercropping",[],{"code":149,"score":84,"supported":49,"title":150,"abstract":151,"tags":154},"I1",[],[152,153],"精准农业","precision agriculture",[],{"code":156,"score":157,"supported":49,"title":158,"abstract":159,"tags":161},"G2",4,[],[160],"smallholder",[103],{"code":163,"score":19,"supported":49,"title":164,"abstract":165,"tags":167},"F4",[],[166],"农药",[],{"code":169,"score":19,"supported":49,"title":170,"abstract":171,"tags":173},"H3",[],[172],"水资源",[],[175,176],"南部非洲 再生农业 土著知识","土著知识 土壤健康 小农户","南部非洲再生农业土著知识-4528","10.1007\u002Fs43621-026-04926-8",{"doi":178,"openalex_id":180,"authors":181,"venue":92,"cited_by_count":72,"oa_url":89,"card":185,"direction":190,"ingested_from":81},"W7220943031",[182],{"name":183,"orcid":184},"Albert Thembinkosi Modi","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-6887-1721",{"tldr":186,"method":187,"finding":188,"direction":78,"opportunity":189},"综述37篇文献，论证南部非洲本土知识可支撑再生农业与可持续作物生产。","系统综述37篇文献，聚焦土壤、水分、病虫害与气候韧性。","本土再生实践能提升土壤碳、微生物活性与水分保持，稳定产量并减少农药依赖。","可将本土生态指标量化并嵌入作物模型与精准农业决策系统，填补长期验证空白。","农业人工智能与决策模型","2026-10-09T23:30:52.261674Z",{"id":193,"title":194,"url":195,"summary":196,"summary_zh":197,"content":8,"source_name":198,"source_url":195,"published_at":199,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":94,"score_detail":200,"sources":203,"tags":205,"primary_topic":209,"secondary_topics":210,"classification":211,"search_phrases":223,"slug":226,"view_count":20,"doi":227,"paper":228,"created_at":244},4738,"Natural ecosystem loss in an Atlantic Forest agricultural basin: drivers of land-use change and future landscape trajectories","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1912707","The Atlantic Forest, one of the world's most threatened biodiversity hotspots, faces intense pressure from agricultural expansion and inadequate land governance. Understanding the spatial drivers and future trajectories of land-use and land cover (LULC) change is critical for safeguarding the ecosystem services and biodiversity that remnant natural areas provide. This study investigated the relative importance of multiple biophysical, socioeconomic, and demographic drivers of natural ecosystem loss in the Guaporé River Basin (GRB), a 246,300-ha subtropical Atlantic Forest agricultural watershed in southern Brazil. We combined a municipality-level temporal trend analysis to characterize historical LULC dynamics (1998–2019) with the Dinamica EGO cellular automata model, calibrated using Weight of Evidence (WoE), to simulate future landscapes under 2030 and 2050 scenarios. Our results reveal divergent ecological dynamics across the basin. The Northern region experienced extensive remnant vegetation loss (1.55% yr −1 conversion to altered ecosystems), driven by flat terrain and high agricultural productivity, while the Southern region showed partial natural regeneration (1.40% yr −1 transition from altered to regenerating vegetation), linked to steeper slopes and vegetation extraction practices. Despite apparent recovery, closer analysis reveals a regressive process of ecological simplification, in which remnant vegetation is progressively replaced by regenerating vegetation. Future projections suggest that, without strengthened enforcement of Brazil's Natural Vegetation Protection Law, the Northern basin will lose an additional 15,903 ha of remnant vegetation by 2050. These findings highlight critical spatial mismatches between legal protection frameworks and actual land-use pressures, with direct implications for conservation planning, watershed management, and biodiversity protection in the Atlantic Forest biome.","大西洋森林是全球受威胁最严重的生物多样性热点地区之一，面临着农业扩张和土地治理不足带来的巨大压力。理解土地利用与土地覆盖（LULC）变化的空间驱动因素及未来演变趋势，对于维护残余自然区域所提供的生态系统服务和生物多样性至关重要。本研究考察了巴西南部瓜波雷河流域（GRB）自然生态系统丧失的多个生物物理、社会经济和人口驱动因素的相对重要性。该流域面积246,300公顷，属亚热带大西洋森林农业流域。我们将市级时间趋势分析（用于刻画1998—2019年历史LULC动态）与Dinamica EGO元胞自动机模型相结合，并采用证据权重法（WoE）进行校准，以模拟2030年和2050年情景下的未来景观。研究结果揭示了流域内差异化的生态动态。北部地区经历了大面积的残余植被丧失（年转化率1.55%，转为改变后的生态系统），其驱动因素为平坦地形和高农业生产力；而南部地区则表现出部分自然再生（年转化率1.40%，从改变后的生态系统转为再生植被），与较陡的坡度和植被采伐活动相关。尽管表面上呈现恢复态势，进一步分析却揭示了一个退行性的生态简化过程，即残余植被正逐步被再生植被所取代。未来预测表明，若不加紧执行巴西《自然植被保护法》，到2050年北部流域将再丧失15,903公顷残余植被。这些发现凸显了法律保护框架与实际土地利用压力之间的关键空间错配，对大西洋森林生物群系的保护规划、流域管理和生物多样性保护具有直接影响。","Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","2026-10-11T00:00:00Z",{"impact":18,"substance":17,"depth":16,"authority":201,"freshness":54,"relevant":20,"comment":202},14,"基于元胞自动机与证据权重的巴西大西洋森林流域土地利用模拟研究，方法扎实、结论具体，但属区域案例，公共影响有限。",[204],{"name":198,"url":195},[26,27,206,207,208],"遥感监测","土地利用变化","流域治理",{"code":30,"slug":31,"name":32,"path":33,"parent_code":34},[],{"status":42,"locked":13,"version":43,"method":44,"evidence":212},{"candidates":213,"agricultural_evidence":49},[214,218],{"code":30,"score":18,"supported":49,"title":215,"abstract":216,"tags":217},[],[27,123,31],[26,207,27],{"code":219,"score":20,"supported":13,"title":220,"abstract":221,"tags":222},"I3",[],[],[206],[224,225],"Guaporé River Basin 土地利用","Atlantic Forest 农业流域 模拟","GuaporéRiverBasin土地利用-4738","10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1912707",{"doi":227,"openalex_id":229,"authors":230,"venue":198,"cited_by_count":72,"oa_url":195,"card":238,"direction":242,"ingested_from":81},"W7221477243",[231,234,236],{"name":232,"orcid":233},"Edberto Moura Lima","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-8447-8460",{"name":235,"orcid":8},"Bano Mehdi-Schulz",{"name":237,"orcid":8},"Jose Miguel Reichert",{"tldr":239,"method":240,"finding":241,"direction":242,"opportunity":243},"结合趋势分析与元胞自动机模拟巴西大西洋森林农业流域土地利用变化及未来情景。","Dinamica EGO元胞自动机+证据权重法，1998–2019年市级LULC","北部残存植被持续丧失，南部看似恢复实为生态简化，2050年北部将再失1.59万公顷。","农业遥感与作物表型","可引入遥感时序与多尺度治理数据，量化法律保护与实际压力错配的驱动机制。","2026-10-12T23:30:06.576251Z",{"id":246,"title":247,"url":248,"summary":249,"summary_zh":250,"content":8,"source_name":251,"source_url":248,"published_at":252,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":253,"score_detail":254,"sources":257,"tags":259,"primary_topic":264,"secondary_topics":265,"classification":270,"search_phrases":289,"slug":292,"view_count":20,"doi":293,"paper":294,"created_at":316},5163,"Ecological indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem responses to climate change in agroecology and nature-based solutions: a scoping review","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.ecolind.2026.115685","Climate change reshapes biodiversity patterns and ecosystem processes across scales. However, ecological indicators used to track these changes remain uneven in structure and application. This study maps and synthesizes indicators applied in agroecology and nature-based solutions (NbS) for assessing biodiversity and ecosystem responses under climate change. A PRISMA-ScR-guided scoping review was conducted using Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, covering literature from 2003 to 2026. From a final dataset of 89 sources, data were extracted through a structured coding framework and synthesized using an Indicator–Scale–Response matrix and an Indicator Application Index. Findings show shared reliance on indicators such as species diversity, ecosystem productivity, carbon dynamics, ecosystem services, and resilience. Differences emerge in how these indicators are applied. Agroecology prioritizes process-based and field-level measurements grounded in local ecological interactions, while NbS emphasizes standardized and scalable metrics linked to monitoring and reporting systems. Cross-scale integration remains uneven, particularly in connecting species-level responses with ecosystem and landscape indicators. Remote sensing and Essential Biodiversity Variables provide emerging pathways for linking scales, though field integration remains partial. Results point to fragmented indicator systems that limit coherent ecological assessment across management contexts. Strengthening alignment between field observations and scalable monitoring approaches could improve comparability and usability of ecological indicators for climate adaptation and ecosystem management in agricultural landscapes.","气候变化重塑了跨尺度的生物多样性模式与生态系统过程。然而，用于追踪这些变化的生态指标在结构和应用上仍不均衡。本研究梳理并综合了农业生态学与基于自然的解决方案（NbS）中用于评估气候变化下生物多样性与生态系统响应的指标。采用PRISMA-ScR指南开展范围综述，检索Scopus、Web of Science和Google Scholar，覆盖2003年至2026年的文献。从最终89篇文献构成的数据集中，通过结构化编码框架提取数据，并运用“指标—尺度—响应”矩阵和指标应用指数进行综合。研究结果表明，各领域共同依赖物种多样性、生态系统生产力、碳动态、生态系统服务和恢复力等指标，但在指标应用方式上存在差异。农业生态学侧重于基于过程和田块尺度的测量，根植于地方生态相互作用；而NbS强调与监测和报告体系相关联的标准化、可扩展的度量指标。跨尺度整合仍不均衡，尤其是在将物种层面响应与生态系统及景观指标相衔接方面。遥感与基本生物多样性变量（Essential Biodiversity Variables）为连接尺度提供了新兴路径，但野外观测的整合仍不充分。研究结果揭示出指标体系的碎片化，限制了跨管理情境下一致的生态评估。加强野外观测与可扩展监测方法之间的衔接，有望提升生态指标在农业景观气候适应与生态系统管理中的可比性和可用性。","Ecological Indicators","2026-10-16T00:00:00Z",64,{"impact":98,"substance":16,"depth":255,"authority":48,"freshness":54,"relevant":20,"comment":256},16,"该综述系统梳理了农业生态学与NbS中生物多样性及生态系统响应的指标，方法规范、结论有参考价值，但属学术综述，产业与政策影响有限，适合作为专业资讯而非每日精选头条。",[258],{"name":251,"url":248},[260,27,261,262,263],"气候变化","农业生态学","基于自然的解决方案","生态指标",{"code":30,"slug":31,"name":32,"path":33,"parent_code":34},[266],{"code":135,"slug":267,"name":268,"path":269,"parent_code":34},"climate","气候适应与防灾减灾","\u002Ftopic\u002Fenvironment\u002Fclimate",{"status":42,"locked":13,"version":43,"method":44,"evidence":271},{"candidates":272,"agricultural_evidence":49},[273,278,283],{"code":30,"score":274,"supported":49,"title":275,"abstract":276,"tags":277},27,[31,124],[27,26,123,31,124],[261,27],{"code":135,"score":16,"supported":49,"title":279,"abstract":281,"tags":282},[280],"climate change",[260,138,280],[260],{"code":219,"score":84,"supported":49,"title":284,"abstract":285,"tags":288},[],[286,287],"遥感","remote sensing",[],[290,291],"基于自然的解决方案 农业生态学 生物多样性 气候变化","基于自然的解决方案 农业生态学","基于自然的解决方案农业生态学生物多样性气候变化-5163","10.1016\u002Fj.ecolind.2026.115685",{"doi":293,"openalex_id":295,"authors":296,"venue":251,"cited_by_count":72,"oa_url":248,"card":311,"direction":242,"ingested_from":81},"W7222588017",[297,300,303,306,308],{"name":298,"orcid":299},"Eliakira Kisetu Nassary","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-7327-4366",{"name":301,"orcid":302},"Mawazo Jamson Shitindi","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-5579-902X",{"name":304,"orcid":305},"Aneth Japhet Magubika","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0009-0001-8910-1953",{"name":307,"orcid":8},"Esta Alfred Mhagama",{"name":309,"orcid":310},"Newton Lwiyiso Kilasi","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-4721-7691",{"tldr":312,"method":313,"finding":314,"direction":78,"opportunity":315},"综述农业生态与NbS中生物多样性和生态系统气候响应指标的应用差异。","PRISMA-ScR范围综述，检索2003-2026年89篇文献，构建指标-尺度","两类领域指标依赖相似但应用分化，跨尺度整合不足，指标系统碎片化。","可研究田间观测与遥感EBV衔接的跨尺度指标框架，提升农业景观气候适应评估可比性。","2026-10-17T23:30:28.181936Z",{"id":318,"title":319,"url":320,"summary":321,"summary_zh":322,"content":8,"source_name":323,"source_url":320,"published_at":324,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":325,"score_detail":326,"sources":329,"tags":331,"primary_topic":336,"secondary_topics":337,"classification":338,"search_phrases":367,"slug":370,"view_count":20,"doi":371,"paper":372,"created_at":399},4992,"Evaluating tools and methods for agroecosystem sustainability and performance: a critical review","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs44274-026-01121-4","The sustainability and performance of agroecosystems are critical for confronting global challenges, from food security to biodiversity loss. This critical narrative review synthesizes 137 peer-reviewed sources and grey literature documents (2000-2024) to interrogate the epistemological assumptions, power dynamics, and contextual appropriateness of sustainability assessment frameworks. This comprehensive review systematically analyzes the diverse tools and methodologies; including Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Response-Inducing Sustainability Evaluation (RISE), Framework for the Evaluation of Natural Resource Management Systems Incorporating Sustainability Indicators (MESMIS), and Tool for Agroecology Performance Evaluation (TAPE); used to evaluate this sustainability. This analysis moves beyond a simple comparison to offer a critical interrogation of these frameworks, exposing a fundamental tension between reductionist tools that offer precise, quantifiable data but often miss systemic interactions, and holistic, participatory approaches that capture socio-ecological complexity but struggle with standardization and scalability. This review underscores that sustainability assessment is not a neutral technical exercise but a value-laden process fraught with trade-offs, power dynamics, and epistemological conflicts, particularly between scientific and indigenous knowledge systems. The transformative potential of emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and remote sensing is examined, while cautioning against technological optimism that risks exacerbating inequities. Ultimately, this review argues for a shift towards reflexive, pluralistic assessment processes that prioritize equity, adaptive learning, and critical independence over standardized scoring, providing practical heuristics for researchers and practitioners navigating methodological trade-offs in diverse contexts.","农业生态系统的可持续性与表现对于应对从粮食安全到生物多样性丧失等全球性挑战至关重要。本批判性叙事综述综合了137篇同行评审文献和灰色文献（2000—2024年），旨在审视可持续性评估框架的认识论假设、权力动态及情境适宜性。本综述系统分析了用于评估该可持续性的多种工具和方法，包括生命周期评价（LCA）、诱导响应可持续性评估（RISE）、纳入可持续性指标的自然资源管理系统评价框架（MESMIS）以及农业生态表现评估工具（TAPE）。本分析超越了简单的比较，对这些框架进行了批判性审视，揭示了还原论工具与整体性参与式方法之间的根本张力——前者提供精确、可量化的数据，但往往忽视系统性交互；后者捕捉社会生态复杂性，却在标准化和可扩展性方面面临困难。本综述强调，可持续性评估并非中性的技术操作，而是一个充满价值负载的过程，充斥着权衡取舍、权力动态和认识论冲突，尤其是科学知识体系与本土知识体系之间的冲突。本文审视了人工智能（AI）和遥感等新兴技术的变革潜力，同时警示技术乐观主义可能加剧不平等。最终，本综述主张转向反思性、多元化的评估过程，将公平、适应性学习和批判性独立置于标准化评分之上，并为研究者和实践者在不同情境中应对方法论权衡提供实用启发式指南。","Discover Environment","2026-10-13T00:00:00Z",71,{"impact":18,"substance":327,"depth":16,"authority":48,"freshness":98,"relevant":20,"comment":328},20,"系统梳理LCA、RISE、MESMIS、TAPE等农业生态可持续性评估工具，指出还原论与整体论方法的张力，并讨论AI与遥感的赋能潜力，对农业信息化与智慧农业评估体系有参考价值。",[330],{"name":323,"url":320},[332,333,26,334,335],"农业人工智能","农业遥感","生命周期评价","可持续评价",{"code":30,"slug":31,"name":32,"path":33,"parent_code":34},[],{"status":42,"locked":13,"version":43,"method":44,"evidence":339},{"candidates":340,"agricultural_evidence":49},[341,345,349,356,362],{"code":30,"score":12,"supported":49,"title":342,"abstract":343,"tags":344},[],[27,26,31,124],[26],{"code":219,"score":128,"supported":49,"title":346,"abstract":347,"tags":348},[],[286,287],[333],{"code":350,"score":84,"supported":49,"title":351,"abstract":352,"tags":355},"A8",[],[353,354],"粮食安全","food security",[],{"code":357,"score":157,"supported":49,"title":358,"abstract":359,"tags":361},"I2",[],[360],"artificial intelligence",[332],{"code":363,"score":20,"supported":13,"title":364,"abstract":365,"tags":366},"H4",[],[],[334],[368,369],"TAPE 农业生态 评价","RISE MESMIS 可持续评估","TAPE农业生态评价-4992","10.1007\u002Fs44274-026-01121-4",{"doi":371,"openalex_id":373,"authors":374,"venue":323,"cited_by_count":72,"oa_url":393,"card":394,"direction":80,"ingested_from":81},"W7221633095",[375,378,381,384,386,388,390],{"name":376,"orcid":377},"Pierre Marie Chimi","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-4520-4165",{"name":379,"orcid":380},"Karimou Ngamsou Abdel","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-8126-6235",{"name":382,"orcid":383},"Baruch Batamack Nkoué","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0001-5601-3327",{"name":385,"orcid":8},"Eusebe Ydelphonse Nyonce Pokam",{"name":387,"orcid":8},"Angele Marie Ngon Dikoume",{"name":389,"orcid":8},"Benjamin Loïc Ndong Ndzana",{"name":391,"orcid":392},"William Armand Mala","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-2240-3746","https:\u002F\u002Flink.springer.com\u002Fcontent\u002Fpdf\u002F10.1007\u002Fs44274-026-01121-4.pdf",{"tldr":395,"method":396,"finding":397,"direction":78,"opportunity":398},"综述137篇文献，批判性评估农业生态系统可持续性评价工具的方法论假设与权衡。","批判性叙事综述，分析LCA、RISE、MESMIS、TAPE等框架及AI与遥感。","评价工具在简化精确与整体参与间存在根本张力，评价是价值负载过程。","可开发兼顾标准化与参与式、融合本土知识并反思技术乐观的混合评价框架。","2026-10-15T23:30:10.405237Z",{"id":401,"title":402,"url":403,"summary":404,"summary_zh":405,"content":8,"source_name":198,"source_url":403,"published_at":324,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":406,"score_detail":407,"sources":409,"tags":411,"primary_topic":415,"secondary_topics":416,"classification":417,"search_phrases":449,"slug":452,"view_count":72,"doi":453,"paper":454,"created_at":476},4869,"From life cycle assessment to life cycle thinking in agri-food systems: lessons from the avocado supply chain","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1875191","Agri-food systems face growing pressure to demonstrate environmental performance and support sustainability transitions. In this context, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) generates evidence on environmental impacts, while Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) helps integrate that information into decision-making across supply chains. This review evaluates LCA and LCT for the avocado sector by synthesising current LCA evidence, analysing the transferability of results to LCA‑based ecolabels and certifications, examining how LCT related food‑policy instruments create or limit incentives for supply‑chain actors and exploring pathways for translating life-cycle information into coordinated sustainability action. The assessment combines a systematic appraisal of English‑language avocado LCAs with regionally relevant studies, in Spanish and German, and field insights from sustained engagement with Ecuadorian producers. Avocado LCAs have expanded in number, supply chain and geographic coverage, consistently identifying production (e.g., fertilisation, fuel, energy use) and distribution (e.g., transport distances) as key environmental hotspots. Despite mounting pressure to reduce impacts, producers and distributors face limited incentives to move beyond compliance with non‑LCA certifications (e.g., GLOBALG.A.P., Rainforest Alliance). Retailers increasingly promote LCA‑based approaches, yet their efforts are hindered by data fragmentation, methodological inconsistency, and traceability challenges. Consumers express strong interest in environmental information, particularly when presented through simplified, multi‑criteria ecolabels, though such formats risk oversimplification or misrepresentation. Methodological gaps persist, including inconsistent treatment of carbon sequestration, biodiversity, and nursery stages, while opportunities in circularity and by‑product valorisation remain underexplored. Overall, LCT and LCA offer essential guidance for improving the sustainability of avocado supply chains, but their effectiveness depends on methodological standardisation, ecolabel harmonisation, clear policy direction, credible differentiation schemes, and robust data systems. By connecting environmental assessment with implementation, governance, and decision-making processes, this review outlines a pathway for embedding LCT within policy and practice, enabling more coherent, transparent, and actionable sustainability governance for agri-food supply chains.","农食系统正面临日益增大的压力，需展示其环境绩效并支持可持续性转型。在此背景下，生命周期评价（Life Cycle Assessment, LCA）为环境影响提供证据，而生命周期思维（Life Cycle Thinking, LCT）则有助于将这些信息整合到供应链各环节的决策中。本综述通过综合现有LCA证据、分析结果向基于LCA的生态标签和认证的可迁移性、考察与LCT相关的食品政策工具如何为供应链参与者创造或限制激励，以及探索将生命周期信息转化为协调可持续行动的路径，对牛油果行业的LCA和LCT进行了评估。该评估结合了对英语牛油果LCA的系统性评价、西班牙语和德语的相关区域研究，以及与厄瓜多尔生产者持续合作获得的实地见解。牛油果LCA在研究数量、供应链覆盖和地理范围上均有扩展，一致识别出生产环节（如施肥、燃料、能源使用）和分销环节（如运输距离）为关键环境热点。尽管减少环境影响的压力不断增大，生产者和分销商在超越非LCA认证（如GLOBALG.A.P.、雨林联盟）合规要求方面面临的激励仍然有限。零售商日益推广基于LCA的方法，但其努力受到数据碎片化、方法学不一致和可追溯性挑战的制约。消费者对环境信息表现出浓厚兴趣，尤其是当信息以简化的多标准生态标签形式呈现时，但此类形式存在过度简化或误导的风险。方法学空白依然存在，包括碳固存、生物多样性和苗圃阶段处理方式的不一致，而循环性和副产品增值方面的机遇仍未得到充分探索。总体而言，LCT和LCA为改善牛油果供应链的可持续性提供了重要指导，但其有效性取决于方法学标准化、生态标签协调、明确的政策方向、可信的差异化方案以及稳健的数据系统。通过将环境评估与实施、治理和决策过程相连接，本综述勾勒出一条将LCT嵌入政策与实践的路径，从而为农食供应链实现更协调、透明和可操作的可持续性治理。",82,{"impact":16,"substance":17,"depth":16,"authority":201,"freshness":12,"relevant":20,"comment":408},"系统综述牛油果供应链LCA与生命周期思维，指出数据碎片化、方法不统一及生态标签激励不足，对农产品可持续治理与信息化追溯有参考价值。",[410],{"name":198,"url":403},[25,412,334,413,414],"牛油果","农产品供应链","生态标签",{"code":30,"slug":31,"name":32,"path":33,"parent_code":34},[],{"status":42,"locked":13,"version":43,"method":44,"evidence":418},{"candidates":419,"agricultural_evidence":49},[420,424,429,435,440,445],{"code":30,"score":84,"supported":49,"title":421,"abstract":422,"tags":423},[],[27,31],[],{"code":363,"score":157,"supported":49,"title":425,"abstract":426,"tags":428},[],[427],"carbon sequestration",[334],{"code":430,"score":19,"supported":49,"title":431,"abstract":432,"tags":434},"F3",[],[433],"施肥",[],{"code":436,"score":20,"supported":13,"title":437,"abstract":438,"tags":439},"B2",[],[],[412],{"code":441,"score":20,"supported":13,"title":442,"abstract":443,"tags":444},"E",[],[],[413],{"code":37,"score":20,"supported":13,"title":446,"abstract":447,"tags":448},[],[],[25],[450,451],"牛油果 供应链 生命周期评价","农产品供应链 生命周期评价 可持续农业 生态标签","牛油果供应链生命周期评价-4869","10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1875191",{"doi":453,"openalex_id":455,"authors":456,"venue":198,"cited_by_count":72,"oa_url":403,"card":471,"direction":78,"ingested_from":81},"W7221595293",[457,459,462,464,466,468],{"name":458,"orcid":8},"Margarita Baquero",{"name":460,"orcid":461},"Villi Ieremia","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-7106-0583",{"name":463,"orcid":8},"Anton Van Oyen",{"name":465,"orcid":8},"Beatriz Rivela",{"name":467,"orcid":8},"Annemie Geeraerd Ameryckx",{"name":469,"orcid":470},"Angel Diego Ramirez","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-3846-3396",{"tldr":472,"method":473,"finding":474,"direction":78,"opportunity":475},"综述牛油果供应链LCA与生命周期思维，探讨如何将环境评估转化为可持续决策。","系统综述英文及西德文牛油果LCA研究，结合厄瓜多尔生产者实地调研。","生产与分销是环境热点，但数据碎片化、方法不一致和认证激励不足阻碍LCA落地。","可研究LCA标准化与生态标签协调机制，以及碳封存、生物多样性和副产物增值的方法学空白。","2026-10-14T23:30:06.874747Z",{"id":478,"title":479,"url":480,"summary":481,"summary_zh":482,"content":8,"source_name":483,"source_url":480,"published_at":484,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":485,"score_detail":486,"sources":488,"tags":490,"primary_topic":494,"secondary_topics":495,"classification":496,"search_phrases":507,"slug":510,"view_count":72,"doi":511,"paper":512,"created_at":526},4821,"Producing a Red List of Ecosystems for the Brazilian Cerrado","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fcsp2.70426","Abstract Land clearance is a key driver of biodiversity loss. This is a particular challenge in the Brazilian Cerrado, the world's most biodiverse savanna biome and a region experiencing a rapid expansion of agriculture. To inform habitat conservation and restoration actions, we used the Red List of Ecosystems (RLE) framework to identify threatened ecosystems within the Cerrado. This biome is divided into 20 ecoregions, and we subdivided each ecoregion into forest, savanna, grassland, and wetland ecosystems. We used remote sensing data from 1985 to 2020 to measure and predict the distribution of each ecosystem and assess its risk of collapse based on Criterion A2b (reduction in geographic distribution over any 50‐year period), Criterion B1 (limited extent of occurrence), and Criterion B2 (limited area of occupancy). Of the 80 ecosystems comprising the Cerrado, we assessed 12 as Endangered and 43 as Vulnerable. Most of these threatened ecosystems were identified under Criterion A2b, while Criterion B identified a smaller subset of spatially restricted ecosystems, particularly wetlands, underscoring the importance of applying more than one criterion in the assessment process. By using the Red List of Ecosystems as an international standard, we provide the first globally comparable analysis of the state of the Cerrado, showing that nearly three‐quarters of the region's ecosystems are at risk of collapse. This information provides a baseline to inform local policy and practice, helping to conserve biodiversity and maintain ecosystem services within this globally important region.","土地开垦是生物多样性丧失的主要驱动因素。这在巴西塞拉多（Cerrado）尤为严峻，该地区拥有全球生物多样性最丰富的稀树草原生物群系，同时正经历农业的快速扩张。为了为栖息地保护和恢复行动提供依据，我们采用生态系统红色名录（Red List of Ecosystems, RLE）框架来识别塞拉多境内受威胁的生态系统。该生物群系被划分为20个生态区，我们又将每个生态区细分为森林、稀树草原、草地和湿地生态系统。我们利用1985年至2020年的遥感数据，测量并预测各生态系统的分布，并基于标准A2b（任意50年期内地理分布范围的缩减）、标准B1（分布范围有限）和标准B2（占据面积有限）评估其崩溃风险。在构成塞拉多的80个生态系统中，我们评估出12个为濒危，43个为易危。这些受威胁的生态系统大多依据标准A2b被识别，而标准B则识别出较少一部分空间受限的生态系统，尤其是湿地，这凸显了在评估过程中应用多项标准的重要性。通过将生态系统红色名录作为国际标准加以运用，我们提供了首个在全球范围内可比较的塞拉多状况分析，表明该地区近四分之三的生态系统面临崩溃风险。这些信息为地方政策和实践提供了基线，有助于在这一具有全球重要性的区域内保护生物多样性并维持生态系统服务。","Conservation Science and Practice","2026-10-12T00:00:00Z",81,{"impact":16,"substance":17,"depth":16,"authority":201,"freshness":54,"relevant":20,"comment":487},"基于1985—2020年遥感数据对巴西塞拉多80个生态系统做红色名录评估，方法规范、数据扎实，对农业扩张与生态保护平衡有参考价值，但属域外研究，国内落地影响有限。",[489],{"name":483,"url":480},[27,206,491,492,493],"农业扩张","草原保护","生态系统评估",{"code":30,"slug":31,"name":32,"path":33,"parent_code":34},[],{"status":42,"locked":13,"version":43,"method":44,"evidence":497},{"candidates":498,"agricultural_evidence":49},[499,503],{"code":30,"score":12,"supported":49,"title":500,"abstract":501,"tags":502},[],[27,123,31],[27],{"code":219,"score":128,"supported":49,"title":504,"abstract":505,"tags":506},[],[286,287],[206],[508,509],"巴西塞拉多 生态系统红色名录","塞拉多 遥感 生物多样性","巴西塞拉多生态系统红色名录-4821","10.1111\u002Fcsp2.70426",{"doi":511,"openalex_id":513,"authors":514,"venue":483,"cited_by_count":72,"oa_url":480,"card":521,"direction":242,"ingested_from":81},"W7221517508",[515,518],{"name":516,"orcid":517},"Juliana Ávila Martins","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-5465-8276",{"name":519,"orcid":520},"Robert J. Smith","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-1599-9171",{"tldr":522,"method":523,"finding":524,"direction":242,"opportunity":525},"用生态系统红色名录框架评估巴西塞拉多80个生态系统的崩溃风险。","基于1985-2020年遥感数据，按A2b、B1、B2标准评估分布与风险。","近四分之三生态系统受威胁，12个濒危、43个易危，湿地等空间受限类型突出。","可结合多源遥感与生态模型，动态监测农业扩张下生态系统风险并支撑保护修复决策。","2026-10-13T23:30:23.689100Z"]