Bridging Farm Economics and Landscape Ecology for Global Sustainability through Hierarchical and Bayesian Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agricultural landscapes face the dual challenge of sustaining food production while reversing biodiversity loss. Agri-environmental policies often fall short of delivering ecological functions such as landscape connectivity, in part due to a persistent disconnect between farm-level economic decisions and landscape-scale spatial planning. We introduce a novel hierarchical optimization framework that bridges this gap. First, an Ecological Intensification (EI) model determines the economically optimal allocation of land to margin and habitat interventions at the individual farm level. These farm-specific intervention levels are then passed to an Ecological Connectivity (EC) model, which spatially arranges them across the landscape to maximize connectivity while preserving farm-level profitability. Finally, we introduce a Bayesian Optimization (BO) approach that translates these spatial outcomes into simple, cost effective, and scalable policy instruments, such as subsidies and eco-premiums, using non-spatial, farm-level policy parameters. Applying the framework to a Canadian agricultural landscape, we demonstrate how it enhances connectivity under real-world economic constraints. Our approach provides a globally relevant tool for aligning farm incentives with biodiversity goals, advancing the development of agri-environmental policies that are economically viable and ecologically effective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".