The State of Food and Agriculture 2025

Land is the foundation of food production, and its management plays a critical role in ensuring global food security. The way land’s productive potential is managed directly affects the availability and stability of food supplies. As the global population grows and dietary patterns shift towards more resource-intensive foods, sustainable land management becomes increasingly important.^{6, 74, 81} While food availability and stability are closely linked to land, achieving comprehensive food security also requires attention to access and utilization. Within the context of building resilient agrifood systems, sustainable land management is not only an agricultural concern – it is a development priority that underpins efforts to meet rising food demand, protect ecosystems and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

As pressures on land continue to rise, there is increased awareness that land is a finite resource. Unlike other production factors, the amount of available agricultural land is limited.^{72, 128–131} This inherent characteristic creates unique challenges for ensuring food security and sustainable development, as increasing demands place ever greater stress on existing land resources.

The need to address these complexities underscores the broader, foundational role that land plays in achieving sustainable development. Land is essential for food production, biodiversity conservation and climate resilience, and it underpins multiple SDGs. It is the silent partner in attaining No Poverty (SDG 1), the buffer for Climate Action (SDG 13) and the very foundation of Life on Land (SDG 15). In terms of SDG 2, land is not just the means to achieving Zero Hunger, it is about cultivating improved food security and nutrition through sustainable agriculture (Box 6). Moreover, land is central to building Sustainable Cities and Communities for the growing population (SDG 11).

Recognizing this, land degradation has moved steadily up the international agenda over the past two decades. The most prominent global commitment is enshrined in SDG Target 15.3, which calls on members to “combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world” by 2030. This target builds on the UNCCD, the only legally binding international agreement focused specifically on the preservation of land and soil. Under this agreement, over 130 countries have engaged in a Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) target-setting framework, committing to balance degradation with equivalent restoration so that the total stock of healthy land is at least maintained.⁴⁵

As of 2020, 115 countries had submitted quantitative, area-based restoration commitments to at least one of the three Rio Conventions – the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) – or to the Bonn Challenge and related regional initiatives. Many countries have made overlapping commitments under multiple frameworks, often with variations in restoration type, scope and definition. As a result, national targets may be misaligned across conventions, which hampers strategic planning and implementation. In many cases, commitments are qualitative or non-specific, and they tend to lack geographic targeting, making them difficult to monitor or evaluate. More precise, measurable and transparent restoration commitments are needed to enhance credibility, effectiveness and accountability. Differences in reporting approaches also make it difficult to compare restoration goals and progress across countries and frameworks.¹³²

Achieving LDN is not only environmentally sound but also economically beneficial for society. Investments in land restoration efforts are estimated to bring returns that far exceed the costs, though the benefit–cost ratios vary depending on cost definitions and time frames.^{17, 45} In the short term, opportunity costs may lower the net benefits, but over a 30-year horizon, returns remain clearly positive. Given that most long-term returns – such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity protection and regional food security – are public goods, whereas opportunity costs and investment risks are borne by individual landholders, private incentives often fail to align with the broader public benefits of restoration.^{17, 133} This misalignment means land degradation has negative externalities, supporting the case for public or international cofinancing to ease the burden of early-stage investment. Moreover, the investment required to restore all degraded land worldwide is equivalent to just 0.03–0.27 percent of global gross domestic product, which is a comparatively small outlay for outsized gains in productivity, livelihoods and resilience.^{134, 135}

These dynamics vary by land size: larger landholders are more likely to pursue complex, high-cost restoration with delayed returns, while smaller landholders tend to adopt simpler, lower-cost practices with more modest societal gains.¹³⁶ Without corrective policy mechanisms, most land users have limited incentive to invest in sustainable land management or restoration at a scale needed to achieve global LDN goals.

Assessing incentives in terms of farm size and productivity may result in overlooking the significant contributions of Indigenous Peoples’ agrifood systems and practices, including hunting and gathering, fishing, shifting cultivation and pastoralism. These practices are deeply rooted in territorial and cultural contexts. They are essential for the conservation of biodiversity and contribute to food security, nutrition and resilience. Indigenous Peoples hold the right to free, prior and informed consent,¹³⁷ which is fundamental for land-related policy discussions, particularly those concerning land degradation neutrality and restoration efforts.

Scaling up global action against land degradation will require economic instruments and inclusive governance arrangements that internalize public benefits, reduce risk to landholders, and mobilize sufficient upfront finance. Ultimately, effective land restoration depends not only on technical knowledge, but on aligning economic incentives to support long-term stewardship.

Despite growing recognition, land degradation is often overlooked. Unlike climate-related disasters that generate visible and immediate shocks, land degradation is typically slow moving and unfolds over large areas, making it less likely to capture public or policy attention. This absence of clear “before and after” events also complicates causal analysis, as the impacts are diffuse and accumulate gradually over time.

By emphasizing sustainable land management as a foundation for production, this report highlights the need to engage with farmers at all production scales to avoid, reduce and reverse land degradation. This approach fosters Decent Work and Economic Growth (SDG 8) by securing agricultural livelihoods and creating green jobs, while contributing to Reduced Inequalities (SDG 10) by improving the conditions for marginalized land users. Finally, the focus on boosting land productivity while enhancing sustainability contributes to SDG 12 (Responsible Production and Consumption). Achieving these outcomes requires the creation of enabling socioeconomic and political environments. These environments should support the adoption of sustainable land management practices, notably secure land tenure, inclusive policies, and access to resources and services. Coordinated action to manage land for food security, urban growth and ecosystem conservation can create resilient agrifood systems that safeguard resources for future generations.