This paper introduces urban land teleconnections as a conceptual framework that explicitly links land changes to underlying urbanization dynamics. We illustrate how three key themes that are currently addressed separately in the urban sustainability and land change literatures can lead to incorrect conclusions and misleading results when they are not examined jointly: the traditional system of land classification that is based on discrete categories and reinforces the false idea of a rural-urban dichotomy; the spatial quantification of land change that is based on place-based relationships, ignoring the connections between distant places, especially between urban functions and rural land uses; and the implicit assumptions about path dependency and sequential land changes that underlie current conceptualizations of land transitions. We then examine several environmental "grand challenges" and discuss how urban land teleconnections could help research communities frame scientific inquiries. Finally, we point to existing analytical approaches that can be used to advance development and application of the concept.coupled human-natural systems | land change science U rbanization and land change are two global processes with far-reaching consequences. Although the two are tightly intertwined, their literatures and analytical frameworks were largely developed separately. We argue that these parallel but distinct conceptualizations limit progress in these fields and in sustainability science, specifically given the environmental impacts of urbanization on the land system, and associated social and political challenges. The magnitude and accelerating rate of contemporary urbanization are reshaping land use locally and globally in ways that require a reexamination of land change and urban sustainability. Worldwide, urban populations are projected to increase by almost 3 billion by 2050 (1) and the total global urban land area by more than 1.5 million square kilometers-an area three times the size of Spain-by 2030 (2). Urban economies currently generate more than 90% of global gross value added, meaning few rural systems are unaffected by urbanization (3). Given such trends, we must reconsider how we conceptualize the many connections and feedbacks between urbanization and land change processes. To date, a large body of literature has considered the proximate land changes brought about by urbanization, but the more distant land-use implications of urbanization remain underexamined.In climate science, the concept of teleconnections refers to climate anomalies that correlate over large geographic distances. During warm phases of the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation, for instance, the incidence of synchronous wildfires increases in the western United States (4). The virtual shrinking of distances between places, strengthening connectivity between distant locations, and growing separation between places of consumption and production are emerging topics in "telecoupled" human-natural systems (5-7) and tropical teleconnections ...

A recent opinion piece rekindled debate as to whether geography's current interdisciplinary make-up is a historical relic or an actual and potential source of intellectual vitality. Taking the latter position, we argue here for the benefits of sustained integration of physical and critical human geography. For reasons both political and pragmatic, we term this area of intermingled research and practice critical physical geography (CPG). CPG combines critical attention to power relations with deep knowledge of biophysical science or technology in the service of social and environmental transformation. We argue that whether practiced by individuals or teams, CPG research can improve the intellectual quality and expand the political relevance of both physical and critical human geography because it is increasingly impractical to separate analysis of natural and social systems: socio-biophysical landscapes are as much the product of unequal power relations, histories of colonialism, and racial and gender disparities as they are of hydrology, ecology, and climate change. Here, we review existing CPG work; discuss the primary benefits of critically engaged integrative research, teaching, and practice; and offer our collective thoughts on how to make CPG work.Keywords: physical geography, critical human geography, transdisciplinarity, anthropoceneIntervention en géographie physique critique Un article d'opinion paru récemment est à l'origine de la relance d'un débat qui pose la question à savoir si le fondement interdisciplinaire actuel de la géographie serait une relique historique ou une source réelle et potentielle de vitalité intellectuelle. En prenant la défense de la seconde position, nous militons en faveur des bénéfices découlant de l'intégration soutenue de la géographie physique et de la géographie humaine critique. Pour des raisons à la fois politiques et pragmatiques, nous avons nommé ce domaine de recherche et de pratique enchevêtré la géographie physique critique (GPC). C'est au service de la transformation sociale et environnementale que la GPC intègre un regard critique sur les relations de pouvoir à la connaissance profonde de la science ou de la technologie biophysique. Que se soient des individus ou des équipes qui la pratiquent, les travaux de recherche en GPC peuvent contribuer à l'amélioration de la qualité intellectuelle et à l'élargissement de la pertinence politique de la géographie humaine critique et géographie physique, compte tenu que la séparation de l'analyse des systèmes naturels et des systèmes sociaux pose des difficultés d'ordre pratique. À l'origine des paysages sociobiophysiques se trouvent autant les relations inégales de pouvoir, les histoires de colonialisme et les disparités raciales et entre les sexes que l'hydrologie, l'écologie et les changements climatiques. Dans cette partie de l'article, nous passons en revue les travaux actuels en GPC, nous engageons une discussion sur les principaux avantages des approches intégratives et véritablement critiques en recherche, dans l'ense...

No abstract

No abstract

Land use is central to addressing sustainability issues, including biodiversity conservation, climate change, food security, poverty alleviation, and sustainable energy. In this paper, we synthesize knowledge accumulated in land system science, the integrated study of terrestrial social-ecological systems, into 10 hard truths that have strong, general, empirical support. These facts help to explain the challenges of achieving sustainability in land use and thus also point toward solutions. The 10 facts are as follows: 1) Meanings and values of land are socially constructed and contested; 2) land systems exhibit complex behaviors with abrupt, hard-to-predict changes; 3) irreversible changes and path dependence are common features of land systems; 4) some land uses have a small footprint but very large impacts; 5) drivers and impacts of land-use change are globally interconnected and spill over to distant locations; 6) humanity lives on a used planet where all land provides benefits to societies; 7) land-use change usually entails trade-offs between different benefits—"win–wins" are thus rare; 8) land tenure and land-use claims are often unclear, overlapping, and contested; 9) the benefits and burdens from land are unequally distributed; and 10) land users have multiple, sometimes conflicting, ideas of what social and environmental justice entails. The facts have implications for governance, but do not provide fixed answers. Instead they constitute a set of core principles which can guide scientists, policy makers, and practitioners toward meeting sustainability challenges in land use.