Selection note: Curated because “Systematic Review on Effects of Bioenergy From Edible Versus Inedible Feedstocks on Food Security” covers food security, agriculture, sustainability; it materially informs GShips work on food energy tradeoffs.

Evidence boundary: NTRS provides open full text, but this reprint (version printed in journal) was screened for curation rather than independently or domain reviewed; inclusion is contextual, not automatic claim evidence.

Stable record
ntrs-20210026795
Topic
ecology-food
Type
Reprint (Version printed in journal)
Publisher
Springer Nature
Authors
Selena Ahmed; Teresa Warne; Erin Smith; Hannah Goemann; Greta Linse; Mark Greenwood; Jeremy Kedziora; Meghan Sapp
Year
2021
Editorial state
metadata curated editorial draft
Reviewer
GShips Project editorial synthesis
Official link checked
2026-07-25

Source-supplied abstract

Achieving food security is a critical challenge of the Anthropocene that may conflict with environmental and societal goals such as increased energy access. The“fuel versus food”debate coupled with climate mitigation efforts has given rise to next-generation biofuels. Findings of this systematic review indicate just over half of the studies (56% of 224 publications) reported a negative impact of bioenergy production on food security. However, no relationship was found between bioenergy feedstocks that are edible versus inedible and food security (Pvalue=0.15). A strong relationship was found between bioenergy and type of food security parameter (Pvalue < 0.001), sociodemographic index of study location (Pvalue=0.001),spatial scale (Pvalue < 0.001), and temporal scale (Pvalue=0.017). Programs and policies focused on bioenergy and climat emitigation should monitor multiple food security parameters at various scales over the long term toward achieving diverse sustainability goals.

Abstract text has not been adopted as a GShips conclusion.

What would change this record?

A newer or corrected version, a retraction, a verified duplicate, a material topic mismatch, a changed access state, or claim-level review would trigger a dated editorial update.

Open the source record (opens external site in a new tab)

Metadata-curated context; independent domain and claim review pending · Last edited 2026-07-25 · Suggest a correction

Accountability record

How to inspect this page

Scope: Atlas resource ntrs-20210026795

Page citations and accountability links

Assumptions and limits

  • NTRS provides open full text, but this reprint (version printed in journal) was screened for curation rather than independently or domain reviewed; inclusion is contextual, not automatic claim evidence.
  • Source-supplied titles, abstracts, authors, and dates may require correction against the canonical full text.

What would change this page?

A newer or corrected version, retraction, verified duplicate, material topic mismatch, changed access state, or claim-level assessment would change this record.

People, review, and conflicts

Prepared by
GShips Project
Editorial status
metadata-curated-editorial-draft
Editorial reviewer
GShips Project editorial synthesis
Last editorial review
No editorial-review date recorded
Independent review
pending
Independent reviewer
No independent reviewer assigned
Last independent review
No independent-review date exists
Last content edit
Not recorded separately
Official source or link verified
2026-07-25

Declared conflicts

  • The maintainer intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work. No entity, outside funding, customer, sponsor, or indexed-organization relationship currently exists.

Suggest a correction to this page