Authors: Tälle, Malin; Öckinger, Erik;Löfroth, Therese;Pettersson, Lars B.;Smith, Henrik G.;Stjernman, Martin;Ranius, Thomas;

Large-scale disturbances like fire or grazing by herbivores are often suppressed or absent in production landscapes. Conservation of species adapted to these disturbances require maintenance or reintroduction of disturbances, which can be achieved through land sparing or land sharing approaches. Land sparing implies that disturbances occur in protected areas, and land sharing that they occur within the production system. We compared the benefits of these approaches for fire in forests and grazing or mowing in semi-natural grasslands. We reviewed empirical studies comparing the outcome of disturbances in protected and non-protected areas, as well as information from Swedish authorities and companies responsible for governing and implementing disturbances in protected and non-protected areas. We found that for several aspects a land-sparing approach is better: the temporal continuity as well as the method and intensity of disturbances, and the post-disturbance treatment. However, land sharing may be more cost-efficient, and increase the spatial extent of disturbances. Together, this suggests that combining land sparing and land sharing in multifunctional landscapes is most effective for preserving disturbance-dependent species. Such an approach emphasize consideration of the location, protection status and disturbance regime of areas across landscapes, and demands cooperation across administrative levels.