Cited by 1,942Land Use and Ecosystem ServicesRemote Sensing in AgricultureAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development

Farming the planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in the year 2000

Open access
Ramankutty, Navin, Evan, Amato T., Monfreda, Chad, Foley, Jonathan A.·2008·Global Biogeochemical Cycles

Abstract

Agricultural activities have dramatically altered our planet's land surface. To understand the extent and spatial distribution of these changes, we have developed a new global data set of croplands and pastures circa 2000 by combining agricultural inventory data and satellite‐derived land cover data. The agricultural inventory data, with much greater spatial detail than previously available, is used to train a land cover classification data set obtained by merging two different satellite‐derived products (Boston University's MODIS‐derived land cover product and the GLC2000 data set). Our data are presented at 5 min (∼10 km) spatial resolution in longitude by longitude, have greater accuracy than previously available, and for the first time include statistical confidence intervals on the estimates. According to the data, there were 15.0 (90% confidence range of 12.2–17.1) million km 2 of cropland (12% of the Earth's ice‐free land surface) and 28.0 (90% confidence range of 23.6–30.0) million km 2 of pasture (22%) in the year 2000.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2007gb002952

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The extent of permanent pastures and meadows spans 28 to 34 Mkm2, including extensively used natural grasslands, intensively managed pastures and meadows established in natural grassland areas, and grassland established after deforestation.

    “The extent of permanent pastures and meadows, the key category for which global statistical data are available (http://faostat.fao.org;any grazing land used for more than five consecutive years), spans 28 (33) to 34 Mkm², including extensively used natural grasslands (Section 2.2), intensively managed pastures and meadows established in natural grassland areas, as well as grassland that was estab”

    From Restoring Degraded Lands (2021) · cites this paper as [33]

    Section 4.1 (§32) estimates 28.0 million km² of pasture and reports FAOSTAT’s 34.4 million km²; section 2.2 (§12) defines permanent pasture to include cultivated and wild forage land. Section 4.2 (§36) describes pasture replacing grasslands and forests. But the Discussion (§45) says the pasture data reveal nothing about grazing intensity, so the claim that pastures established in natural grassland areas are intensively managed is not supported. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Ramankutty, N., J. A. Foley, and N. J. Olejniczak (2002b), People on the land: Changes in population and global croplands during the 20th cen- tury, Ambio, 31(3), 251 -257.
  2. J. A. Foley and C. Monfreda, Center for Sustainability and the Global Environment (SAGE), Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1710 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53726, USA.
  3. N. Ramankutty, Department of Geography and Earth System Science Program, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, Canada H3A 2K6. (navin.ramankutty@mcgill.ca) GB1003 19449224, 2008, 1, · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ramankutty, N., Evan, A. T., Monfreda, C., & Foley, J. A.
Affiliations
  • McGill University (CA)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Venue
Global Biogeochemical Cycles
Published
2008-01-17
Volume
22
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0886-6236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-9224
OpenAlex
W1838764073
Cited by
1,942
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 79 · 2024: 142 · 2023: 123 · 2022: 119 · 2021: 173 · 2020: 149 · 2019: 141 · 2018: 142 · 2017: 119 · 2016: 145 · 2015: 86 · 2014: 104 · 2013: 87 · 2012: 88
FWCI
55.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Global Biogeochemical Cycles (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • Wageningen University and Research
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Keywords
cropland extent, land cover classification, MODIS land cover, GLC2000, land surface change, confidence intervals

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review