The debate between land sparing and land sharing agricultural strategies has significant implications for wild animal populations and welfare at landscape scale.
The land sparing versus land sharing debate typically focuses on biodiversity conservation, but a welfare lens adds important dimensions. High-intensity spared land may involve industrial farming practices with poor welfare outcomes for farm animals, while wildlife-friendly shared land may support higher wild animal populations but with unpredictable welfare consequences. Wild animals face predation, disease, starvation, and injury regardless of which strategy is adopted. Some welfare advocates argue that reducing the total wildlife population on farmland through sparing may actually reduce aggregate wild animal suffering if wild lives involve net negative welfare. This remains philosophically contested but is increasingly discussed in effective altruism and animal welfare circles.