J Appl Ecol. 2020;00:1–10. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jpe | 1 © 2020 British Ecological Society Received: 16 November 2019 | Accepted: 24 May 2020 DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.13699 RESEARCH ARTICLE Trade-offs between biodiversity and agriculture are moving targets in dynamic landscapes Leandro Macchi 1 | Julieta Decarre 2 | Andrea P. Goijman 2 | Matías Mastrangelo 3 | Pedro G. Blendinger 1 | Gregorio I. Gavier-Pizarro 2 | Francisco Murray 4 | María Piquer-Rodriguez 1 | Asunción Semper-Pascual 5 | Tobias Kuemmerle 5,6 1 Instituto de Ecología Regional (IER), CONICET - Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Tucumán, Argentina; 2 Instituto de Recursos Biológicos (IRB-CIRN), Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), Buenos Aires, Argentina; 3 Grupo de Estudios de Agroecosistemas y Paisajes Rurales (GEAP), CONICET - Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina; 4 Agencia de Extensión Rural San Luis, Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), San Luis, Argentina; 5 Geography Department, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany and 6 Integrative Research Institute on Transformations of Human-Environment Systems (IRI-THESys), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany Correspondence Leandro Macchi Email: leandromacchi@gmail.com Julieta Decarre Email: decarre.julieta@inta.gob.ar Funding information Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung; INTA Natural Resources National Programme, Grant/Award Number: PNNAT 1128053 and 1128052; Fondo para la Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, Grant/Award Number: PICT 2006-1693; Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Grant/Award Number: KU 2458/5-1; Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, Grant/Award Number: 031B0034A Handling Editor: Guadalupe Peralta Abstract 1. Understanding how biodiversity responds to intensifying agriculture is critical to mitigating the trade-offs between them. These trade-offs are particularly strong in tropical and subtropical deforestation frontiers, yet it remains unclear how changing landscape context in such frontiers alters agriculture–biodiversity trade–offs. 2. We focus on the Argentinean Chaco, a global deforestation hotspot, to explore how landscape context shapes trade-off curves between agricultural intensity and avian biodiversity. We use a space-for-time approach and integrate a large field dataset of bird communities (197 species, 234 survey plots), three agricul- tural intensity metrics (meat yield, energy yield and profit) and a range of environ- mental covariates in a hierarchical Bayesian occupancy framework. 3. Woodland extent in the landscape consistently determines how individual bird species, and the bird community as a whole, respond to agricultural intensity. Many species switch in their fundamental response, from decreasing occupancy with increased agricultural intensity when woodland extent in the landscape is low (loser species), to increasing occupancy with increased agricultural intensity when woodland extent is high (winner species). 4. This suggests that landscape context strongly mediates who wins and loses along agricultural intensity gradients. Likewise, where landscapes change, such as in deforestation frontiers, the very nature of the agriculture–biodiversity trade–offs can change as landscapes transformation progresses. 5. Synthesis and applications. Schemes to mitigate agriculture–biodiversity trade–offs, such as land sparing or sharing, must consider landscape context. Strategies that are identified based on a snapshot of data risk failure in dynamic landscapes, particu- larly where agricultural expansion continues to reduce natural habitats. Rather than a single, fixed strategy, adaptive management of agriculture–biodiversity