Which plant-based diets are best for stopping deforestation?

We know that in general, plant-based diets could use less land^{[see why]}, which is crucial for stopping deforestation. But not all plant-based diets are equally beneficial. It depends what crops are involved, how high their yields are, and where they are grown. What are some diets that would really help the most?

Also note: In some cases, the "production configuration" discussion i.e. which of the crops are grown in what region of the world might make a big difference, even with the same per-capita diet discussion i.e. the global production totals for each food. If so, we could start a separate discussion on how to economically encourage an optimal production configuration. 💬 discussion also make a note about weird cases that would encourage reforestation in some areas but deforestation in others (which is not a good tradeoff if it's a loss of old-growth and a gain of not-so-biodiverse new forest)

Consensus

This section has not been filled in yet.

Answers

User:Elie

• Plant-based using status quo crops is a good start, guaranteed to be more land-efficient than the status quo at least (due to cutting out the inefficiencies of animal farming). But not necessarily the most land-efficient option.
• Crop choices might provide a theoretical framework to maximize yields (minimize land use) by growing the "best" crops in each region. But it's unclear how it would work in practice, considering that polyculture can be higher-yielding than monoculture. 💬 discussion That caveat (also?) belongs on the crop choices page.
• It's possible for some plant-based diets to be just as bad as the animal-based status quo, due to relying on low-yielding crops. Let's do some case studies. One might be: Lentils vs second-hand soy.
• Some of this analysis might get complicated, as how do you predict which farmland is likely to get a crop switch, and what might the yields be on that particular land? I don't have a great framework in mind at the moment