Near-term investments in forest management support long-term carbon sequestration capacity in forests of the United States

The forest carbon sink of the United States offsets emissions in other sectors. Recently passed US laws include important climate legislation for wildfire reduction, forest restoration, and forest planting. In this study, we examine how wildfire reduction strategies and planting might alter the forest carbon sink. Our results suggest that wildfire reduction strategies reduce carbon sequestration potential in the near term but provide a longer term benefit. Planting initiatives increase carbon sequestration but at levels that do not offset lost sequestration from wildfire reduction strategies. We conclude that recent legislation may increase near-term carbon emissions due to fuel treatments and reduced wildfire frequency and intensity, and expand long-term US carbon sink strength.

Avoiding emissions versus creating sinks-Effectiveness and attractiveness to climate finance

The perception of greater impact via new sinks, as opposed to through avoided emissions, has already led some large investors to focus on sink-related projects. This is a flawed perception when applied universally and carries a risk that effective routes to mitigation through avoiding emissions are side-lined. In reality, both emissions avoidance and emissions removal are needed, and both can be a cost-effective means of delivering mitigation.

More future synergies and less trade-offs between forest ecosystem services with natural climate solutions instead of bioeconomy solutions

To reach the Paris Agreement, societies need to increase the global terrestrial carbon sink. There are many climate change mitigation solutions (CCMS) for forests, including increasing bioenergy, bioeconomy, and protection. Bioenergy and bioeconomy solutions use climate-smart, intensive management to generate high quantities of bioenergy and bioproducts. Protection of (semi-)natural forests is a major component of "natural climate solution" (NCS) since forests store carbon in standing biomass and soil. Furthermore, protected forests provide more habitat for biodiversity and non-wood ecosystem services (ES). We investigated the impacts of different CCMS and climate scenarios, jointly or in isolation, on future wood ES, non-wood ES, and regulating ES for a major wood provider for the international market. Specifically, we projected future ES given by three CCMS scenarios for Sweden 2020-2100. In the long term, fulfilling the increasing wood demand through bioenergy and bioeconomy solutions will decrease ES multifunctionality, but the increased stand age and wood stocks induced by rising greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations will partially offset these negative effects. Adopting bioenergy and bioeconomy solutions will have a greater negative impact on ES supply than adopting NCS. Bioenergy or bioeconomy solutions, as well as increasing GHG emissions, will reduce synergies and increase trade-offs in ES. NCS, by contrast, increases the supply of multiple ES in synergy, even transforming current ES trade-offs into future synergies. Moreover, NCS can be considered an adaptation measure to offset negative climate change effects on the future supplies of non-wood ES. In boreal countries around the world, forestry strategies that integrate NCS more deeply are crucial to ensure a synergistic supply of multiple ES.

Large-scale reforestation can increase water yield and reduce drought risk for water-insecure regions in the Asia-Pacific

Large-scale reforestation can potentially bring both benefits and risks to the water cycle, which needs to be better quantified under future climates to inform reforestation decisions. We identified 477 water-insecure basins worldwide accounting for 44.6% (380.2 Mha) of the global reforestation potential. As many of these basins are in the Asia-Pacific, we used regional coupled land-climate modeling for the period 2041-2070 to reveal that reforestation increases evapotranspiration and precipitation for most water-insecure regions over the Asia-Pacific. This resulted in a statistically significant increase in water yield (p < .05) for the Loess Plateau-North China Plain, Yangtze Plain, Southeast China, and Irrawaddy regions. Precipitation feedback was influenced by the degree of initial moisture limitation affecting soil moisture response and thus evapotranspiration, as well as precipitation advection from other reforested regions and moisture transport away from the local region. Reforestation also reduces the probability of extremely dry months in most of the water-insecure regions. However, some regions experience nonsignificant declines in net water yield due to heightened evapotranspiration outstripping increases in precipitation, or declines in soil moisture and advected precipitation.

Dairy Manure Co-composting with Wood Biochar Plays a Critical Role in Meeting Global Methane Goals

Livestock are the largest source of anthropogenic methane (CH₄) emissions, and in intensive dairy systems, manure management can contribute half of livestock CH₄. Recent policies such as California's short-lived climate pollutant reduction law (SB 1383) and the Global Methane Pledge call for cuts to livestock CH₄ by 2030. However, investments in CH₄ reduction strategies are primarily aimed at liquid dairy manure, whereas stockpiled solids remain a large source of CH₄. Here, we measure the CH₄ and net greenhouse gas reduction potential of dairy manure biochar-composting, a novel manure management strategy, through a composting experiment and life-cycle analysis. We found that biochar-composting reduces CH₄ by 79%, compared to composting without biochar. In addition to reducing CH₄ during composting, we show that the added climate benefit from biochar production and application contributes to a substantially reduced life-cycle global warming potential for biochar-composting: -535 kg CO₂e Mg^-1 manure compared to -194 kg CO₂e Mg^-1 for composting and 102 kg CO₂e Mg^-1 for stockpiling. If biochar-composting replaces manure stockpiling and complements anaerobic digestion, California could meet SB 1383 with 132 less digesters. When scaled up globally, biochar-composting could mitigate 1.59 Tg CH₄ yr^-1 while doubling the climate change mitigation potential from dairy manure management.

Sustained timber yield claims, considerations, and tradeoffs for selectively logged forests

What is meant by sustainability depends on what is sustained and at what level. Sustainable forest management, for example, requires maintenance of a variety of values not the least of which is sustained timber yields (STYs). For the 1 Bha of the world's forests subjected to selective or partial logging, failure to maintain yields can be hidden by regulatory requirements and questionable auditing practices such as increasing the number of commercial species with each harvest, reducing the minimum size at which trees can be harvested and accepting logs of lower quality. For assertions of STY to be credible, clarity is needed about all these issues, as well as about the associated ecological and economic tradeoffs. Lack of clarity about sustainability heightens risks of unsubstantiated claims and unseen losses. STY is possible but often requires cutting cycles that are longer and logging intensities that are lower than prescribed by law, as well as effective use of low-impact logging practices and application of silvicultural treatments to promote timber stock recovery. These departures from business-as-usual practices will lower profit margins but generally benefit biodiversity and ecosystem services.

The global potential for increased storage of carbon on land

SignificanceDespite increased interest in land-based carbon storage as a climate solution, there are physical limits on how much additional carbon can be incorporated into terrestrial ecosystems. To effectively determine where and how to act, jurisdictions need robust data illustrating the magnitude and distribution of opportunities to increase carbon storage, as well as information on the actions available to achieve that storage. Here, we provide globally consistent maps for directing additional carbon storage under current and future climate, as well as a framework for determining how that storage could be gained through restoration, improved management, or maintenance of woody biomass and soil organic matter. Our estimates provide an upper bound on how improved land stewardship can mitigate the climate crisis.

Informing Nature-based Climate Solutions for the United States with the best-available science

Nature-based Climate Solutions (NbCS) are managed alterations to ecosystems designed to increase carbon sequestration or reduce greenhouse gas emissions. While they have growing public and private support, the realizable benefits and unintended consequences of NbCS are not well understood. At regional scales where policy decisions are often made, NbCS benefits are estimated from soil and tree survey data that can miss important carbon sources and sinks within an ecosystem, and do not reveal the biophysical impacts of NbCS for local water and energy cycles. The only direct observations of ecosystem-scale carbon fluxes, for example, by eddy covariance flux towers, have not yet been systematically assessed for what they can tell us about NbCS potentials, and state-of-the-art remote sensing products and land-surface models are not yet being widely used to inform NbCS policymaking or implementation. As a result, there is a critical mismatch between the point- and tree-scale data most often used to assess NbCS benefits and impacts, the ecosystem and landscape scales where NbCS projects are implemented, and the regional to continental scales most relevant to policymaking. Here, we propose a research agenda to confront these gaps using data and tools that have long been used to understand the mechanisms driving ecosystem carbon and energy cycling, but have not yet been widely applied to NbCS. We outline steps for creating robust NbCS assessments at both local to regional scales that are informed by ecosystem-scale observations, and which consider concurrent biophysical impacts, future climate feedbacks, and the need for equitable and inclusive NbCS implementation strategies. We contend that these research goals can largely be accomplished by shifting the scales at which pre-existing tools are applied and blended together, although we also highlight some opportunities for more radical shifts in approach.

Land-based measures to mitigate climate change: Potential and feasibility by country

Land-based climate mitigation measures have gained significant attention and importance in public and private sector climate policies. Building on previous studies, we refine and update the mitigation potentials for 20 land-based measures in >200 countries and five regions, comparing "bottom-up" sectoral estimates with integrated assessment models (IAMs). We also assess implementation feasibility at the country level. Cost-effective (available up to $100/tCO₂ eq) land-based mitigation is 8-13.8 GtCO₂ eq yr^-1 between 2020 and 2050, with the bottom end of this range representing the IAM median and the upper end representing the sectoral estimate. The cost-effective sectoral estimate is about 40% of available technical potential and is in line with achieving a 1.5°C pathway in 2050. Compared to technical potentials, cost-effective estimates represent a more realistic and actionable target for policy. The cost-effective potential is approximately 50% from forests and other ecosystems, 35% from agriculture, and 15% from demand-side measures. The potential varies sixfold across the five regions assessed (0.75-4.8 GtCO2eq yr^-1 ) and the top 15 countries account for about 60% of the global potential. Protection of forests and other ecosystems and demand-side measures present particularly high mitigation efficiency, high provision of co-benefits, and relatively lower costs. The feasibility assessment suggests that governance, economic investment, and socio-cultural conditions influence the likelihood that land-based mitigation potentials are realized. A substantial portion of potential (80%) is in developing countries and LDCs, where feasibility barriers are of greatest concern. Assisting countries to overcome barriers may result in significant quantities of near-term, low-cost mitigation while locally achieving important climate adaptation and development benefits. Opportunities among countries vary widely depending on types of land-based measures available, their potential co-benefits and risks, and their feasibility. Enhanced investments and country-specific plans that accommodate this complexity are urgently needed to realize the large global potential from improved land stewardship.

Improving rural health care reduces illegal logging and conserves carbon in a tropical forest

Tropical forest loss currently exceeds forest gain, leading to a net greenhouse gas emission that exacerbates global climate change. This has sparked scientific debate on how to achieve natural climate solutions. Central to this debate is whether sustainably managing forests and protected areas will deliver global climate mitigation benefits, while ensuring local peoples' health and well-being. Here, we evaluate the 10-y impact of a human-centered solution to achieve natural climate mitigation through reductions in illegal logging in rural Borneo: an intervention aimed at expanding health care access and use for communities living near a national park, with clinic discounts offsetting costs historically met through illegal logging. Conservation, education, and alternative livelihood programs were also offered. We hypothesized that this would lead to improved health and well-being, while also alleviating illegal logging activity within the protected forest. We estimated that 27.4 km2 of deforestation was averted in the national park over a decade (∼70% reduction in deforestation compared to a synthetic control, permuted P = 0.038). Concurrently, the intervention provided health care access to more than 28,400 unique patients, with clinic usage and patient visitation frequency highest in communities participating in the intervention. Finally, we observed a dose-response in forest change rate to intervention engagement (person-contacts with intervention activities) across communities bordering the park: The greatest logging reductions were adjacent to the most highly engaged villages. Results suggest that this community-derived solution simultaneously improved health care access for local and indigenous communities and sustainably conserved carbon stocks in a protected tropical forest.

Climate change mitigation as a co-benefit of regenerative ranching: insights from Australia and the United States

‘Managed grazing’ is gaining attention for its potential to contribute to climate change mitigation by reducing bare ground and promoting perennialization, thereby enhancing soil carbon sequestration (SCS). Understanding why ranchers adopt managed grazing is key to developing the right incentives. In this paper, we explore principles and practices associated with the larger enterprise of ‘regenerative ranching’ (RR), which includes managed grazing but infuses the practice with holistic decision-making. We argue that this broader approach is appealing due to a suite of ecological, economic and social benefits, making climate change mitigation an afterthought, or ‘co-benefit’. RR is challenging, however, because it requires a deep understanding of ecological processes along with a set of skills related to monitoring and moving livestock and feeding the soil microbiome. We review the literature regarding links between RR and SCS, then present results of qualitative research focused on motivators, enablers and constraints associated with RR, drawing on interviews with 52 practitioners in New South Wales, Australia and the western United States. Our analysis is guided by a conceptual model of the social–ecological system associated with RR that identifies determinants of regenerative potential. We discuss implications for rancher engagement and conclude with a consideration of leverage points for global scalability.

National mitigation potential from natural climate solutions in the tropics

Better land stewardship is needed to achieve the Paris Agreement's temperature goal, particularly in the tropics, where greenhouse gas emissions from the destruction of ecosystems are largest, and where the potential for additional land carbon storage is greatest. As countries enhance their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement, confusion persists about the potential contribution of better land stewardship to meeting the Agreement's goal to hold global warming below 2°C. We assess cost-effective tropical country-level potential of natural climate solutions (NCS)—protection, improved management and restoration of ecosystems—to deliver climate mitigation linked with sustainable development goals (SDGs). We identify groups of countries with distinctive NCS portfolios, and we explore factors (governance, financial capacity) influencing the feasibility of unlocking national NCS potential. Cost-effective tropical NCS offers globally significant climate mitigation in the coming decades (6.56 Pg CO₂e yr⁻¹ at less than 100 US$ per Mg CO₂e). In half of the tropical countries, cost-effective NCS could mitigate over half of national emissions. In more than a quarter of tropical countries, cost-effective NCS potential is greater than national emissions. We identify countries where, with international financing and political will, NCS can cost-effectively deliver the majority of enhanced NDCs while transforming national economies and contributing to SDGs.

This article is part of the theme issue ‘Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions’.

Climate change mitigation and nature conservation both require higher protected area targets

Nations of the world have, to date, pursued nature protection and climate change mitigation and adaptation policies separately. Both efforts have failed to achieve the scale of action needed to halt biodiversity loss or mitigate climate change. We argue that success can be achieved by aligning targets for biodiversity protection with the habitat protection and restoration necessary to bring down greenhouse gas concentrations and promote natural and societal adaptation to climate change. Success, however, will need much higher targets for environmental protection than the present 10% of sea and 17% of land. A new target of 30% of the sea given high levels of protection from exploitation and harm by 2030 is under consideration and similar targets are being discussed for terrestrial habitats. We make the case here that these higher targets, if achieved, would make the transition to a warmer world slower and less damaging for nature and people. This article is part of the theme issue 'Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions'.

Pleistocene Arctic megafaunal ecological engineering as a natural climate solution?

Natural climate solutions (NCS) in the Arctic hold the potential to be implemented at a scale able to substantially affect the global climate. The strong feedbacks between carbon-rich permafrost, climate and herbivory suggest an NCS consisting of reverting the current wet/moist moss and shrub-dominated tundra and the sparse forest-tundra ecotone to grassland through a guild of large herbivores. Grassland-dominated systems might delay permafrost thaw and reduce carbon emissions-especially in Yedoma regions, while increasing carbon capture through increased productivity and grass and forb deep root systems. Here we review the environmental context of megafaunal ecological engineering in the Arctic; explore the mechanisms through which it can help mitigate climate change; and estimate its potential-based on bison and horse, with the aim of evaluating the feasibility of generating an ecosystem shift that is economically viable in terms of carbon benefits and of sufficient scale to play a significant role in global climate change mitigation. Assuming a megafaunal-driven ecosystem shift we find support for a megafauna-based arctic NCS yielding substantial income in carbon markets. However, scaling up such projects to have a significant effect on the global climate is challenging given the large number of animals required over a short period of time. A first-cut business plan is presented based on practical information-costs and infrastructure-from Pleistocene Park (northeastern Yakutia, Russia). A 10 yr experimental phase incorporating three separate introductions of herds of approximately 1000 individuals each is costed at US$114 million, with potential returns of approximately 0.3-0.4% yr^-1 towards the end of the period, and greater than 1% yr^-1 after it. Institutional friction and the potential role of new technologies in the reintroductions are discussed. This article is part of the theme issue 'Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions'.

We need both natural and energy solutions to stabilize our climate

We respond to concerns raised by Baldocchi and Penuelas who question the potential for ecosystems to provide carbon sinks and storage, and conclude that we should focus on decarbonizing our energy systems. While we agree with many of their concerns, we arrive at a different conclusion: we need strong action to advance both clean energy solutions and natural climate solutions (NCS) if we are to stabilize warming well below 2°C. Cost-effective NCS can deliver 11.3 PgCO2 e yr-1 or ~30% of near-term climate mitigation needs through protection, improved management, and restoration of ecosystems, as we increase overall ambition.