Abstract

BackgroundForest landscape restoration (FLR) has been adopted by governments and practitioners across the globe to mitigate and adapt to climate change and restore ecological functions across degraded landscapes. However, the extent to which these activities capture CO2 with associated climate mitigation impacts are poorly known, especially in geographies where data on biomass growth of restored forests are limited or do not exist. To fill this gap, we developed biomass accumulation rates for a set of FLR activities (natural regeneration, planted forests and woodlots, agroforestry, and mangrove restoration) across the globe and global CO2 removal rates with corresponding confidence intervals, grouped by FLR activity and region/climate.ResultsPlanted forests and woodlots were found to have the highest CO2 removal rates, ranging from 4.5 to 40.7 t CO2 ha−1 year−1 during the first 20 years of growth. Mangrove tree restoration was the second most efficient FLR at removing CO2, with growth rates up to 23.1 t CO2 ha−1 year−1 the first 20 years post restoration. Natural regeneration removal rates were 9.1–18.8 t CO2 ha−1 year−1 during the first 20 years of forest regeneration, followed by agroforestry, the FLR category with the lowest and regionally broad removal rates (10.8–15.6 t CO2 ha−1 year−1). Biomass growth data was most abundant and widely distributed across the world for planted forests and natural regeneration, representing 45% and 32% of all the data points assessed, respectively. Agroforestry studies, were only found in Africa, Asia, and the Latin America and Caribbean regions.ConclusionThis study represents the most comprehensive review of published literature on tree growth and CO2 removals to date, which we operationalized by constructing removal rates for specific FLR activities across the globe. These rates can easily be applied by practitioners and decision-makers seeking to better understand the positive climate mitigation impacts of existing or planned FLR actions, or by countries making restoration pledges under the Bonn Challenge Commitments or fulfilling Nationally Determined Contributions to the UNFCCC, thereby helping boost FLR efforts world-wide.

Highlights

  • Forest landscape restoration (FLR) has been adopted by governments and practitioners across the globe to mitigate and adapt to climate change and restore ecological functions across degraded landscapes

  • Among the species under the planted forests and woodlots FLR category, those in tropical regions showed the highest removal factors, while eucalyptus remained high across climates (Fig. 2)

  • The comparison of the suite of FLR ­carbon dioxide (CO2) removal rates developed in our study with the current Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) removal rates shows that we include a broader range of FLR activities, climates (IPCC plantations defaults are only for tropical climates where as we include boreal and temperate data), and regions, along with 95% confidence intervals and goodness of fit (R2), which the IPCC Guidelines are currently lacking

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Forest landscape restoration (FLR) has been adopted by governments and practitioners across the globe to mitigate and adapt to climate change and restore ecological functions across degraded landscapes. The extent to which these activities capture ­CO2 with associated climate mitigation impacts are poorly known, especially in geographies where data on biomass growth of restored forests are limited or do not exist. To fill this gap, we developed biomass accumulation rates for a set of FLR activities (natural regeneration, planted forests and woodlots, agroforestry, and mangrove restoration) across the globe and global ­CO2 removal rates with corresponding confidence intervals, grouped by FLR activity and region/climate. Global emissions from deforestation and forest degradation have been historically high [1,2,3,4,5]. ­CO2 sink, threatening our ability to abate increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere and to mitigate climate change.

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call