Abstract
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/tCO2eq) land‐based mitigation is 8–13.8 GtCO2eq 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.
Highlights
Land-based climate mitigation measures, known as Agriculture, Forestry and other Land Uses (AFOLU) mitigation or natural climate solutions (Griscom et al, 2017)—which if implemented with benefits to human well-being and biodiversity may constitute nature- based solutions—have gained significant attention and importance in public and private sector climate strategies and policies (Seddon et al, 2020)
Since technical potentials may not be plausible or desirable due to economic, social, political, or environmental constraints and tradeoffs, we focus the regional assessment on cost-effective potentials which represent a more realistic level regarding public willingness to pay for climate mitigation
We provide a comprehensive and updated assessment of global, regional, and country-level land-based mitigation potential, and examine country-level feasibility
Summary
Land-based climate mitigation measures, known as Agriculture, Forestry and other Land Uses (AFOLU) mitigation or natural climate solutions (Griscom et al, 2017)—which if implemented with benefits to human well-being and biodiversity may constitute nature- based solutions—have gained significant attention and importance in public and private sector climate strategies and policies (Seddon et al, 2020). Land-based measures reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and/or enhance carbon removals They include supply-side interventions in forests and other ecosystems (to protect, manage, and restore), agriculture (to reduce emissions and enhance carbon sequestration), and bioenergy (to reduce fossil fuel emissions and sequester carbon), as well as demand-side interventions on food waste, diets, and resource use. AFOLU measures in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement, either by listing actions or by including the land sector in their broader GHG reduction targets (Crumpler et al, 2019). Land- based mitigation measures are embedded in other international agreements and initiatives, including the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN), Aichi Biodiversity Targets, the goals of the New York Declaration on Forests (NYDF), the Bonn Challenge, and the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
