The importance of natural land carbon sinks in modelling future emissions pathways and assessing individual country progress towards net-zero emissions targets

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Nature-based solutions (NBS), in the form of active ecosystem conservation, restoration and improved land management, represent a pathway to accelerate net-zero emissions (NZE) strategies and support biodiversity. Meaningful implementation and successful accounting depend on the ability to differentiate between anthropogenic and natural carbon fluxes on land. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) land carbon accounting methods currently incorporate all CO2 fluxes on managed land in country inventories without distinguishing between anthropogenic and natural components. Meanwhile, natural land carbon sinks are modelled by earth system models but are mostly reported at global level. Here we present a simple yet novel methodology to estimate the present and future progression of natural land sinks at the country and regional level. Forests dominate the uptake of CO2 on land and as such, our analysis is based on allocating global projections of the natural land carbon flux to individual countries using a compilation of forest land areas for a historic and scenario range spanning 1960–2100. Specifically, we use MIT’s carbon cycle model simulations that are set in the context of emissions pathways from the Shell Energy Security Scenarios (2023). Our natural land carbon flux estimates for individual countries and regions such as the European Union (EU) show generally good agreement with independent estimates from recent land-use harmonisation studies for 2000–2020. Hence, our approach may also provide a simple, first-order exploration of future natural land fluxes at country level—a potential that other studies do not yet offer. In turn, this enables better understanding of the anthropogenic and natural components contributing to country NZE targets under different scenarios. Nevertheless, our findings also suggest that models such as the Shell World Energy Model (WEM) would benefit from further improvements in the apportionment of land carbon sources and sinks to evaluate detailed actions to meet country targets. More importantly, uncertainties remain regarding the resilience of land ecosystems and their capacity to store increasing amounts of carbon under progressive global warming. Therefore, we recommend that the carbon cycle modelling and energy modelling research communities continue to collaborate to develop a next generation of relevant data products to distinguish anthropogenic from natural impacts at local, regional and national levels.