Comparing Path Dependence and Spatial Targeting of Land Use in Implementing Climate Change Responses

Brown, Iain; Castellazzi, Marie; Feliciano, Diana

doi:10.3390/land3030850

Cited by 10 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 113 publications

(68 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests that the widely used method of estimating soil carbon from a fixed ratio with vegetation biomass overestimates carbon sequestration from afforestation (Hong et al, 2020). Afforestation on peaty soils can lead to losses of soil carbon that outweigh that sequestered as the trees grow (Brown, 2020; Brown et al, 2014; Friggens et al, 2020; Sloan et al, 2018).…”

Section: Potential Pitfalls Of Nature‐based Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting the message right on nature‐based solutions to climate change

Seddon

Smith

et al. 2021

Global Change Biology

576

294

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nature‐based solutions (NbS)—solutions to societal challenges that involve working with nature—have recently gained popularity as an integrated approach that can address climate change and biodiversity loss, while supporting sustainable development. Although well‐designed NbS can deliver multiple benefits for people and nature, much of the recent limelight has been on tree planting for carbon sequestration. There are serious concerns that this is distracting from the need to rapidly phase out use of fossil fuels and protect existing intact ecosystems. There are also concerns that the expansion of forestry framed as a climate change mitigation solution is coming at the cost of carbon rich and biodiverse native ecosystems and local resource rights. Here, we discuss the promise and pitfalls of the NbS framing and its current political traction, and we present recommendations on how to get the message right. We urge policymakers, practitioners and researchers to consider the synergies and trade‐offs associated with NbS and to follow four guiding principles to enable NbS to provide sustainable benefits to society: (1) NbS are not a substitute for the rapid phase out of fossil fuels; (2) NbS involve a wide range of ecosystems on land and in the sea, not just forests; (3) NbS are implemented with the full engagement and consent of Indigenous Peoples and local communities in a way that respects their cultural and ecological rights; and (4) NbS should be explicitly designed to provide measurable benefits for biodiversity. Only by following these guidelines will we design robust and resilient NbS that address the urgent challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss, sustaining nature and people together, now and into the future.

show abstract

Section: Potential Pitfalls Of Nature‐based Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting the message right on nature‐based solutions to climate change

Seddon

Smith

et al. 2021

Global Change Biology

576

294

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New woodland on farmland can incur an opportunity cost through loss of subsidies, whilst woodland grants are often seen as unaligned to land managers' needs (Lawrence and Dandy, 2014;Slee et al, 2014). Land tenure security and divergences between public and private ownership have further reinforced differences (Muñoz-Rojas et al 2015), shaping a 'path dependency' for afforestation to occur on marginal land (Brown et al, 2014).…”

Section: Opportunities and Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Land manager groups can have divergent attitudes to new opportunities: hence, private estates are typically interested in new income streams to support existing activities; the forest industry is mainly interested in softwood timber production; and conservation NGOs are motivated by enhanced biodiversity value (Raum, 2018). Most new woodland occurs where constraints on farming means land managers are more open towards alternative uses (Brown et al, 2014) but typically in 'opportunistic' mode, being distant from their core values (Gasson, 1973;Duesberg et al, 2014). A woodland grant for poorer quality land becomes a rational alternative if other factors are conducive.…”

Section: Factors Influencing Afforestation and Peatland Restorationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Challenges in delivering climate change policy through land use targets for afforestation and peatland restoration

Brown

2020

Environmental Science & Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change policy for the land sector is challenged by complex biophysical and socioeconomic contexts. A target approach utilising land-use change indicators is often used to quantify and communicate progress, based upon assumed greenhouse gas emission (GHG) reductions. This paper investigated areal targets for woodland expansion and peatland restoration, both of which can deliver substantial carbon sequestration benefits, with uptake typically supported by grant incentives. A case study used empirical data to investigate realisation of such targets in Scotland referenced against ambitious policy commitments (net-zero emissions by 2045). Analysis of actual locations for recent afforestation and peatland restoration, referenced against biophysical data, showed that new woodland primarily occurred on land that was marginal for agriculture, usually on wetter uncultivated semi-natural land, often on organic soils. This acts to constrain net carbon gains.Both peatland restoration and new woodland show tendency to aggregate in specific zones or locations, regardless of biophysical opportunities, highlighting underlying socioeconomic factors. Differential patterns of uptake are also shown by grant applications across different land use groups. Socioeconomic factors act against more ubiquitous uptake of incentive schemes, especially for new woodland on improved agricultural land, which will constrain long-term decarbonisation objectives unless tackled directly. Investigation therefore shows that use of simple targets (e.g. trees planted) as headline progress indicators can be misleading, potentially contributing to policy failure and misuse of carbon offsets. A more spatially targeted approach is required to maximise GHG reductions relative to local contexts. Recommendations are made for improved measures that recognise spatial and temporal variability, as exemplified by certification schemes.

show abstract

“…Firstly, to what extent is a spatial strategy that incorporates all visions possible? To date, spatially explicit research has included an analysis of suitability for woodland expansion at the national level (Sing et al 2013), and nested modelling of responses to climate change at the regional and national levels (Brown et al 2014), but neither of these take into account governance or land owner decision making. The Land Use Strategy and Land Reform and Community Empowerment agendas suggest that decisions should be made, or at least strongly informed, by local stakeholders.…”

Section: Challenges and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Green Gold to Wild Woodlands; understanding stakeholder visions for woodland expansion in Scotland

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Despite woodland expansion being advocated via a number of Scottish policy documents, barriers to woodland creation remain. These include contested views about land use, concerns about tradeoffs between ecosystem services, and a lack of synergy between policies and plans. Objectives To use existing published sources and stakeholder feedback and input to determine the values that different Scottish stakeholders have for woodland expansion, and to translate these into alternative storylines, or visions. To identify areas of common ground and divergence between the visions. Methods We present a mixed-method approach combining a document analysis, a stakeholder workshop and semi-structured interviews. Results The five visions elicited illustrate that at national level there is a great deal of consensus between stakeholders that woodland expansion can offer valuable public benefits, and that mechanisms should be put in place to provide long-term funding for these. Important areas of divergence include compatibility of woodland with current agricultural and sporting practices, and the extent of Land Reform and Community Empowerment. 'Landscape scale' collaboration and decision making is widely favoured for governing decisions about woodland expansion and other land use changes. Conclusions By articulating the range of different objectives for woodland expansion, and capturing stakeholder suggestions for how governance could be adapted to achieve each vision, the results provide a synthesis of potential overarching ways forward for woodland expansion policy. The visions have also stimulated dialogue between national level stakeholders, suggesting they may be able to support necessary discourse as part of strategic land use planning.

show abstract

Comparing Path Dependence and Spatial Targeting of Land Use in Implementing Climate Change Responses

Cited by 10 publications

References 113 publications

Getting the message right on nature‐based solutions to climate change

Getting the message right on nature‐based solutions to climate change

Challenges in delivering climate change policy through land use targets for afforestation and peatland restoration

Green Gold to Wild Woodlands; understanding stakeholder visions for woodland expansion in Scotland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About