Contribution of the land sector to a 1.5 °C world

Roe, Stephanie; Streck, Charlotte; Obersteiner, Michael; Frank, Stefan; Griscom, Bronson W.; Drouet, Laurent; Fricko, Oliver; Gusti, M.; Harris, Nancy L.; Hasegawa, Tomoko; Hausfather, Zeke; Havlík, Petr; House, Jo; Nabuurs, Gert‐Jan; Popp, Alexander; Sánchez, María José Sanz; Sanderman, Jonathan; Smith, Pete; Stehfest, Elke; Lawrence, Deborah

doi:10.1038/s41558-019-0591-9

Cited by 432 publications

(341 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

332

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Dietary change and waste reduction can provide large benefits for mitigation, with potentials of 0.7-8 Gt CO 2 eq/year for dietary change and 0.7-4.5 Gt CO 2 eq/year for food waste reduction Lenton (2010Lenton ( , 2014, McLaren (2012), Powell and Lenton (2012) Note: The land management-based mitigation ranges are consistent with those of Roe et al (2019).…”

Section: Practices Based On Value Chain Managementmentioning

confidence: 75%

Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?

Smith

Calvin

Nkem

et al. 2019

Global Change Biology

Self Cite

232

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as “land challenges”). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing‐up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.

show abstract

Section: Practices Based On Value Chain Managementmentioning

confidence: 75%

Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?

Smith

Calvin

Nkem

et al. 2019

Global Change Biology

Self Cite

232

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We also included studies with GHG mitigation, ecological, or social outcomes only if the effect of the intervention on climate impacts was also reported. Hence, a large body of literature reporting solely on any of these other outcomes were excluded (e.g., Anderson et al, 2019;Busch et al, 2019;Friedlingstein, Allen, Canadell, Peters, & Seneviratne, 2019;Griscom et al, 2017Griscom et al, , 2020Lewis, Wheeler, Mitchard, & Koch, 2019;Roe et al, 2019).…”

Section: Comparator Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping the effectiveness of nature‐based solutions for climate change adaptation

Chausson

Turner

Seddon

et al. 2020

Global Change Biology

387

233

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Historically, the main source of GHG emissions from terrestrial ecosystems has been deforestation (9), but emissions from degraded peatlands, melting permafrost, more frequent or more intense wildfires, and other sources are compounding the problem (10). Natural and seminatural ecosystems are important elements of mitigation strategies because of their capacity to remove CO 2 from the atmosphere, which could partially offset emissions in sectors that are hard to decarbonize, such as aviation (11,12). Measures that have the greatest potential to deliver climate change mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems include protection of intact carbon stores, avoided deforestation, reforestation of formerly forested land, and restoration of degraded peatlands.…”

Section: What Constitutes Success In Climate Change Adaptation and MImentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the success of climate change adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems

Morecroft

Duffield

Harley³

et al. 2019

Science

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural and seminatural ecosystems must be at the forefront of efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change. In the urgency of current circumstances, ecosystem restoration represents a range of available, efficient, and effective solutions to cut net greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change. Although mitigation success can be measured by monitoring changing fluxes of greenhouse gases, adaptation is more complicated to measure, and reductions in a wide range of risks for biodiversity and people must be evaluated. Progress has been made in the monitoring and evaluation of adaptation and mitigation measures, but more emphasis on testing the effectiveness of proposed strategies is necessary. It is essential to take an integrated view of mitigation, adaptation, biodiversity, and the needs of people, to realize potential synergies and avoid conflict between different objectives.

show abstract

Contribution of the land sector to a 1.5 °C world

Abstract: To put the Paris Agreement in context, we reviewed available 1.5 °C scenarios to assess viable emissions pathways and required mitigation across all sectors. Recently released 1.5 °C (1.9 W m −2

Cited by 432 publications

References 96 publications

Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?

Which practices co‐deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?

Mapping the effectiveness of nature‐based solutions for climate change adaptation

Measuring the success of climate change adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About