Natural climate solutions

Bronson W. Griscom, Justin Adams, Peter W. Ellis, Richard A. Houghton, Guy Lomax, Daniela A. Miteva, William H. Schlesinger, David Shoch, Juha V. Siikamäki, Pete Smith, Peter Woodbury, Chris Zganjar, Allen Blackman, João Campari, Richard T. Conant, Christopher Delgado, Patricia Elias, Trisha Gopalakrishna, Marisa R. Hamsik, Mario Herrero & 12 others Joseph Kiesecker, Emily Landis, Lars Laestadius, Sara M. Leavitt, Susan Minnemeyer, Stephen Polasky, Peter Potapov, Francis E. Putz, Jonathan Sanderman, Marcel Silvius, Eva Wollenberg, Joe Fargione

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

143 Citations (Scopus)
11 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Better stewardship of land to is needed to achieve the Paris Climate Agreement goal of holding warming below 2°C; however, confusion persists about the specific set of land stewardship options available and their mitigation potential. To address this, we identify and quantify “natural climate solutions” (NCS): 20 conservation, restoration, and improved land management actions that increase carbon storage and/or avoid greenhouse gas emissions across global forests, wetlands, grasslands, and agricultural lands. We find that the maximum potential of NCS – when constrained by food security, fiber security, and biodiversity conservation – is 23.8 PgCO2e yr-1 (95% CI 20.3 - 37.4). This is ≥30% higher than prior estimates, which did not include the full range of options and safeguards considered here. About half of this maximum (11.3 PgCO2e yr-1) represents cost effective climate mitigation, assuming the social cost of CO2 pollution is ≥100 USD MgCO2e -1 by 2030. Natural climate solutions can provide 37% of cost effective CO2 mitigation needed through 2030 for a >66% chance of holding warming below 2°C. One-third of this cost effective NCS mitigation can be delivered at or below 10 USD MgCO2 -1. Most NCS actions – if effectively implemented – also offer water filtration, flood buffering, soil health, biodiversity habitat, and enhanced climate resilience. Work remains to better constrain uncertainty of NCS mitigation estimates. Nevertheless, existing knowledge reported here provides a robust basis for immediate global action to improve ecosystem stewardship as a major solution to climate change.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)11645-11650
Number of pages6
JournalPNAS
Volume114
Issue number44
Early online date16 Oct 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Oct 2017

Fingerprint

Climate
Costs and Cost Analysis
Biodiversity
Ecosystem
Food Supply
Wetlands
Soil
Carbon
Gases
Water
Health

Keywords

  • climate mitigation
  • forests
  • agriculture
  • wetlands
  • ecosystem services

Cite this

Griscom, B. W., Adams, J., Ellis, P. W., Houghton, R. A., Lomax, G., Miteva, D. A., ... Fargione, J. (2017). Natural climate solutions. PNAS, 114(44), 11645-11650. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710465114, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.883444

Natural climate solutions. / Griscom, Bronson W. ; Adams, Justin ; Ellis, Peter W. ; Houghton, Richard A. ; Lomax, Guy; Miteva, Daniela A. ; Schlesinger, William H. ; Shoch, David ; Siikamäki, Juha V. ; Smith, Pete; Woodbury, Peter ; Zganjar, Chris ; Blackman, Allen ; Campari, João ; Conant, Richard T. ; Delgado, Christopher ; Elias, Patricia ; Gopalakrishna, Trisha ; Hamsik, Marisa R. ; Herrero, Mario ; Kiesecker, Joseph ; Landis, Emily ; Laestadius, Lars ; Leavitt, Sara M. ; Minnemeyer, Susan ; Polasky, Stephen ; Potapov, Peter ; Putz, Francis E. ; Sanderman, Jonathan ; Silvius, Marcel ; Wollenberg, Eva ; Fargione, Joe.

In: PNAS, Vol. 114, No. 44, 31.10.2017, p. 11645-11650.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Griscom, BW, Adams, J, Ellis, PW, Houghton, RA, Lomax, G, Miteva, DA, Schlesinger, WH, Shoch, D, Siikamäki, JV, Smith, P, Woodbury, P, Zganjar, C, Blackman, A, Campari, J, Conant, RT, Delgado, C, Elias, P, Gopalakrishna, T, Hamsik, MR, Herrero, M, Kiesecker, J, Landis, E, Laestadius, L, Leavitt, SM, Minnemeyer, S, Polasky, S, Potapov, P, Putz, FE, Sanderman, J, Silvius, M, Wollenberg, E & Fargione, J 2017, 'Natural climate solutions' PNAS, vol. 114, no. 44, pp. 11645-11650. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710465114, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.883444
Griscom BW, Adams J, Ellis PW, Houghton RA, Lomax G, Miteva DA et al. Natural climate solutions. PNAS. 2017 Oct 31;114(44):11645-11650. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710465114, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.883444
Griscom, Bronson W. ; Adams, Justin ; Ellis, Peter W. ; Houghton, Richard A. ; Lomax, Guy ; Miteva, Daniela A. ; Schlesinger, William H. ; Shoch, David ; Siikamäki, Juha V. ; Smith, Pete ; Woodbury, Peter ; Zganjar, Chris ; Blackman, Allen ; Campari, João ; Conant, Richard T. ; Delgado, Christopher ; Elias, Patricia ; Gopalakrishna, Trisha ; Hamsik, Marisa R. ; Herrero, Mario ; Kiesecker, Joseph ; Landis, Emily ; Laestadius, Lars ; Leavitt, Sara M. ; Minnemeyer, Susan ; Polasky, Stephen ; Potapov, Peter ; Putz, Francis E. ; Sanderman, Jonathan ; Silvius, Marcel ; Wollenberg, Eva ; Fargione, Joe. / Natural climate solutions. In: PNAS. 2017 ; Vol. 114, No. 44. pp. 11645-11650.
@article{c7cd3c598a7548f9a0dd3d4e3e3b545a,
title = "Natural climate solutions",
abstract = "Better stewardship of land to is needed to achieve the Paris Climate Agreement goal of holding warming below 2°C; however, confusion persists about the specific set of land stewardship options available and their mitigation potential. To address this, we identify and quantify “natural climate solutions” (NCS): 20 conservation, restoration, and improved land management actions that increase carbon storage and/or avoid greenhouse gas emissions across global forests, wetlands, grasslands, and agricultural lands. We find that the maximum potential of NCS – when constrained by food security, fiber security, and biodiversity conservation – is 23.8 PgCO2e yr-1 (95{\%} CI 20.3 - 37.4). This is ≥30{\%} higher than prior estimates, which did not include the full range of options and safeguards considered here. About half of this maximum (11.3 PgCO2e yr-1) represents cost effective climate mitigation, assuming the social cost of CO2 pollution is ≥100 USD MgCO2e -1 by 2030. Natural climate solutions can provide 37{\%} of cost effective CO2 mitigation needed through 2030 for a >66{\%} chance of holding warming below 2°C. One-third of this cost effective NCS mitigation can be delivered at or below 10 USD MgCO2 -1. Most NCS actions – if effectively implemented – also offer water filtration, flood buffering, soil health, biodiversity habitat, and enhanced climate resilience. Work remains to better constrain uncertainty of NCS mitigation estimates. Nevertheless, existing knowledge reported here provides a robust basis for immediate global action to improve ecosystem stewardship as a major solution to climate change.",
keywords = "climate mitigation, forests, agriculture, wetlands, ecosystem services",
author = "Griscom, {Bronson W.} and Justin Adams and Ellis, {Peter W.} and Houghton, {Richard A.} and Guy Lomax and Miteva, {Daniela A.} and Schlesinger, {William H.} and David Shoch and Siikam{\"a}ki, {Juha V.} and Pete Smith and Peter Woodbury and Chris Zganjar and Allen Blackman and Jo{\~a}o Campari and Conant, {Richard T.} and Christopher Delgado and Patricia Elias and Trisha Gopalakrishna and Hamsik, {Marisa R.} and Mario Herrero and Joseph Kiesecker and Emily Landis and Lars Laestadius and Leavitt, {Sara M.} and Susan Minnemeyer and Stephen Polasky and Peter Potapov and Putz, {Francis E.} and Jonathan Sanderman and Marcel Silvius and Eva Wollenberg and Joe Fargione",
note = "Our thanks for inputs by L. Almond, A. Baccini, A. Bowman, S. CookPatton, J. Evans, K. Holl, R. Lalasz, A. Nassikas, M. Spalding, M. Wolosin, and expert elicitation respondents. Our thanks for datasets developed by the Hansen lab and the NESCent grasslands working group (C. Lehmann, D. Griffith, T. M. Anderson, D. J. Beerling, W. Bond, E. Denton, E. Edwards, E. Forrestel, D. Fox, W. Hoffmann, R. Hyde, T. Kluyver, L. Mucina, B. Passey, S. Pau, J. Ratnam, N. Salamin, B. Santini, K. Simpson, M. Smith, B. Spriggs, C. Still, C. Str{\"o}mberg, and C. P. Osborne). This study was made possible by funding from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. Woodbury was supported in part by USDA-NIFA Project 2011-67003-30205 Data deposition: A global spatial dataset of reforestation opportunities has been deposited on Zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/883444). This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1710465114/-/DCSupplemental.",
year = "2017",
month = "10",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1073/pnas.1710465114",
language = "English",
volume = "114",
pages = "11645--11650",
journal = "PNAS",
issn = "0027-8424",
publisher = "NATL ACAD SCIENCES",
number = "44",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Natural climate solutions

AU - Griscom, Bronson W.

AU - Adams, Justin

AU - Ellis, Peter W.

AU - Houghton, Richard A.

AU - Lomax, Guy

AU - Miteva, Daniela A.

AU - Schlesinger, William H.

AU - Shoch, David

AU - Siikamäki, Juha V.

AU - Smith, Pete

AU - Woodbury, Peter

AU - Zganjar, Chris

AU - Blackman, Allen

AU - Campari, João

AU - Conant, Richard T.

AU - Delgado, Christopher

AU - Elias, Patricia

AU - Gopalakrishna, Trisha

AU - Hamsik, Marisa R.

AU - Herrero, Mario

AU - Kiesecker, Joseph

AU - Landis, Emily

AU - Laestadius, Lars

AU - Leavitt, Sara M.

AU - Minnemeyer, Susan

AU - Polasky, Stephen

AU - Potapov, Peter

AU - Putz, Francis E.

AU - Sanderman, Jonathan

AU - Silvius, Marcel

AU - Wollenberg, Eva

AU - Fargione, Joe

N1 - Our thanks for inputs by L. Almond, A. Baccini, A. Bowman, S. CookPatton, J. Evans, K. Holl, R. Lalasz, A. Nassikas, M. Spalding, M. Wolosin, and expert elicitation respondents. Our thanks for datasets developed by the Hansen lab and the NESCent grasslands working group (C. Lehmann, D. Griffith, T. M. Anderson, D. J. Beerling, W. Bond, E. Denton, E. Edwards, E. Forrestel, D. Fox, W. Hoffmann, R. Hyde, T. Kluyver, L. Mucina, B. Passey, S. Pau, J. Ratnam, N. Salamin, B. Santini, K. Simpson, M. Smith, B. Spriggs, C. Still, C. Strömberg, and C. P. Osborne). This study was made possible by funding from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. Woodbury was supported in part by USDA-NIFA Project 2011-67003-30205 Data deposition: A global spatial dataset of reforestation opportunities has been deposited on Zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/883444). This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1710465114/-/DCSupplemental.

PY - 2017/10/31

Y1 - 2017/10/31

N2 - Better stewardship of land to is needed to achieve the Paris Climate Agreement goal of holding warming below 2°C; however, confusion persists about the specific set of land stewardship options available and their mitigation potential. To address this, we identify and quantify “natural climate solutions” (NCS): 20 conservation, restoration, and improved land management actions that increase carbon storage and/or avoid greenhouse gas emissions across global forests, wetlands, grasslands, and agricultural lands. We find that the maximum potential of NCS – when constrained by food security, fiber security, and biodiversity conservation – is 23.8 PgCO2e yr-1 (95% CI 20.3 - 37.4). This is ≥30% higher than prior estimates, which did not include the full range of options and safeguards considered here. About half of this maximum (11.3 PgCO2e yr-1) represents cost effective climate mitigation, assuming the social cost of CO2 pollution is ≥100 USD MgCO2e -1 by 2030. Natural climate solutions can provide 37% of cost effective CO2 mitigation needed through 2030 for a >66% chance of holding warming below 2°C. One-third of this cost effective NCS mitigation can be delivered at or below 10 USD MgCO2 -1. Most NCS actions – if effectively implemented – also offer water filtration, flood buffering, soil health, biodiversity habitat, and enhanced climate resilience. Work remains to better constrain uncertainty of NCS mitigation estimates. Nevertheless, existing knowledge reported here provides a robust basis for immediate global action to improve ecosystem stewardship as a major solution to climate change.

AB - Better stewardship of land to is needed to achieve the Paris Climate Agreement goal of holding warming below 2°C; however, confusion persists about the specific set of land stewardship options available and their mitigation potential. To address this, we identify and quantify “natural climate solutions” (NCS): 20 conservation, restoration, and improved land management actions that increase carbon storage and/or avoid greenhouse gas emissions across global forests, wetlands, grasslands, and agricultural lands. We find that the maximum potential of NCS – when constrained by food security, fiber security, and biodiversity conservation – is 23.8 PgCO2e yr-1 (95% CI 20.3 - 37.4). This is ≥30% higher than prior estimates, which did not include the full range of options and safeguards considered here. About half of this maximum (11.3 PgCO2e yr-1) represents cost effective climate mitigation, assuming the social cost of CO2 pollution is ≥100 USD MgCO2e -1 by 2030. Natural climate solutions can provide 37% of cost effective CO2 mitigation needed through 2030 for a >66% chance of holding warming below 2°C. One-third of this cost effective NCS mitigation can be delivered at or below 10 USD MgCO2 -1. Most NCS actions – if effectively implemented – also offer water filtration, flood buffering, soil health, biodiversity habitat, and enhanced climate resilience. Work remains to better constrain uncertainty of NCS mitigation estimates. Nevertheless, existing knowledge reported here provides a robust basis for immediate global action to improve ecosystem stewardship as a major solution to climate change.

KW - climate mitigation

KW - forests

KW - agriculture

KW - wetlands

KW - ecosystem services

U2 - 10.1073/pnas.1710465114

DO - 10.1073/pnas.1710465114

M3 - Article

VL - 114

SP - 11645

EP - 11650

JO - PNAS

JF - PNAS

SN - 0027-8424

IS - 44

ER -