A global evidence map of human well-being and biodiversity co-benefits and trade-offs of natural climate solutions
Authors:
Charlotte H. Chang,
James T. Erbaugh,
Paola Fajardo,
Luci Lu,
István Molnár,
Dávid Papp,
Brian E. Robinson,
Kemen Austin,
Susan Cook-Patton,
Timm Kroeger,
Lindsey Smart,
Miguel Castro,
Samantha H. Cheng,
Peter W. Ellis,
Rob I. McDonald,
Teevrat Garg,
Erin E. Poor,
Preston Welker,
Andrew R. Tilman,
Stephen A. Wood,
Yuta J. Masuda
Abstract:
Natural climate solutions (NCS) are critical for mitigating climate change through ecosystem-based carbon removal and emissions reductions. NCS implementation can also generate biodiversity and human well-being co-benefits and trade-offs ("NCS co-impacts"), but the volume of evidence on NCS co-impacts has grown rapidly across disciplines, is poorly understood, and remains to be systematically coll…
▽ More
Natural climate solutions (NCS) are critical for mitigating climate change through ecosystem-based carbon removal and emissions reductions. NCS implementation can also generate biodiversity and human well-being co-benefits and trade-offs ("NCS co-impacts"), but the volume of evidence on NCS co-impacts has grown rapidly across disciplines, is poorly understood, and remains to be systematically collated and synthesized. A global evidence map of NCS co-impacts would overcome key barriers to NCS implementation by providing relevant information on co-benefits and trade-offs where carbon mitigation potential alone does not justify NCS projects. We employ large language models to assess over two million articles, finding 257,266 relevant articles on NCS co-impacts. We analyze this large and dispersed body of literature using innovative machine learning methods to extract relevant data (e.g., study location, species, and other key variables), and create a global evidence map on NCS co-impacts. Evidence on NCS co-impacts has grown approximately ten-fold in three decades, although some of the most abundant evidence is associated with pathways that have less mitigation potential. We find that studies often examine multiple NCS pathways, indicating natural NCS pathway complements, and each NCS is often associated with two or more coimpacts. Finally, NCS co-impacts evidence and priority areas for NCS are often mismatched--some countries with high mitigation potential from NCS have few published studies on the broader co-impacts of NCS implementation. Our work advances and makes available novel methods and systematic and representative data of NCS co-impacts studies, thus providing timely insights to inform NCS research and action globally.
△ Less
Submitted 30 April, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
