Explore the vast range of titles available.

Land-use changes are critical for climate policy because native vegetation and soils store abundant carbon and their losses from agricultural expansion, together with emissions from agricultural production, contribute about 20 to 25 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions 1 , 2 . Most climate strategies require maintaining or increasing land-based carbon 3 while meeting food demands, which are expected to grow by more than 50 per cent by 2050 1 , 2 , 4 . A finite global land area implies that fulfilling these strategies requires increasing global land-use efficiency of both storing carbon and producing food. Yet measuring the efficiency of land-use changes from the perspective of greenhouse gas emissions is challenging, particularly when land outputs change, for example, from one food to another or from food to carbon storage in forests. Intuitively, if a hectare of land produces maize well and forest poorly, maize should be the more efficient use of land, and vice versa. However, quantifying this difference and the yields at which the balance changes requires a common metric that factors in different outputs, emissions from different agricultural inputs (such as fertilizer) and the different productive potentials of land due to physical factors such as rainfall or soils. Here we propose a carbon benefits index that measures how changes in the output types, output quantities and production processes of a hectare of land contribute to the global capacity to store carbon and to reduce total greenhouse gas emissions. This index does not evaluate biodiversity or other ecosystem values, which must be analysed separately. We apply the index to a range of land-use and consumption choices relevant to climate policy, such as reforesting pastures, biofuel production and diet changes. We find that these choices can have much greater implications for the climate than previously understood because standard methods for evaluating the effects of land use 4 – 11 on greenhouse gas emissions systematically underestimate the opportunity of land to store carbon if it is not used for agriculture. Evaluation of the efficiency of land-use changes and their effect on global carbon storage shows that several land-use and consumption choices relevant to climate policy have greater implications than previously thought.

We estimate the global bioenergy potential from dedicated biomass plantations in the 21st century under a range of sustainability requirements to safeguard food production, biodiversity and terrestrial carbon storage. We use a process‐based model of the land biosphere to simulate rainfed and irrigated biomass yields driven by data from different climate models and combine these simulations with a scenario‐based assessment of future land availability for energy crops. The resulting spatial patterns of large‐scale lignocellulosic energy crop cultivation are then investigated with regard to their impacts on land and water resources. Calculated bioenergy potentials are in the lower range of previous assessments but the combination of all biomass sources may still provide between 130 and 270 EJ yr−1 in 2050, equivalent to 15–25% of the World's future energy demand. Energy crops account for 20–60% of the total potential depending on land availability and share of irrigated area. However, a full exploitation of these potentials will further increase the pressure on natural ecosystems with a doubling of current land use change and irrigation water demand. Despite the consideration of sustainability constraints on future agricultural expansion the large‐scale cultivation of energy crops is a threat to many areas that have already been fragmented and degraded, are rich in biodiversity and provide habitat for many endangered and endemic species.

The most recent IPCC assessment has shown an important role for negative emissions technologies (NETs) in limiting global warming to 2 °C cost-effectively. However, a bottom-up, systematic, reproducible, and transparent literature assessment of the different options to remove CO2 from the atmosphere is currently missing. In part 1 of this three-part review on NETs, we assemble a comprehensive set of the relevant literature so far published, focusing on seven technologies: bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), afforestation and reforestation, direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), enhanced weathering, ocean fertilisation, biochar, and soil carbon sequestration. In this part, part 2 of the review, we present estimates of costs, potentials, and side-effects for these technologies, and qualify them with the authors' assessment. Part 3 reviews the innovation and scaling challenges that must be addressed to realise NETs deployment as a viable climate mitigation strategy. Based on a systematic review of the literature, our best estimates for sustainable global NET potentials in 2050 are 0.5-3.6 GtCO2 yr−1 for afforestation and reforestation, 0.5-5 GtCO2 yr−1 for BECCS, 0.5-2 GtCO2 yr−1 for biochar, 2-4 GtCO2 yr−1 for enhanced weathering, 0.5-5 GtCO2 yr−1 for DACCS, and up to 5 GtCO2 yr−1 for soil carbon sequestration. Costs vary widely across the technologies, as do their permanency and cumulative potentials beyond 2050. It is unlikely that a single NET will be able to sustainably meet the rates of carbon uptake described in integrated assessment pathways consistent with 1.5 °C of global warming.

With the Paris Agreement's ambition of limiting climate change to well below 2 °C, negative emission technologies (NETs) have moved into the limelight of discussions in climate science and policy. Despite several assessments, the current knowledge on NETs is still diffuse and incomplete, but also growing fast. Here, we synthesize a comprehensive body of NETs literature, using scientometric tools and performing an in-depth assessment of the quantitative and qualitative evidence therein. We clarify the role of NETs in climate change mitigation scenarios, their ethical implications, as well as the challenges involved in bringing the various NETs to the market and scaling them up in time. There are six major findings arising from our assessment: first, keeping warming below 1.5 °C requires the large-scale deployment of NETs, but this dependency can still be kept to a minimum for the 2 °C warming limit. Second, accounting for economic and biophysical limits, we identify relevant potentials for all NETs except ocean fertilization. Third, any single NET is unlikely to sustainably achieve the large NETs deployment observed in many 1.5 °C and 2 °C mitigation scenarios. Yet, portfolios of multiple NETs, each deployed at modest scales, could be invaluable for reaching the climate goals. Fourth, a substantial gap exists between the upscaling and rapid diffusion of NETs implied in scenarios and progress in actual innovation and deployment. If NETs are required at the scales currently discussed, the resulting urgency of implementation is currently neither reflected in science nor policy. Fifth, NETs face severe barriers to implementation and are only weakly incentivized so far. Finally, we identify distinct ethical discourses relevant for NETs, but highlight the need to root them firmly in the available evidence in order to render such discussions relevant in practice.

This comment raises concerns regarding the way in which a new European directive, aimed at reaching higher renewable energy targets, treats wood harvested directly for bioenergy use as a carbon-free fuel. The result could consume quantities of wood equal to all Europe’s wood harvests, greatly increase carbon in the air for decades, and set a dangerous global example.

Oil palm cultivation has become one of the world’s most important drivers of land use change in the tropics causing biodiversity loss and greenhouse gas emissions. The impact of climate change and rising carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the atmosphere on oil palm productivity is not well understood. If environmental change leads to declining palm oil yields in existing cultivation areas, cultivation areas may expand or shift to other regions. Here we assess climate change impacts on palm oil production using an extended version of the dynamic global vegetation model with managed land, LPJmL4, and a range of climate scenarios from the inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project. We find increasing average yields under all future climate scenarios. This contradicts earlier studies, which did not consider the potential positive effect of CO2 fertilization. If we do not account for CO2 fertilization, future yields also decrease in our simulations. Our results indicate the potentially large role of rising CO2 levels on oil palm cultivation. This highlights the importance of further applied plant science to better understand the impact of climate change and elevated CO2 levels on oil palm growth and productivity.

Modeling of climate change impacts have mainly been focused on a small number of annual staple crops that provide most of the world's calories. Crop models typically do not represent perennial crops despite their high economic, nutritional, or cultural value. Here we assess climate change impacts on global tea production, chosen because of its high importance in culture and livelihoods of people around the world. We extended the dynamic global vegetation model with managed land, LPJmL4, global crop model to simulate the cultivation of tea plants. Simulated tea yields were validated and found in good agreement with historical observations as well as experiments on the effects of increasing CO2 concentrations. We then projected yields into the future under a range of climate scenarios from the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project. Under current irrigation levels and lowest climate change scenarios, tea yields are expected to decrease in major producing countries. In most climate scenarios, we project that tea yields are set to increase in China, India, and Vietnam. However, yield losses are expected to affect Kenya, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka. If abundant water supply and full irrigation is assumed for all tea cultivation areas, yields are projected to increase in all regions.

Do the wet savannahs and shrublands of Africa provide a large reserve of potential croplands to produce food staples or bioenergy with low carbon and biodiversity costs? We find that only small percentages of these lands have meaningful potential to be low-carbon sources of maize (∼2%) or soybeans (9.5–11.5%), meaning that their conversion would release at least one-third less carbon per ton of crop than released on average for the production of those crops on existing croplands. Factoring in land-use change, less than 1% is likely to produce cellulosic ethanol that would meet European standards for greenhouse gas reductions. Biodiversity effects of converting these lands are also likely to be significant as bird and mammal richness is comparable to that of the world’s tropical forest regions. Our findings contrast with influential studies that assume these lands provide a large, low-environmental-cost cropland reserve. Africa’s savannahs and shrublands have been assumed to provide a large area for the expansion of cropland with relatively little damage to the environment. Research now shows that conversion would be likely to have high carbon and biodiversity costs.

Growing demand for food coupled with climate commitments to reduce emissions will result in more land development for agriculture and renewable energy. Simultaneously, conserving land for biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people (NCP) is imperative for achieving international climate, sustainable development, and biodiversity goals. Meeting these interconnected objectives requires efficient land allocation across sectors. Here, we present a flexible, multiple-objective framework for strategically allocating land to mitigate threats to biodiversity and NCP under climate change while supporting development. Application of this framework at a global scale through country-level targets shows that if future development is planned without consideration of nature, demands for land could impact nearly 1 million km 2 of high-priority conservation areas. Multi-sector planning can mitigate potential conflict, reducing carbon loss and species exposure. Our findings underscore the need to conserve critical areas for nature, reduce land demand for food and energy, and intentionally coordinate land use across sectors. An improved strategy for siting food and energy production is needed to avoid further habitat loss. This paper presents a multi-sector framework that can empower land use planners to find synergies across conservation and development sectors.

Global land is turning into an increasingly scarce resource. We here present a comprehensive assessment of co-occuring land-use change from 2000 until 2010, compiling existing spatially explicit data sources for different land uses, and building on a rich literature addressing specific land-use changes in all world regions. This review systematically categorizes patterns of land use, including regional urbanization and agricultural expansion but also globally telecoupled land-use change for all world regions. Managing land-use change patterns across the globe requires global governance. Here we present a comprehensive assessment of the extent and density of multiple drivers and impacts of land-use change. We combine and reanalyze spatially explicit data of global land-use change between 2000 and 2010 for population, livestock, cropland, terrestrial carbon and biodiversity. We find pervasive pressure on biodiversity but varying patterns of gross land-use changes across world regions. Our findings enable a classification of land-use patterns into three types. The ‘consumers’ type, displayed in Europe and North America, features high land footprints, reduced direct human pressures due to intensification of agriculture, and increased reliance on imports, enabling a partial recovery of terrestrial carbon and reducing pressure on biodiversity. In the ‘producer’ type, most clearly epitomized by Latin America, telecoupled land-use links drive biodiversity and carbon loss. In the ‘mover’ type, we find strong direct domestic pressures, but with a wide variety of outcomes, ranging from a concurrent expansion of population, livestock and croplands in Sub-Saharan Africa at the cost of natural habitats to strong pressure on cropland by urbanization in Eastern Asia. In addition, anthropogenic climate change has already left a distinct footprint on global land-use change. Our data- and literature-based assessment reveals region-specific opportunities for managing global land-use change.