Assessing evidence on the impacts of nature-based interventions for climate change mitigation: a systematic map of primary and secondary research from subtropical and tropical terrestrial regions

Environmental Evidence

Systematic Map

Jen Tinsman¹  Amanda Sigouin¹  Ana Porzecanski¹  Eleanor J. Sterling²  Gabriel F. Calistro³  Peter Lichtenthal⁴  Pedro H. S. Brancalion⁵  Kelly Jones⁶  Morena Mills⁷  Meredith Wiggins⁸  Allison Fritts-Penniman⁹  Steven W. J. Canty^1,10  A. Justin Nowakowski^1,11  Michael B. Mascia^1,12  Sebastien Costedoat^1,12  Carlos L. Muñoz Brenes^1,12  Arundhati Jagadish^1,12  Catherine J. Chamberlain^1,13  Chris Zganjar^1,14  Samantha H. Cheng^1,15 

[1] Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, American Museum of Natural History, 10024, New York, NY, USA;Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, American Museum of Natural History, 10024, New York, NY, USA;Hawai’I Institute of Marine Biology, University of Hawai’i, Mānoa, HI, USA;Department of Biology, Boston University, 5 Cummington Mall, 02215, Boston, MA, USA;Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, 1200 Amsterdam Avenue, 10027, New York, NY, USA;Department of Forest Sciences, ‘Luiz de Queiroz’ College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Piracicaba, Brazil;Human Dimensions of Natural Resources Department, Colorado State University, 80523-1480, Fort Collins, CO, USA;Imperial College London, London, UK;Independent Researcher, Washington, D.C., USA;Saturday Academy, University of Portland, 5000 N Willamette Blvd, 97203, Portland, OR, USA;Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, 647 Contees Wharf Rd, 21037, Edgewater, MD, USA;Saturday Academy, University of Portland, 5000 N Willamette Blvd, 97203, Portland, OR, USA;Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, 647 Contees Wharf Rd, 21037, Edgewater, MD, USA;Working Land and Seascapes, Smithsonian Institution, 20013, Washington, DC, USA;The Betty and Gordon Moore Center for Science, Conservation International, 2011 Crystal Drive, 22202, Arlington, VA, USA;The Betty and Gordon Moore Center for Science, Conservation International, 2011 Crystal Drive, 22202, Arlington, VA, USA;The Nature Conservancy, 27701, Durham, NC, USA;The Nature Conservancy, 22203, Arlington, VA, USA;World Wildlife Fund, 1250 24th St NW, 20037, Washington, DC, USA;Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, American Museum of Natural History, 10024, New York, NY, USA;

关键词: Nature-based solutions;    Natural climate solutions;    Climate change mitigation;    Carbon sequestration;    Co-benefits;    Impacts;    Scale;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13750-023-00312-3

 received in 2023-02-11, accepted in 2023-09-01,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundNature-based interventions (NbIs) for climate change mitigation include a diverse set of interventions aimed at conserving, restoring, and/or managing natural and modified ecosystems to improve their ability to store and sequester carbon and avoid greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Recent projections estimate that terrestrial NbIs can lead to more than one-third of the climate change mitigation necessary to meet the Paris Climate Agreement by 2030. Further, these interventions can provide co-benefits in the form of social and ecological outcomes. Despite growing recognition of the potential benefits, a clear characterization of the distribution and occurrence of evidence which supports linkages between different types of NbIs and outcomes for climate change mitigation, ecosystems, and people remains poorly understood.MethodsThis systematic map assesses the evidence base on the links between NbIs and climate change mitigation, social, and ecological outcomes in tropical and subtropical terrestrial regions. We searched three bibliographic databases, 65 organization websites, and conducted backward citation chasing within 39 existing evidence syntheses to identify relevant articles. Additionally, we reached out to key informants for additional sources of evidence. We then used machine learning to rank returned results by relevance at the title and abstract stage and manually screened for inclusion using predefined criteria at the title, abstract, and full text stages. We extracted relevant meta-data from included articles using an a priori coding scheme. Lastly, we conducted a targeted, complementary search to identify relevant review and synthesis articles to provide broader context for the findings of the systematic map.Review findingsWe included 948 articles in this systematic map. Most of the evidence base (56%) examined links between protection, natural resource management, and restoration interventions with changes to ‘proxy’ outcomes for climate change mitigation (changes to land condition, land cover, and/or land use). Other areas with high occurrence of articles included linkages between interventions within natural resource management and trees in croplands categories and changes to aboveground carbon storage and/or sequestration (17% of articles). A key knowledge gap was on measured changes in GHG emissions across all intervention types (6% of articles). Overall, articles in the evidence base did not often assess changes in co-benefits alongside direct or indirect changes for climate change mitigation (32%). In most cases, the evidence base contained studies which did not explicitly test for causal linkages using appropriate experimental or quasi-experimental designs.ConclusionsThe evidence base for NbIs is significant and growing; however, key gaps in knowledge hamper the ability to inform ongoing and future investment and implementation at scale. More comprehensive evidence is needed to support causal inference between NbIs and direct outcomes for climate change mitigation to better determine additionality, permanence, leakage, and other unintended consequences. Similarly, priorities emerging from this map include the need for coordinated and harmonized efforts to collect diverse data types to better understand whether and how other outcomes (e.g. social, ecological) of NbIs can be achieved synergistically with mitigation objectives. Understanding potential benefits and trade-offs of NbIs is particularly urgent to inform rapidly expanding carbon markets for nature.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Collaboration for Environmental Evidence and BioMed Central Ltd. 2023

【 图 表 】

Fig. 6

12951_2015_155_Article_IEq88.gif

Fig. 3

Fig. 5

Fig. 2

Fig. 1

12888_2023_5283_Article_IEq2.gif

Fig. 1

12951_2017_255_Article_IEq56.gif

Fig. 14

Fig. 13

12951_2017_255_Article_IEq54.gif

12951_2017_255_Article_IEq53.gif

Fig. 1

12951_2016_246_Article_IEq15.gif

12951_2016_246_Article_IEq13.gif

Fig. 1

Fig. 9

12951_2017_255_Article_IEq52.gif

Fig. 1

Scheme 1