Assessing the impact of strictly protecting 30%–50% of global land on carbon dynamics in natural and agricultural ecosystems

Hector Camargo-Alvarez, Daniel Bampoh* (Corresponding Author), Valeria Mazzola, Peter Alexander, Roslyn Henry, Sam Rabin, Mark Rounsevell, Almut Arneth

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Societal Impact Statement: Strictly protected areas for nature conservation are a key policy to benefit biodiversity and climate change mitigation since reduced deforestation and ecosystem restoration enhance carbon stocks. However, there is controversy regarding their potential societal impacts, such as competition for land and food security. Here, we investigate the implications of protecting 30% and 50% of the global ice-free land surface on the spatiotemporal dynamics of ecosystem carbon uptake and losses, agricultural land use and synergies with food production. The study provides insights into the role of protected areas on the global terrestrial carbon store, contributing to climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation efforts. Summary: Agriculture and forestry use around half of the global ice-free land and are major drivers of biodiversity loss. For this reason, the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) targets at least 30% of protected global land by 2030. This study evaluates the impacts of different land-use change scenarios on the storage of carbon in terrestrial ecosystems and trade-offs and synergies in the global food production system by comparing a reference scenario with no additional protected area expansion targets and two scenarios with strict area-based protection targets of 30% and 50% of the ice-free land surface. A net global gain in carbon storage up to 110 PgC was projected for 2056–2060 in the protection scenarios compared to the reference scenario (equivalent to around 10 years of current global anthropogenic C emissions). However, regional disparities in carbon storage are large and include carbon losses in areas identified as having—at least on a decadal perspective—‘irrecoverable’ carbon. In the protection scenarios, cropland expansion in some regions is accompanied by intensification of production with an increase of up to 8% in the use of N fertiliser, which may lead to pollution and additional greenhouse gas emissions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1070-1079
Number of pages10
JournalPlants People Planet
Volume7
Issue number4
Early online date25 Nov 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2025

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Additional supporting information can be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end of this article.

Funding

HC acknowledges funding from Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung, AA, and MR acknowledge support through the Helmholtz Association. RH and PA were supported by the UK's Global Food Security Programme Project Resilience of the UK food system to Global Shocks. Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

FundersFunder number
Alexander von Humboltd Foundation
Helmholtz Association
Global Food Security Programme
Projekt DEAL

    Keywords

    • biodiversity
    • carbon storage
    • climate change
    • ecosystem services
    • land-use change
    • LPJ-GUESS
    • PLUM

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing the impact of strictly protecting 30%–50% of global land on carbon dynamics in natural and agricultural ecosystems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this