National governments and multilateral institutions face difficult challenges reconciling environmental goals, such as biodiversity conservation and addressing climate change, with economic development goals.
In a first-of-its-kind analysis done for 146 countries around the world, an interdisciplinary research team led by researchers at the University of Minnesota found large potential gains in biodiversity, climate and economic development from improved land use and land management. The findings were recently published in Science.
The researchers integrated spatial biophysical and economic data with optimization methods to develop sustainable landscape efficiency frontiers for each of 146 countries included in the analysis. The landscape efficiency frontier in each country shows the maximally feasible combinations of biodiversity conservation (including both species and ecosystem measures), land-based climate mitigation (net carbon sequestration and methane emissions reductions) and net economic value from agricultural crops, livestock and forestry production. For example, the landscape efficiency frontier shows the highest economic value from agriculture and forestry for a given score for biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation, or the maximum climate mitigation possible for a given biodiversity score and economic values from agriculture and forestry. In most countries, land use and land management generates outcomes well inside their landscape efficiency frontier showing that simultaneous gains in environment and economic development are possible.
The analysis found:
- Summing results across all 146 countries included in the analysis shows potential to increase climate mitigation by over 200 billion metric tons CO2 equivalents (>20% increase) or net economic value by over $350 billion (>80% increase) without loss in other objectives important for carbon sequestration and biodiversity and expansion of agriculture and
- These gains occur both from land reallocation, involving selective restoration of forestry areas in highly productive lands, and crop intensification, especially in lower-income countries with current low-yield agriculture.
"We know we're facing both a climate crisis and a biodiversity crisis but, usually, the pushback against doing something about either is that it's going to cost too much," said lead author Stephen Polasky, a Regents Professor and co-founder of NatCap TEEMs in the University of Minnesota College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resources Sciences. "One of the main reasons for doing this study was to show, in fact, that there are ways where we can be more efficient and address climate and biodiversity without bankrupting people."
The research team discusses the analysis in greater detail here.
According to Polasky, this information is useful for organizations involved in supporting and financing development, such as international finance institutions, to help them better direct their resources and support for countries in a way that helps them meet their national goals but, at the same time, meet international commitments for biodiversity, conservation, climate change,
and adaptation.
"One of the advantages we find from doing this analysis is that we show people what's possible, and that tends to open their minds to thinking about a wider set of alternatives, when they can see the gain that could be had by making some of these changes. Then making some of the changes is not so scary," said Polasky.
"This research proves that the supposed tradeoff between protecting nature and growing economies is false," said Becky Chaplin-Kramer, Global Biodiversity Lead Scientist at World Wildlife Fund-US. "By mapping what's truly possible country by country, we've given policymakers and investors a roadmap to pursue biodiversity gains, climate mitigation, and development goals together."
NatCap TEEMs and its collaborators, including NatCap Insights, have started working with other partners to apply this work, including working with the World Bank to do country-specific analyses to answer their specific questions.
The research team added that there are also many ecosystem services and economic activities that are not yet included in this analysis, so there is much additional work that can be done to deepen that analysis.
Funding for the analysis was provided by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the University of Minnesota Fesler-Lampert Endowment, the University of Minnesota Institute on the Environment, World Resources Institute, and the World Bank.
About NatCap TEEMs
NatCap TEEMs (Natural Capital Alliance: The Earth-Economy Modelers) in the Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences, aims to improve understanding of the integrated earth-economy system and to inform decision-making for sustainable development on a livable planet. NatCap TEEMs is a part of the Natural Capital Alliance, a global partnership whose mission is to pioneer science, technology, and partnerships that enable people and nature to thrive (formerly the Natural Capital Project). Learn more at natcapteems.umn.edu
About the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences
The University of Minnesota's College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences strives to inspire minds, nourish people, and sustainably enhance the natural environment. CFANS has a legacy of innovation, bringing discoveries to life through science and educating the next generation of leaders. Every day, students, faculty, and researchers use science to address the grand challenges of the world today and in the future. CFANS offers an unparalleled expanse of experiential learning opportunities for students and the community, with 12 academic departments, 10 research and outreach centers across the state, the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, the Bell Museum, and dozens of interdisciplinary centers. Learn more at cfans.umn.edu.
