Countries’ climate pledges put unrealistic demands for land: Report

The study, involving more than 20 researchers from around the world and released on Tuesday by Melbourne Climate Futures, the University of Melbourne’s interdisciplinary climate research initiative, determines that countries intend to use 633 million hectares of the total land area for carbon capture tactics like tree planting, which would gobble up land desperately needed for food production and nature protection.

Only 551 million hectares accounted for in pledges would restore degraded lands and primary forests, which store carbon, regulate rainfall and local temperatures, shelter plants and animals, purify water and air and in some cases belong to Indigenous Peoples, whose land rights are found to be critical to reducing climate change due to their stewardship of forests.

“Land has a critical role to play in global efforts to keep the planet cool, but it’s not a silver bullet solution,” said Kate Dooley, the lead author of The Land Gap Report and a researcher at the University of Melbourne.

“This study reveals that countries’ climate pledges are dangerously over reliant on inequitable and unsustainable land-based measures to capture and store carbon. Clearly, countries are loading up on land pledges to avoid the hard work of steeply reducing emissions from fossil fuels, decarbonizing food systems and stopping the destruction of forests and other ecosystems.”

Researchers examined official climate plans and public statements, including Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which countries submitted to the United Nations as part of the Paris Agreement, to calculate the total land area set aside for carbon removals.

Unlike other “gap” reports, including the recently-released UNEP Emissions Gap report, which describe a divide between mitigation ambition and the emissions reductions needed to achieve the climate goals to be discussed at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of Parties (COP27) in Egypt this month, this analysis demonstrates the chasm between governments’ reliance on land for carbon mitigation purposes and the role that land can realistically play due to competing needs and in light of human rights.

“Faced with a global land squeeze, we must think carefully about how we use each and every plot of land,” said Dooley. “Yet countries treat land like a limitless resource in their climate plans. Using a land area equivalent to half of current global croplands for tree planting simply won’t work, particularly when the evidence in front of us shows the fragility of tree planting to worsening climate impacts like fires and droughts.”

The researchers argue the most problematic climate plans involve transforming land currently used for other purposes, such as food production, into tree-covered areas, such as monoculture plantations.

The report says that these land changes would encroach on land safeguarded by Indigenous Peoples or used by local communities and smallholder farmers to feed themselves.

Disclaimer: This story is auto-aggregated by a computer program and has not been created or edited by FreshersLIVE.Publisher : IANS-Media

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *