How do we best synergize climate mitigation actions to co‐benefit biodiversity?

Abstract

A multitude of actions to protect, sustainably manage and restore natural and modified ecosystems can have co‐benefits for both climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation. Reducing greenhouse emissions to limit warming to less than 1.5 or 2°C above preindustrial levels, as outlined in the Paris Agreement, can yield strong co‐benefits for land, freshwater and marine biodiversity and reduce amplifying climate feedbacks from ecosystem changes. Not all climate mitigation strategies are equally effective at producing biodiversity co‐benefits, some in fact are counterproductive. Moreover, social implications are often overlooked within the climate‐biodiversity nexus. Protecting biodiverse and carbon‐rich natural environments, ecological restoration of potentially biodiverse and carbon‐rich habitats, the deliberate creation of novel habitats, taking into consideration a locally adapted and meaningful (i.e. full consequences considered) mix of these measures, can result in the most robust win‐win solutions. These can be further enhanced by avoidance of narrow goals, taking long‐term views and minimizing further losses of intact ecosystems. In this review paper, we first discuss various climate mitigation actions that evidence demonstrates can negatively impact biodiversity, resulting in unseen and unintended negative consequences. We then examine climate mitigation actions that co‐deliver biodiversity and societal benefits. We give examples of these win‐win solutions, categorized as ‘protect, restore, manage and create’, in different regions of the world that could be expanded, upscaled and used for further innovation.

The direct drivers of recent global anthropogenic biodiversity loss

“…Combating climate change alone will not be enough to prevent—or possibly even slow—the further loss of biodiversity, unless damaging land/sea use change and direct exploitation are also tackled with similar ambition and determination ( 14 , 27 ). Rapidly upscaling holistic management practices that benefit both climate and biodiversity will be key ( 5 , 28 ) and must be done in a manner that safeguards livelihoods and ways of life ( 29 , 30 ). Actions that succeed in reversing or slowing biodiversity declines can not only considerably slow human-caused climate change ( 31 ): They can also make ecosystems more able to maintain functionality—and hence the flows of nature’s contributions to people—in the face of ongoing climatic and other environmental changes ( 29 ).…”

Accounting for local temperature effect substantially alters afforestation patterns

“…The difference in A/R area produced between scenarios with plantations and native forests is of similar magnitude as the BGP effect explored here (SI table 2). However, plantations are associated with reducing biodiversity while native forests can aid the loss of species [39,40].…”

Time for decisive actions to protect freshwater ecosystems from global changes

“…As reviewed above, anthropogenic factors and associated processes responsible for the decline of freshwater biodiversity are clearly identified since decades and several existing solutions, either technological, nature-based or policy-based, could be applied globally to halt and/or reverse this rapid decline. These solutions can also benefit climate change mitigation and human well-being (Pörtner et al, 2021;Shin et al, 2022;Smith et al, 2022). Some few examples of potential solutions focusing on improving water quality, restoring freshwater connectivity and protecting freshwater systems globally are given below (see, e.g.…”