As world leaders gather at the 25th UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) in Madrid, which started on Monday and continues to Friday next week, they are discussing concrete steps for meeting and increasing national emission-reduction targets. Equally important, COP25 offers an opportunity to elevate one of the most powerful tools we have to address climate change: nature.
Nature-based solutions (also known as natural climate solutions) leverage the world’s forests, grasslands, wetlands and soil to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Healthy ecosystems absorb and store carbon on their own. If they are protected, restored and managed sustainably, they can provide one-third of the emission reductions needed to meet the Paris Agreement’s goal for 2030.
In other words, nature is offering us an opportunity that we cannot afford to miss. Reducing fossil-fuel emissions is crucial, but it will not be enough to keep global warming below 2°C, let alone 1.5°C, relative to preindustrial levels.
To secure a livable future on this planet, we also must commit to funding nature-based solutions. All countries need to start incorporating nature-based solutions into their national climate pledges, and begin investing accordingly.
Two years ago, scientists from The Nature Conservancy and its partners published new research showcasing nature-based solutions’ potential to fight climate change. Yet natural climate solutions have continued to attract relatively little attention — and even less funding.
Fortunately, this may be starting to change. In September, nature-based solutions featured prominently at UN Climate Week in New York City. Although that event did not live up to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ call for “clear steps to enhance nationally determined contributions by 2020,” it did offer a platform to a new generation of climate and nature advocates.
From the Youth4Nature coalition to the Swedish activist Greta Thunberg, young people were on hand to demand that today’s leaders account for the challenges they will inherit.
Climate Week also produced an announcement from a coalition led by China and New Zealand, focused on encouraging nature-based solutions in both national climate plans and the corporate sector.
The private sector also has made new commitments, with a group of 230 international investors, representing US$16.2 trillion in assets under management, calling on companies to take immediate action to address deforestation in their supply chains.
Political leaders now must maintain this momentum, by taking a closer look at what nature can do to help mitigate and build resilience to climate change. For example, one promising solution is sustainable agroforestry, in which food crops are grown alongside native trees. Expanding this practice could bolster food security and boost incomes in rural communities and simultaneously restore soil health, sequester carbon and nurture critical wildlife.
Another nature-based solution is being pioneered in Australia, where massive bushfires are putting people and wildlife at risk — and releasing enormous amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
The Nature Conservancy is cooperating with Indigenous communities to improve grassland health, sequester carbon and reduce the risk of wildfires.
Drawing on traditional knowledge dating back thousands of years, Indigenous rangers set smaller, controlled burns to prevent the buildup of dry grass that contributes to larger, hotter wildfires. This program contributes to healthier grasslands while generating income for Indigenous communities through the sale of carbon credits.
These kinds of programs benefit people and the environment, but much more investment is urgently needed. Although natural systems play a critical role in regulating the climate, nature-based solutions still receive less than 4 percent of total public funding for climate action.
France, Sweden, South Korea, the UK and a few other countries have pledged to increase funding for international preservation and restoration efforts, and finalizing the details of these programs is now on the COP25 docket.
However, unless more countries make similar commitments, natural climate solutions would not achieve the necessary scale.
Worse, natural systems that could be part of the solution to climate change are facing increasingly severe threats. We have all seen the recent images of fires raging through the Amazon rainforest, which plays a major role in regulating the world’s climate. Record-high temperatures, environmental crimes, weak oversight, ineffective firefighting and other factors have increased the vulnerability of systems that store a disproportionate share of the planet’s carbon.
The Amazon is just one example. The conversion and degradation of natural land and marine habitats is ongoing around the world. Such practices undermine our ability to adapt to climate effects like rising sea levels, and directly threaten our food security by wiping out species that pollinate crops, contribute to soil health and provide habitats for fish and other marine life. Nature, climate and human well-being are intimately connected; none can be addressed in isolation.
COP25 provides an opportunity for world leaders to seize on these connections in the run-up to next year, which would be a veritable “environmental super year.”
In addition to finalizing an international high-seas treaty and establishing a new framework for the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, governments would also revisit their climate commitments at COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland.
Any commitments that countries make at these meetings would mean little without concrete plans to back them up. We have the science, and we have the solutions. What we need now is action to leverage the power of nature. Our shared existence on this planet depends on it.
Sally Jewell is interim chief executive of The Nature Conservancy.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Election seasons expose societal divisions and contrasting visions about the future of Taiwan. They also offer opportunities for leaders to forge unity around practical ideas for strengthening Taiwan’s resilience. Beijing has in the past sought to exacerbate divisions within Taiwan. For Beijing, a divided Taiwan is less likely to pursue permanent separation. It also is more manipulatable than a united Taiwan. A divided polity has lower trust in government institutions and diminished capacity to solve societal challenges. As my co-authors Richard Bush, Bonnie Glaser, and I recently wrote in our book US-Taiwan Relations: Will China’s Challenge Lead to a Crisis?, “Beijing wants
Taiwan has never had a president who is not from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Could next year’s presidential election put a third-party candidate in office? The contenders who have thrown their hats into the ring are Vice President William Lai (賴清德) of the DPP, New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) of the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲). A monthly poll released by my-formosa.com on Monday showed support for Hou nosediving from 26 percent to 18.3 percent, the lowest among the three presidential hopefuls. It was a surprising
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has nominated New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) as its candidate for next year’s presidential election. The selection process was replete with controversy, mainly because the KMT has never stipulated a set of protocols for its presidential nominations. Yet, viewed from a historical perspective, the KMT has improved to some extent. There are two fundamental differences between the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP): First, the DPP believes that the Republic of China on Taiwan is a sovereign country with independent autonomy, meaning that Taiwan and China are two different entities. The KMT, on the
The US Congress in 1972 enacted Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination at schools or in education programs that receive federal funding. Since then, many barriers that blocked women from receiving an education in the US have been effectively removed. In 1970, 56.9 percent of university graduates were men and 43.1 percent were women. Twelve years later, those figures were almost the same, but in 2019, the ratios were reversed, with 57.6 percent of graduates women and 42.4 percent men. The shift is not just evident among those receiving bachelor’s degrees. The data for students obtaining associate, master’s and doctoral degrees
RSS