Three approaches that aim to cut the harms of agriculture — land sharing, rewilding and organic farming — risk driving up food imports and causing environmental damage overseas. An alternative approach is both effective and cheaper.
With agriculture the main driver of the habitat loss and degradation that underpin the global biodiversity crisis1, governments worldwide have implemented policies to lessen farming’s impact on the environment. Meanwhile, landowners, organizations interested in the financing of biodiversity conservation and certain non-governmental groups, including conservation bodies, have been pushing for land-use changes that benefit nature.
However, numerous studies show that some of today’s most popular conservation policies are doing little to help those species most affected by farming. What’s more, by reducing how much food is produced per unit area (yield), they are driving up food imports and thereby having an impact on wildlife overseas.
The Handbook aims to provide decision-makers with a comprehensive NBS impact assessment framework, and a robust set of indicators and methodologies to assess impacts of nature-based solutions across 12 societal challenge areas: Climate Resilience; Water Management; Natural and Climate Hazards; Green Space Management; Biodiversity; Air Quality; Place Regeneration; Knowledge and Social Capacity Building for Sustainable Urban Transformation; Participatory Planning and Governance; Social Justice and Social Cohesion; Health and Well-being; New Economic Opportunities and Green Jobs. Indicators have been developed collaboratively by representatives of 17 individual EU-funded NBS projects and collaborating institutions such as the EEA and JRC, as part of the European Taskforce for NBS Impact Assessment, with the four-fold objective of: serving as a reference for relevant EU policies and activities; orient urban practitioners in developing robust impact evaluation frameworks for nature-based solutions at different scales; expand upon the pioneering work of the EKLIPSE framework by providing a comprehensive set of indicators and methodologies; and build the European evidence base regarding NBS impacts. They reflect the state of the art in current scientific research on impacts of nature-based solutions and valid and standardized methods of assessment, as well as the state of play in urban implementation of evaluation frameworks.
The coming decades will define whether the
Amazon – home to more than 28 million inhabitants,
198 indigenous peoples, and harbouring the most
biodiverse forest, the largest freshwater reservoir
and the largest tropical bloc for climate regulation
on the planet – will become the great catalyst
for Brazil’s low-carbon economy. Or whether, in
the opposite direction, the Amazon will reach an
irreversible point of degradation, deepening current
inequalities and jeopardizing the stability and
competitiveness of the country’s entire economy.
How to guide the Legal Amazon towards a
decarbonization trajectory, transforming the region’s
economy so that it grows, generates opportunities,
values local cultures and environmental assets,
while fighting inequality and deforestation? This
question motivated the 76 researchers who signed
the New Economy for the Amazon report.
The study combines different techniques and
knowledge to present a unique depiction of the
Legal Amazon’s current economy, bringing to
light the region’s economic and environmental
relations with the rest of Brazil and the world.
The study focuses on carbon-intensive sectors
that must change course in order to become
a relevant part of a standing forest economy,
more suited to the challenges of this century.
The study further explores the role of the
bioeconomy, revealing a vigorous activity hitherto
invisible to conventional instruments used
to measure economic activity. Although it is
based on the secular form of production of the
original peoples, constantly innovated by local
technologies developed in Amazonian villages,
rural areas and cities, the bioeconomy remains
underestimated in terms of its current impact
and future potential. The work provides visibility
to these activities, demonstrating their relevance
as a solution for the region’s future economy.
The report also assesses the economic performance
of the Legal Amazon under different scenarios,
comparing the current trajectory, which has
been driving degradation, with alternative
decarbonization scenarios, especially in the
agricultural, livestock and energy sectors.
More than comparing GDP and job creation results,
as economic performance is traditionally assessed,
the New Economy for the Amazon gives shape to a
qualitative analysis of that which is wanted for the
future – and there is no future for Brazil without
the Amazon. The results show that it is impossible
for the country to reach its Paris Agreement
targets and contribute to curbing global warming
without eliminating deforestation in the Amazon.
Even assuming that deforestation is eliminated,
it will still be necessary to restore large areas of
the forest and adopt new ways of generating and
consuming energy, whether in rural or urban areas.
This report proposes a transition that generates
quality jobs and opportunities for the region’s
citizens, while driving important changes in the rest
of the country. The New Economy for the Amazon
can be the great catalyst for the decarbonization
of the entire Brazilian economy and the greatest
opportunity for economic and social development
in the country’s contemporary history.
Many cities around the world are experimenting with nature-based solutions (NbS) to address the interconnected climate-, biodiversity- and society-related challenges they are facing (referred to as the climate–biodiversity–society, or CBS, nexus), by restoring, protecting and more sustainably managing urban ecosystems. Although the application of urban NbS is flourishing, there is little synthesized evidence clarifying the contribution of NbS in addressing the intertwined CBS challenges and their capacity to encourage transformational change in urban systems worldwide. We map and analyse NbS approaches specifically for climate change adaptation across 216 urban interventions and 130 cities worldwide. Results suggest that current NbS practices are limited in how they may comprehensively address CBS challenges, particularly by accounting for multidimensional forms of climate vulnerability, social justice, the potential for collaboration between public and private sectors and diverse cobenefits. Data suggest that knowledge and practice are biased towards the Global North, under-representing key CBS challenges in the Global South, particularly in terms of climate hazards and urban ecosystems involved. Our results also point out that further research and practice are required to leverage the transformative potential of urban NbS. We provide recommendations for each of these areas to advance the practice of NbS for transformative urban adaptation within the CBS nexus.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework envisages an increasing reliance on large-scale private finance to fund biodiversity targets. We warn that this may pose contradictions in delivering conservation outcomes and propose a critical ongoing role for direct public funding of conservation and public oversight of private nature-related financial mechanisms.
Biodiversity offsetting is a globally influential policy mechanism for reconciling trade-offs between development and biodiversity loss. However, there is little robust evidence of its effectiveness. We evaluated the outcomes of a jurisdictional offsetting policy (Victoria, Australia). Offsets under Victoria’s Native Vegetation Framework (2002–2013) aimed to prevent loss and degradation of remnant vegetation, and generate gains in vegetation extent and quality. We categorised offsets into those with near-complete baseline woody vegetation cover (“avoided loss”, 2702 ha) and with incomplete cover (“regeneration”, 501 ha), and evaluated impacts on woody vegetation extent from 2008 to 2018. We used two approaches to estimate the counterfactual. First, we used statistical matching on biophysical covariates: a common approach in conservation impact evaluation, but which risks ignoring potentially important psychosocial confounders. Second, we compared changes in offsets with changes in sites that were not offsets for the study duration but were later enrolled as offsets, to partially account for self-selection bias (where landholders enrolling land may have shared characteristics affecting how they manage land). Matching on biophysical covariates, we estimated that regeneration offsets increased woody vegetation extent by 1.9%–3.6%/year more than non-offset sites (138–180 ha from 2008 to 2018) but this effect weakened with the second approach (0.3%–1.9%/year more than non-offset sites; 19–97 ha from 2008 to 2018) and disappeared when a single outlier land parcel was removed. Neither approach detected any impact of avoided loss offsets. We cannot conclusively demonstrate whether the policy goal of ‘net gain’ (NG) was achieved because of data limitations. However, given our evidence that the majority of increases in woody vegetation extent were not additional (would have happened without the scheme), a NG outcome seems unlikely. The results highlight the importance of considering self-selection bias in the design and evaluation of regulatory biodiversity offsetting policy, and the challenges of conducting robust impact evaluations of jurisdictional biodiversity offsetting policies.
Although highly climate vulnerable, Bangladesh in South Asia is known as a pioneer of climate change adaptation. Recent national policies have recognised the vital importance of community-based and locally led adaptation (LLA). Where LLA interventions have been used by international and national nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), they have proven to be both effective and widely accepted by local communities. Yet major gaps remain in implementing LLA nationally due to legislative, administrative and conceptual limitations.
Meeting Bangladesh’s ambitious national targets will require better coordination within government and with NGOs, so that each can benefit from the other. Building on recent examples, this briefing showcases existing interventions that are replicable and scalable and presents three key action areas requiring further government support. The lessons are also relevant to LLA practitioners in Bangladesh and other least developed countries.
Modern agriculture has drastically changed global landscapes and introduced pressures on wildlife populations. Policy and management of agricultural systems has changed over the last 30 years, a period characterized not only by intensive agricultural practices but also by an increasing push towards sustainability. It is crucial that we understand the long-term consequences of agriculture on beneficial invertebrates and assess if policy and management approaches recently introduced are supporting their recovery. In this study, we use large citizen science datasets to derive trends in invertebrate occupancy in Great Britain between 1990 and 2019. We compare these trends between regions of no- (0%), low- (greater than 0–50%) and high-cropland (greater than 50%) cover, which includes arable and horticultural crops. Although we detect general declines, invertebrate groups are declining most strongly in high-cropland cover regions. This suggests that even in the light of improved policy and management over the last 30 years, the way we are managing cropland is failing to conserve and restore invertebrate communities. New policy-based drivers and incentives are required to support the resilience and sustainability of agricultural ecosystems. Post-Brexit changes in UK agricultural policy and reforms under the Environment Act offer opportunities to improve agricultural landscapes for the benefit of biodiversity and society.
Despite efforts to promote sustainable agriculture, food and agricultural production remain the main driver of global biodiversity loss. However, where food production conflicts with biodiversity conservation and which products and countries contribute the most has not been as comprehensively assessed. Based on spatial models of farming and conservation priority areas, we estimate how production and consumption of 48 agricultural commodities driven by 197 countries may conflict with conservation priorities for 7,143 species. This study provides a quantitative basis to better understand and manage the large-scale transformative changes between humanity and nature through decisions concerning food consumption, production, and trade.
Demand for food products, often from international trade, has brought agricultural land use into direct competition with biodiversity. Where these potential conflicts occur and which consumers are responsible is poorly understood. By combining conservation priority (CP) maps with agricultural trade data, we estimate current potential conservation risk hotspots driven by 197 countries across 48 agricultural products. Globally, a third of agricultural production occurs in sites of high CP (CP > 0.75, max = 1.0). While cattle, maize, rice, and soybean pose the greatest threat to very high-CP sites, other low-conservation risk products (e.g., sugar beet, pearl millet, and sunflower) currently are less likely to be grown in sites of agriculture–conservation conflict. Our analysis suggests that a commodity can cause dissimilar conservation threats in different production regions. Accordingly, some of the conservation risks posed by different countries depend on their demand and sourcing patterns of agricultural commodities. Our spatial analyses identify potential hotspots of competition between agriculture and high-conservation value sites (i.e., 0.5° resolution, or ~367 to 3,077km2, grid cells containing both agriculture and high-biodiversity priority habitat), thereby providing additional information that could help prioritize conservation activities and safeguard biodiversity in individual countries and globally. A web-based GIS tool at https://agriculture.spatialfootprint.com/biodiversity/ systematically visualizes the results of our analyses.
Focused on forest management and governance, this book examines two decades of experience with Adaptive Collaborative Management (ACM), assessing both its uses and improvements needed to address global environmental issues.
The volume argues that the activation and the empowerment of local peoples are critical to addressing current environmental challenges and that this must be enhanced by linking and extending such stewardship to global and national policymakers and actors on a broader scale. This can be achieved by employing ACM’s participatory approach, characterized by conscious efforts among stakeholders to communicate, collaborate, negotiate and seek out opportunities to learn collectively about the impacts of their action. The case studies presented here reflect decades of experience working with forest communities in three Indonesian Islands and four African countries. Researchers and practitioners who participated in CIFOR’s early ACM work had the rare opportunity to return to their research sites decades later to see what has happened. These authors reflect critically on their own experience and local site conditions to glean insights that guide us in more effectively addressing climate change and other forest-related challenges. They showcase how global and regional actors will have to work more closely with smallholders, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, recognizing the key local roles in forest stewardship.
This book will be of great interest to students, scholars and practitioners working in the fields of conservation, forest management, community development, natural resource management and development studies more broadly.
The stability and resilience of the Earth system and human well-being are inseparably linked yet their interdependencies are generally under-recognized; consequently, they are often treated independently. Here, we use modelling and literature assessment to quantify safe and just Earth system boundaries (ESBs) for climate, the biosphere, water and nutrient cycles, and aerosols at global and subglobal scales. We propose ESBs for maintaining the resilience and stability of the Earth system (safe ESBs) and minimizing exposure to significant harm to humans from Earth system change (a necessary but not sufficient condition for justice). The stricter of the safe or just boundaries sets the integrated safe and just ESB. Our findings show that justice considerations constrain the integrated ESBs more than safety considerations for climate and atmospheric aerosol loading. Seven of eight globally quantified safe and just ESBs and at least two regional safe and just ESBs in over half of global land area are already exceeded. We propose that our assessment provides a quantitative foundation for safeguarding the global commons for all people now and into the future.
Global biodiversity loss has been disproportionately driven by consumption of people in rich nations. The concept of ‘loss and damage’ — familiar from international agreements on climate change — should be considered for the effects of biodiversity loss in countries of the Global South.
There is potential for nature-based solutions (NbS) to contribute to climate-resilient development (CRD) due to their integrated approach to mitigation, adaptation, and sustainable development. However, despite alignment between NbS and CRD’s objectives, realization of this potential is not guaranteed. A CRD pathways (CRDP) approach helps to analyze the complexities of the relationship between CRD and NbS, and a climate justice lens enables the identification of the multiple ways that NbS can support or undermine CRD by foregrounding the politics inherent in deciding between NbS trade-offs. We use stylized vignettes of potential NbS to examine how the dimensions of climate justice reveal the potential of NbS to contribute to CRDP. We consider tensions in NbS projects between local and global climate objectives, and the potential for NbS framing to reinforce inequalities or unsustainable practices. Ultimately, we present a framework that combines climate justice and CRDP in an analytical tool for understanding the potential for a NbS to support CRD in specific places.
The northern peatland carbon sink plays a vital role in climate regulation; however, the future of the carbon sink is uncertain, in part, due to the changing interactions of peatlands and wildfire. Here, we use empirical datasets from natural, degraded and restored peatlands in non-permafrost boreal and temperate regions to model net ecosystem exchange and methane fluxes, integrating peatland degradation status, wildfire combustion and post-fire dynamics. We find that wildfire processes reduced carbon uptake in pristine peatlands by 35% and further enhanced emissions from degraded peatlands by 10%. The current small net sink is vulnerable to the interactions of peatland degraded area, burn rate and peat burn severity. Climate change impacts accelerated carbon losses, where increased burn severity and burn rate reduced the carbon sink by 38% and 65%, respectively, by 2100. However, our study demonstrates the potential for active peatland restoration to buffer these impacts.
Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana, the world’s largest producers of cocoa, account for two thirds of the global cocoa production. In both countries, cocoa is the primary perennial crop, providing income to almost two million farmers. Yet precise maps of the area planted with cocoa are missing, hindering accurate quantification of expansion in protected areas, production and yields and limiting information available for improved sustainability governance. Here we combine cocoa plantation data with publicly available satellite imagery in a deep learning framework and create high-resolution maps of cocoa plantations for both countries, validated in situ. Our results suggest that cocoa cultivation is an underlying driver of over 37% of forest loss in protected areas in Côte d’Ivoire and over 13% in Ghana, and that official reports substantially underestimate the planted area (up to 40% in Ghana). These maps serve as a crucial building block to advance our understanding of conservation and economic development in cocoa-producing regions.
The risks from climate change are ever-growing, especially in more vulnerable and exposed regions such as coastlines. The rise in sea level and increase in the frequency and intensity of climate-induced coastal hazards are threatening the increasing coastal populations. Brazil, with its 8,500 km of coast, is one of the countries most at risk from coastal flooding and erosion. Nature-based solutions have been suggested as climate adaptation strategies with the greatest potential to counteract coastal hazards stemming from sea-level rise and safeguard coastal cities. However, there is still a knowledge gap in the scientific literature on the effectiveness of nature-based solutions, especially at large spatial scales in Central and South America. Here, we assessed the risks from climate-induced hazards of coastal erosion and flooding related to sea-level rise on the Brazilian coast, and the effectiveness of nature-based solutions as climate adaptation strategies. We reveal that nature-based shoreline protection can reduce by 2.5 times the risks to the Brazilian coastline. The loss of existing natural habitats would substantially increase the area and population at risk from these climate-induced hazards. Worrisomely, legal mechanisms to protect these natural habitats are few and being weakened. Only 10% of the coastal natural habitats are within protected areas, and these alone do not ensure coastal protection, as our results indicate that the loss of unprotected natural habitats has about the same risk as the total absence of natural habitats. Our results warn of the severe consequences of the continued loss of natural habitats along the coast. Thus, actions towards the maintenance and protection of coastal habitats are paramount for climate adaptation and to ensure the well-being and livelihoods of coastal populations. Brazil has a central role in demonstrating the benefits of strategies based on nature-based solutions for shoreline protection, favoring their implementation worldwide. We provide both the natural habitat maps and the maps with model results with spatial and numerical information so readers can explore the relations between the natural habitats and coastal risk indexes at a sub-national level and foster their use by local stakeholders.
Forest restoration requires monitoring to assess above- and belowground communities, which is challenging due to practical and resource limitations. Ecological acoustic survey methods––also known as “ecoacoustics”––are increasingly available and provide a rapid, effective, and non-intrusive means of monitoring biodiversity. Aboveground ecoacoustics is widespread, but soil ecoacoustics has yet to be utilized in restoration despite its demonstrable effectiveness at detecting soniferous soil meso- and macrofauna. This study applied ecoacoustic tools and indices (Acoustic Complexity Index, Normalized Difference Soundscape Index, and Bioacoustic Index) to measure belowground (and aboveground as secondary) biodiversity in a forest restoration site spanning two age classes. We collected n = 198 belowground acoustic samples and n = 180 aboveground samples from three recently deforested (felled <3 years ago) and three deciduous forest plots undergoing restoration (for the last 30–51 years) across three monthly visits in South Yorkshire, U.K. We used a belowground sampling device and sound-attenuation chamber to record soil communities and passive acoustic monitoring to record aboveground sounds. We found that restored plot acoustic complexity and diversity were significantly higher than deforested plots in the sound-attenuation chamber, but there were no inter-plot differences in in-situ soil or aboveground samples. We also found that restored plots had a significantly greater high-frequency to low-frequency ratio (suggesting higher biophony to anthrophony ratios) for in-situ and sound chamber soil but no association for aboveground samples. Our results suggest that ecoacoustics has immense potential to monitor belowground biodiversity, adding to the restoration ecologist’s toolkit and supporting global ecosystem recovery.
Biodiversity conservation supporting a global sustainability transformation must be inclusive, equitable, just and embrace plural values. The conservation basic income (CBI), a proposed unconditional cash transfer to individuals residing in important conservation areas, is a potentially powerful mechanism for facilitating this radical shift in conservation. This analysis provides comprehensive projections for potential gross costs of global CBI using spatial analyses of three plausible future conservation scenarios. Gross costs vary widely, depending on the areas and populations included, from US$351 billion to US$6.73 trillion annually. A US$5.50 per day CBI in existing protected areas in low- and middle-income countries would cost US$478 billion annually. These costs are large compared with current government conservation spending (~US$133 billion in 2020) but represent a potentially sensible investment in safeguarding incalculable social and natural values and the estimated US$44 trillion in global economic production dependent on nature.
Laws that establish legal rights for nature are being pursued in a growing number of countries to protect the environment. The success or failure of these rights-of-nature laws can depend in large part on how scientific concepts and expertise have been used to develop, interpret, and implement them. Epstein et al. reviewed key scientific aspects of rights-of-nature laws and the use of science in court decisions that have interpreted them. They examined the “right to evolve” to illustrate challenges in applying scientific concepts in rights-of-nature laws and identify some possible solutions.
Brazil’s nine Amazonian states, here collectively referred to as Amazônia, include some of the world’s richest ecosystems, including the Amazon rainforest and parts of the Cerrado savanna and Pantanal wetlands. The region is also among Brazil’s poorest socioeconomically. As a result, sustainable, inclusive development of Amazônia calls for raising living standards while protecting natural forests. A Balancing Act for Brazil’s Amazonian States: An Economic Memorandum explores how a recalibrated development approach can achieve these goals. In the shorter term, there is an urgent need to halt deforestation–a massive destruction of natural wealth that poses risks to the climate and economy. Amazônia is Brazil’s deforestation hot spot, and the Amazon rainforest is approaching tipping points into broad and permanent forest loss. Reversing the recent increase in deforestation requires stronger land and forest governance, including land regularization and more effective law enforcement. In the longer term, both Brazil and Amazônia need a new growth model. This model would be anchored in productivity rather than resource extraction and it would diversify the export basket beyond commodities. A more balanced structural transformation requires the lagging urban sectors, such as manufacturing and services, to step up to promote economic growth, reduce pressure on the agricultural frontier, and generate jobs for Brazil and Amazônia’s largely urban populations. The public-good value of Amazônia’s forests could generate conservation finance linked to verifiable reductions in deforestation. Such financing would support a new development approach, combining forest protection, productivity, balanced structural transformation, sustainable production techniques (including the bioeconomy), and other measures to address the needs of Amazônia’s urban and rural populations. This approach must also heed the needs and interests of Amazônia’s traditional communities. Given both the value and the fragility of Amazônia’s ecosystems, coupled with considerable socioeconomic local needs, the stakes are high—for Amazônia, Brazil, and the world.
The consistent monitoring of trees both inside and outside of forests is key to sustainable land management. Current monitoring systems either ignore trees outside forests or are too expensive to be applied consistently across countries on a repeated basis. Here we use the PlanetScope nanosatellite constellation, which delivers global very high-resolution daily imagery, to map both forest and non-forest tree cover for continental Africa using images from a single year. Our prototype map of 2019 (RMSE = 9.57%, bias = −6.9%). demonstrates that a precise assessment of all tree-based ecosystems is possible at continental scale, and reveals that 29% of tree cover is found outside areas previously classified as tree cover in state-of-the-art maps, such as in croplands and grassland. Such accurate mapping of tree cover down to the level of individual trees and consistent among countries has the potential to redefine land use impacts in non-forest landscapes, move beyond the need for forest definitions, and build the basis for natural climate solutions and tree-related studies.
European forests are facing multiple natural and anthropogenic pressures that are expected to become more severe in the next decades. Tree diversity is projected to decline in many areas across the continent. How this will affect the provision of forest services remains an open question, whose answer depends, among others, on the practical and theoretical challenges of incorporating assisted migration into climate adaptation strategies. Here, we tackle the issue by combining a large dataset of tree species occurrences, future climatic projections, and data on tree functional traits and tree-specific forest services into a novel modelling framework.
Land abandonment and rural depopulation are accelerating globally. In less than 50 years, the proportion of the human population living in rural areas has decreased by ∼25% (1). Abandonment takes many shapes, and no single definition has been accepted. Most often, land abandonment refers to a termination of agricultural activities for at least 5 years (to differentiate it from fallow land) and is quantified at the crop-field scale (2, 3). Other types of abandonment have received less attention, such as abandoned pastures, forestry areas, mines, factories, and entire human settlements. Here, “land abandonment” broadly captures the end of human activities. Since the 1950s, abandoned land has accumulated to up to 400 million ha globally (3), an area roughly half the size of Australia. Given this scale, there is an urgent need to develop a vision of how to achieve balanced benefits for biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services, and people’s livelihoods on abandoned land.
Nature-based solutions (NbS) have been gradually valued by various countries because they have great potential for contributing to the Paris Agreement goals and carbon neutrality and meanwhile render synergies in various dimensions. Currently, the evaluation of NbS policies in the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) is still quite lacking. Based on the NDCs documents of 190 countries and the initial subcategories of related researches, this paper proposes a NbS analysis framework covering targets, pathways, policies, and synergies. Then examining the characteristics of NbS policies and actions of 190 Parties by ecosystems, including forests, farmlands, grasslands, coastal zones & wetlands, urban ecosystems, and other ecosystems with the framework. The results show that: 1) NbS has not yet become the mainstream measure worldwide to combat climate change while developing countries pay more attention to NbS than developed countries; 2) Current NbS targets set by 131 countries(about 69 %) are qualitative and 59 countries(about 31 %) for quantitative. There is no robust and accurate quantitative indicator system for NbS; 3) NbS pathways mentioned by 156 countries (about 82 %) are unevenly distributed in ecosystems and concentrated in forest and farmland ecosystems; 4) Just over a third of the 190 countries (about 35 %) don’t apply any NbS pathways with scientific foundations and only 27 parties (about 14 %) announce strengthening the related research of NbS pathways in supporting policies in the future. The scientific foundations of NbS are undervalued and more NbS pathways with reliable scientific foundations should be implemented; 5) A variety of policies, predominantly planning and law, have been adopted by 130 countries (about 68 %) to ensure NbS actions. Other types of policies still need to be further improved, covering financing, information system &research, and capacity building; 6) Funding needs are unclear and financing mechanisms are imperfect for NbS actions. Only about 1/6 of the countries have suggested estimated funding needs of NbS actions; 7) Only 18 countries (about 9.5 %) have recognized the synergistic benefits of NbS in economic, social, and environmental dimensions, and there are relatively limited methodologies for the assessment of NbS synergies. At last, suggestions are put forward to further promote NbS contributions to tackling climate change.
Old growth forests continue to decline.
