Abstract
AbstractLand use has a critical role to play in both climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation, and increasingly there have been calls to integrate policies for concurrently meeting Paris Agreement commitments and the UN decade on ecosystem restoration 2021–2030. Currently however, investment activities have been dominated by climate change mitigation activities, including through the development of carbon markets (both voluntary and compliance markets). Whilst climate change mitigation is to be welcomed, the prioritization of carbon in avoided deforestation and reforestation can lead to suboptimal or negative outcomes for biodiversity. Restoration of degraded native vegetation may provide an opportunity for concurrent production of both carbon and biodiversity benefits, by harnessing existing carbon markets without the need to trade-off biodiversity outcomes. Here we demonstrate that carbon sequestered by restoring degraded temperate woodland can pay the price of the restored biodiversity. This is shown using conservative carbon prices in an established market (during both a voluntary and compliance market phase), and the restoration price revealed by a 10-year conservation incentive payment scheme. When recovery rates are high, market prices for carbon could pay the full price of restoration, with additional independent investment needed in cases where recovery trajectories are slower. Using carbon markets to fund restoration of degraded native vegetation thereby provides a solution for constrained resources and problematic trade-offs between carbon and biodiversity outcomes. Multi-attribute markets offer the potential to greatly increase the extent of restoration for biodiversity conservation, while providing an affordable source of carbon sequestration and enhancing economic benefits to landowners.
Funder
School of Agriculture Food and Wine at The University of Adelaide
South Australian Department for Environment and Water
Australia Awards Endeavour Research Fellowship
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference80 articles.
1. Anderson-Teixeira KJ (2018) Prioritizing biodiversity and carbon. Nat Clim Change 8:667–668. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0242-6
2. Australian Government (2014) Emissions Reduction Fund white paper. Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy, Canberra, Australia. http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/government/emissions-reduction-fund/publications/erf-white-paper
3. Australian Government (2023a) Emissions Reduction Fund Auction Results. https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/auctions-results/march-2023 Accessed 18 Oct 2023
4. Australian Government (2023b) Full Carbon Accounting Model (FullCAM). https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/full-carbon-accounting-model-fullcam Accessed 19 Oct 2023
5. Bergstrom DM, Wienecke BC, van den Hoff J, Hughes L, Lindenmayer DB, Ainsworth TD, Baker CM, Bland L, Bowman DMJS, Brooks ST, Canadell JG, Constable AJ, Dafforn KA, Depledge MH, Dickson CR, Duke NC, Helmstedt KJ, Holz A, Johnson CR, McGeoch MA, Melbourne-Thomas J, Morgain R, Nicholson E, Prober SM, Raymond B, Ritchie EG, Robinson SA, Ruthrof KX, Setterfield SA, Sgrò CM, Stark JS, Travers T, Trebilco R, Ward DFL, Wardle GM, Williams KJ, Zylstra PJ, Shaw JD (2021) Combating ecosystem collapse from the tropics to the Antarctic Glob Change Biol 27:1692–1703. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15539
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献