Search
Co-benefits of forest carbon projects in Southeast Asia

February 10, 2022 | Nature Sustainability | Source |

Introduction: An international research team led by principal investigators from University of Adelaide in Australia and National University of Singapore finds forest carbon projects in Southeast Asia could offer substantial benefits beyond climate change mitigation. 

Key findings: By protecting 58% of threatened forests as carbon projects, the region could prevent 835 million tons of CO2 emissions annually, support pollination for agriculture benefiting around 324,000 people, retain 78% of nitrogen pollutants in watersheds, and conserve 25 million hectares of Key Biodiversity Areas. With 196 million hectares of tropical forests, many under threat, there's significant potential for these projects to contribute to climate goals, like those in the Paris Agreement.

Forests also play a crucial role in providing essential services such as pollination, water quality regulation, and biodiversity conservation. For example, forests near agricultural lands support pollinators crucial for crop production, and they help maintain water quality by absorbing nitrogen pollutants. Additionally, protecting forests helps conserve biodiversity hotspots.

The financial viability of these projects is influenced by carbon pricing. At a conservative carbon price of $5.80 per ton of CO2, about 114 million hectares of forests could be protected. If carbon prices increase, the benefits—such as climate mitigation, crop pollination, water quality, and biodiversity conservation—would also rise. Investments in forest conservation could thus align with global climate and development goals, including those related to food security, clean water, and sustainable development. Overall, forest carbon projects offer a financially viable and effective approach to addressing a range of socio-economic and environmental challenges.

Figure | Co-benefits attained within profitable forest carbon areas at a carbon price of US$5.80 per tCO2e. a, Climate mitigation potential. b, Pollination service. c, Freshwater service. d, KBAs. e, Spatial overlay of any level of co-benefits attained within profitable forest carbon areas. Yellow represents areas that are profitable for carbon, areas in blue provide one co-benefit in addition to carbon, areas in green provide two other co-benefits and areas in pink provide three co-benefits in addition to carbon.

Viewed Articles
Co-benefits of forest carbon projects in Southeast Asia
February 10, 2022 | Nature Sustainability | Source | Introduction: An international research team led by principal investigators from University of Adelaide in Australia and National University of Sin
Read More
Pre- and post-production processes increasingly dominate greenhouse gas emissions from agri-food systems
April 14, 2022 | Earth System Science Data | Source | Introduction: Traditional assessments have underestimated global GHG emissions from agrifood systems by focusing mainly on farm-level production a
Rice paddy soils are a quantitatively important carbon store according to a global synthesis
August 06, 2021 | Communications Earth & Environment |  Introduction: Rice paddies are widely discussed for methane emissions, but their role as carbon stores is less consistently quantified. Led by C
Optimized agricultural management reduces global cropland nitrogen losses to air and water
November 12, 2024 | Nature Food | Source |  Introduction: While nitrogen (N) inputs are essential for crop productivity, N losses from croplands contribute to major environmental issues, including cli
A hybrid sustainability performance measurement approach for fresh food cold supply chains
April 20, 2023 | Journal of Cleaner Production | Source |  Introduction: Fresh food cold supply chains (CSCs) in developing countries face major sustainability issues, including food waste, high energ
Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of perishable food products delivered by the cold chain in China
June 20, 2021 | Journal of Cleaner Production | Source | Introduction: Researchers from the University of Michigan (USA) analyzed the lifecycle GHG emissions of perishable foods—vegetables, fruits, me
TOP