Maximizing tree carbon in croplands and grazing lands while sustaining yields.

BACKGROUND

Integrating trees into agricultural landscapes can provide climate mitigation and improves soil fertility, biodiversity habitat, water quality, water flow, and human health, but these benefits must be achieved without reducing agriculture yields. Prior estimates of carbon dioxide (CO) removal potential from increasing tree cover in agriculture assumed a moderate level of woody biomass can be integrated without reducing agricultural production. Instead, we used a Delphi expert elicitation to estimate maximum tree covers for 53 regional cropping and grazing system categories while safeguarding agricultural yields. Comparing these values to baselines and applying spatially explicit tree carbon accumulation rates, we develop global maps of the additional CO removal potential of Tree Cover in Agriculture. We present here the first global spatially explicit datasets calibrated to regional grazing and croplands, estimating opportunities to increase tree cover without reducing yields, therefore avoiding a major cost barrier to restoration: the opportunity cost of CO removal at the expense of agriculture yields.

RESULTS

The global estimated maximum technical CO removal potential is split between croplands (1.86 PgCO yr) and grazing lands (1.45 PgCO yr), with large variances. Tropical/subtropical biomes account for 54% of cropland (2.82 MgCO ha yr, SD = 0.45) and 73% of grazing land potential (1.54 MgCO ha yr, SD = 0.47). Potentials seem to be driven by two characteristics: the opportunity for increase in tree cover and bioclimatic factors affecting CO removal rates.

CONCLUSIONS

We find that increasing tree cover in 2.6 billion hectares of agricultural landscapes may remove up to 3.3 billion tons of CO per year - more than the global annual emissions from cars. These Natural Climate Solutions could achieve the Bonn Challenge and add 793 million trees to agricultural landscapes. This is significant for global climate mitigation efforts because it represents a large, relatively inexpensive, additional CO removal opportunity that works within agricultural landscapes and has low economic and social barriers to rapid global scaling. There is an urgent need for policy and incentive systems to encourage the adoption of these practices.