Global evidence of human well-being and biodiversity impacts of natural climate solutions

Charlotte H. Chang, James T. Erbaugh, Paola Fajardo, Luci Lu, István Molnár, Dávid Papp, Brian E. Robinson, Kemen G. Austin, Miguel Castro, Samantha H. Cheng, Susan Cook-Patton, Peter W. Ellis, Teevrat Garg, Jacob P. Hochard, Timm Kroeger, Robert I. McDonald, Erin E. Poor, Lindsey S. Smart, Andrew R. Tilman, Preston Welker, Stephen A. Wood and Yuta J. Masuda ()
Additional contact information
Charlotte H. Chang: Pomona College
James T. Erbaugh: The Nature Conservancy
Paola Fajardo: University of Oxford
Luci Lu: New Mexico State University
István Molnár: Lexunit
Dávid Papp: Lexunit
Brian E. Robinson: McGill University
Kemen G. Austin: Wildlife Conservation Society
Miguel Castro: The Nature Conservancy
Samantha H. Cheng: World Wildlife Fund
Susan Cook-Patton: The Nature Conservancy
Peter W. Ellis: The Nature Conservancy
Teevrat Garg: University of California San Diego
Jacob P. Hochard: University of Wyoming
Timm Kroeger: The Nature Conservancy
Robert I. McDonald: The Nature Conservancy
Erin E. Poor: The Nature Conservancy
Lindsey S. Smart: The Nature Conservancy
Andrew R. Tilman: USDA Forest Service
Preston Welker: The Nature Conservancy
Stephen A. Wood: The Nature Conservancy
Yuta J. Masuda: Paul G. Allen Family Foundation

Nature Sustainability, 2025, vol. 8, issue 1, 75-85

Abstract: Abstract Natural climate solutions (NCS) play a critical role in climate change mitigation. NCS can generate win–win co-benefits for biodiversity and human well-being, but they can also involve trade-offs (co-impacts). However, the massive evidence base on NCS co-benefits and possible trade-offs is poorly understood. We employ large language models to assess over 2 million published journal articles, primarily written in English, finding 257,266 relevant studies on NCS co-impacts. Using machine learning methods to extract data (for example, study location, species and other key variables), we create a global evidence map on NCS co-impacts. We find that global evidence on NCS co-impacts has grown approximately tenfold in three decades, and some of the most abundant evidence relates to NCS that have lower mitigation potential. Studies often examine multiple NCS, indicating some natural complementarities. Finally, we identify countries with high carbon mitigation potential but a relatively weak body of evidence on NCS co-impacts. Through effective methods and systematic and representative data on NCS co-impacts, we provide timely insights to inform NCS-related research and action globally.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-024-01454-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:natsus:v:8:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1038_s41893-024-01454-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/natsustain/

DOI: 10.1038/s41893-024-01454-z

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Sustainability is currently edited by Monica Contestabile

More articles in Nature Sustainability from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().