Hedging our bet on forest permanence for the economic viability of climate targets

Michael G. Windisch (), Florian Humpenöder, Leon Merfort, Nico Bauer, Gunnar Luderer, Jan Philipp Dietrich, Jens Heinke, Christoph Müller, Gabriel Abrahao, Hermann Lotze-Campen and Alexander Popp
Additional contact information
Michael G. Windisch: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Florian Humpenöder: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Leon Merfort: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Nico Bauer: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Gunnar Luderer: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Jan Philipp Dietrich: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Jens Heinke: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Christoph Müller: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Gabriel Abrahao: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Hermann Lotze-Campen: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association
Alexander Popp: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - Member of the Leibniz Association

Nature Communications, 2025, vol. 16, issue 1, 1-10

Abstract: Abstract Achieving the Paris Agreement’s CO2 emission reduction goals heavily relies on enhancing carbon storage and sequestration in forests globally. Yet, the increasing vulnerability of carbon stored in forests to both climate change and human intervention is often neglected in current mitigation strategies. Our study explores modelled interactions between key emission sectors, indicating that accelerated decarbonization could meet climate objectives despite forest carbon losses due to disturbances. However, delaying action on forest carbon loss by just five years consistently doubles the additional mitigation costs and efforts across key sectors, regardless of the assessed forest disturbance rates. Moreover, these myopic responses to forest carbon loss are as stringent, or even more demanding, than immediate responses to twice the forest disturbance rate. Our results underline the urgent need to monitor and safeguard forests for the economic feasibility of the Paris Agreement’s climate goals.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-57607-x Abstract (text/html)

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:natcom:v:16:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-025-57607-x

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

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-57607-x

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Communications is currently edited by Nathalie Le Bot, Enda Bergin and Fiona Gillespie

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