Addressing critiques refines global estimates of reforestation potential for climate change mitigation

Kurt A. Fesenmyer (), Erin E. Poor, Drew E. Terasaki Hart, Joseph W. Veldman, Forrest Fleischman, Pooja Choksi, Sally Archibald, Mohammed Armani, Matthew E. Fagan, Evan C. Fricke, César Terrer, Natalia Hasler, Christopher A. Williams, Peter W. Ellis and Susan C. Cook-Patton ()
Additional contact information
Kurt A. Fesenmyer: The Nature Conservancy
Erin E. Poor: The Nature Conservancy
Drew E. Terasaki Hart: The Nature Conservancy
Joseph W. Veldman: Texas A&M University
Forrest Fleischman: University of Minnesota
Pooja Choksi: University of Minnesota
Sally Archibald: University of the Witwatersrand
Mohammed Armani: Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology
Matthew E. Fagan: University of Maryland
Evan C. Fricke: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
César Terrer: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Natalia Hasler: Clark University
Christopher A. Williams: Clark University
Peter W. Ellis: The Nature Conservancy
Susan C. Cook-Patton: The Nature Conservancy

Nature Communications, 2025, vol. 16, issue 1, 1-13

Abstract: Abstract Reforestation is a prominent climate change mitigation strategy, but available global maps of reforestation potential are widely criticized and highly variable, which limits their ability to provide robust estimates of both the locations and total area of opportunity. Here we develop global maps that address common critiques, build on a review of 89 reforestation maps created at multiple scales, and present eight reforestation scenarios with varying objectives, including providing ecosystem services, minimizing social conflicts, and delivering government policies. Across scenarios, we find up to 195 Mha (million hectares) are available (2225 TgCO2e (teragrams of carbon dioxide equivalent) per year total net mitigation potential), which is 71–92% smaller than previous estimates because of conservative modeling choices, incorporation of safeguards, and use of recent, high-resolution datasets. This area drops as low as 6 Mha (53 TgCO2e per year total net mitigation potential) if only statutorily protected areas are targeted. Few locations simultaneously achieve multiple objectives, suggesting that a mix of lands and restoration motivations will be needed to capitalize on the many potential benefits of reforestation.

Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-59799-8 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_s41467-025-59799-8

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

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-59799-8

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 ().