Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity

Biodiversity conservation is often considered to be an important co-benefit of REDD+ and other mechanisms aiming to increase carbon in biomass and soil to mitigate climate change. This reasoning is based on the assumption that the level of biodiversity and ecosystem carbon are positively correlated....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Larjavaara, M., Davenport, T.R.B., Gangga, A., Holm, S., Kanninen, M., Nguyen, D.T.
Format: Journal Article
Language:Inglés
Published: IOP Publishing 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/112145
_version_ 1855528837578752000
author Larjavaara, M.
Davenport, T.R.B.
Gangga, A.
Holm, S.
Kanninen, M.
Nguyen, D.T.
author_browse Davenport, T.R.B.
Gangga, A.
Holm, S.
Kanninen, M.
Larjavaara, M.
Nguyen, D.T.
author_facet Larjavaara, M.
Davenport, T.R.B.
Gangga, A.
Holm, S.
Kanninen, M.
Nguyen, D.T.
author_sort Larjavaara, M.
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Biodiversity conservation is often considered to be an important co-benefit of REDD+ and other mechanisms aiming to increase carbon in biomass and soil to mitigate climate change. This reasoning is based on the assumption that the level of biodiversity and ecosystem carbon are positively correlated. Firstly, however, studies have shown both positive and negative relationships. Secondly, incentives for additional ecosystem carbon do not trigger random or all potential changes in land-use, but often concentrate on one or a few specific changes that could have an opposite effect than the general trend indicates. Therefore, it is important to study biodiversity impacts of plausible measures to increase carbon. We obtained land-use scenarios on pathways to increase carbon based on 97 face-to-face interviews of local land-use experts in twelve landscapes in seven countries and five continents. We then conducted another set of face-to-face interviews with biodiversity experts yielding 2963 estimations concerning the value of land-use classes for 264 taxa of fauna and flora in these landscapes. We found positive carbon to biodiversity relationships in ten of the twelve landscapes. The biodiversity impacts of measures to increase carbon were positive in eleven of the twelve landscapes. Our results indicate that a random land-use change that increases biodiversity is also likely to increase carbon and vice versa.
format Journal Article
id CGSpace112145
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2019
publishDateRange 2019
publishDateSort 2019
publisher IOP Publishing
publisherStr IOP Publishing
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace1121452025-02-19T13:56:03Z Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity Larjavaara, M. Davenport, T.R.B. Gangga, A. Holm, S. Kanninen, M. Nguyen, D.T. biodiversity carbon ecosystem services Biodiversity conservation is often considered to be an important co-benefit of REDD+ and other mechanisms aiming to increase carbon in biomass and soil to mitigate climate change. This reasoning is based on the assumption that the level of biodiversity and ecosystem carbon are positively correlated. Firstly, however, studies have shown both positive and negative relationships. Secondly, incentives for additional ecosystem carbon do not trigger random or all potential changes in land-use, but often concentrate on one or a few specific changes that could have an opposite effect than the general trend indicates. Therefore, it is important to study biodiversity impacts of plausible measures to increase carbon. We obtained land-use scenarios on pathways to increase carbon based on 97 face-to-face interviews of local land-use experts in twelve landscapes in seven countries and five continents. We then conducted another set of face-to-face interviews with biodiversity experts yielding 2963 estimations concerning the value of land-use classes for 264 taxa of fauna and flora in these landscapes. We found positive carbon to biodiversity relationships in ten of the twelve landscapes. The biodiversity impacts of measures to increase carbon were positive in eleven of the twelve landscapes. Our results indicate that a random land-use change that increases biodiversity is also likely to increase carbon and vice versa. 2019-05-01 2021-03-08T08:19:28Z 2021-03-08T08:19:28Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/112145 en Open Access IOP Publishing Larjavaara, M., Davenport, T.R.B., Gangga, A., Holm, S., Kanninen, M., Nguyen, D.T. 2019. Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity. Environmental Research Letters, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab1554
spellingShingle biodiversity
carbon
ecosystem services
Larjavaara, M.
Davenport, T.R.B.
Gangga, A.
Holm, S.
Kanninen, M.
Nguyen, D.T.
Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity
title Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity
title_full Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity
title_fullStr Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity
title_full_unstemmed Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity
title_short Payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity
title_sort payments for adding ecosystem carbon are mostly beneficial to biodiversity
topic biodiversity
carbon
ecosystem services
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/112145
work_keys_str_mv AT larjavaaram paymentsforaddingecosystemcarbonaremostlybeneficialtobiodiversity
AT davenporttrb paymentsforaddingecosystemcarbonaremostlybeneficialtobiodiversity
AT ganggaa paymentsforaddingecosystemcarbonaremostlybeneficialtobiodiversity
AT holms paymentsforaddingecosystemcarbonaremostlybeneficialtobiodiversity
AT kanninenm paymentsforaddingecosystemcarbonaremostlybeneficialtobiodiversity
AT nguyendt paymentsforaddingecosystemcarbonaremostlybeneficialtobiodiversity