Optimal allocation of nature-based solutions to achieve climate mitigation and adaptation goals

Nature-based solutions (NbS) can prevent further climate change and increase local communities' capacity to adapt to the current impacts of climate change. However, the benefits obtained from implementing NbS are not distributed equally across people. Thus, it is key to further understand how people are impacted when implementing NbS. We developed a multi-objective prioritization approach to identify changes in (i) the biophysical provision of ecosystem services, (ii) optimal allocation of NbS and (iii) monetary benefits when targeting climate mitigation versus climate adaptation goals. We used the increase in metric tons of carbon storage as representative of climate mitigation and the decrease in on-site and downstream tons of sediment per year as representative of climate adaptation. Planning strategies that target climate mitigation or climate adaptation goals separately represent a loss of between 30% and 60% of the maximum possible carbon sequestration or sediment retention benefits. Conversely, targeting climate mitigation and climate adaptation goals at the same time captured more than 90% of the maximum possible benefits for all objectives. Priority NbS in the mitigation planning strategy included soil and water conservation and forest rehabilitation, while priority NbS in the adaptation planning strategy included grassland rehabilitation and hill terrace improvement. Targeting mitigation and adaptation goals at the same time captures 35M USD (89% of the maximum attainable) in value of carbon restored and retained, and 2M USD (100% of the maximum attainable) of avoided maintenance costs to the KGA hydropower plant. Conversely, failing to incorporate adaptation goals when developing climate plans only captures 1M of avoided maintenance costs to the KGA hydropower plant. Our approach can be replicated in other locations to promote cost-effective investments in NbS able to secure both global and local benefits to people. This can improve the outcomes of international climate change financial schemes like the Green Climate Fund and the UN-REDD+ program. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.Jaramar Villarreal-Rosas, Jonathan R. Rhodes, Laura J. Sonter, Hugh P. Possingham, Adrian L. Vog

Trade-offs between efficiency, equality and equity in restoration for flood protection

Conservation decision-makers and practitioners increasingly strive for efficient and equitable outcomes for people and nature. However, environmental management programs commonly benefit some groups of people more than others, and very little is known about how efforts to promote equality (i.e. even distributions) and equity (i.e. proportional distributions) trade-off against efficiency (i.e. total net outcome per dollar spent). Based on a case study in the Brigalow Belt Bioregion, Australia, we quantified trade-offs between equality, equity, and efficiency in planning for flood protection. We considered optimal restoration strategies that allocate a fixed budget (a) evenly among beneficiary sectors (i.e. seeking equality among urban residents, rural communities, and the food sector), (b) evenly among local government areas (LGAs) within the Brigalow Belt (i.e. seeking spatial equality), and (c) preferentially to areas of highest socioeconomic disadvantage (i.e. seeking equity). We assessed equality using the Gini coefficient, and equity using an index of socioeconomic disadvantage. At an AUD10M budget, evenly distributing the budget among beneficiary sectors was 80% less efficient than ignoring beneficiary groups, and did not improve equality in the distribution of flood protection among beneficiary sectors. Evenly distributing the budget among LGAs ensured restoration in four areas that were otherwise ignored, with a modest reduction in efficiency (12%–25%). Directing flood protection to areas of highest socioeconomic disadvantage did not result in additional reductions in efficiency, and captured areas of high disadvantage for the rural and urban sectors that were missed otherwise. We show here that different ways of targeting equity and equality lead to quite different trade-offs with efficiency. Our approach can be used to guide transparent negotiations between beneficiaries and other stakeholders involved in a planning process.Jaramar Villarreal-Rosas, Adrian L Vogl, Laura J Sonter, Hugh P Possingham, and Jonathan R Rhode

A pantropical assessment of deforestation caused by industrial mining

Growing demand for minerals continues to drive deforestation worldwide. Tropical forests are particularly vulnerable to the environmental impacts of mining and mineral processing. Many local- to regional-scale studies document extensive, long-lasting impacts of mining on biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, the full scope of deforestation induced by industrial mining across the tropics is yet unknown. Here, we present a biome-wide assessment to show where industrial mine expansion has caused the most deforestation from 2000 to 2019. We find that 3,264 km2 of forest was directly lost due to industrial mining, with 80% occurring in only four countries: Indonesia, Brazil, Ghana, and Suriname. Additionally, controlling for other nonmining determinants of deforestation, we find that mining caused indirect forest loss in two-thirds of the investigated countries. Our results illustrate significant yet unevenly distributed and often unmanaged impacts on these biodiverse ecosystems. Impact assessments and mitigation plans of industrial mining activities must address direct and indirect impacts to support conservation of the world's tropical forests

Patterns of infringement, risk, and impact driven by coal mining permits in Indonesia

Coal mining is known for its contributions to climate change, but its impacts on the environment and human lives near mine sites are less widely recognised. This study integrates remote sensing, GIS, stakeholder interviews and extensive review of provincial data and documents to identify patterns of infringement, risk and impact driven by coal mining expansion across East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Specifically, we map and analyse patterns of mining concessions, land clearing, water cover, human settlement, and safety risks, and link them with mining governance and regulatory infractions related to coal mining permits. We show that excessive, improper permit granting and insufficient monitoring and oversight have led to deforestation, widespread overlaps of concessions with settlements, extensive boundary and regulatory violations, lacking reclamation, and numerous deaths. As the world's largest thermal coal exporter, Indonesia's elevated coal infringements, risks, and impacts translate to supply chain, sustainability, and human rights concerns for global coal markets

The impacts of land use change on flood protection services among multiple beneficiaries

Land use change drives significant declines in ecosystem services globally. However, we currently lack an understanding of how and where different beneficiaries of ecosystem services experience the impacts of land use change. This information is needed to identify possible inequalities in the delivery among beneficiaries, and to design policy interventions to address them. Here, we used a spatially explicit and disaggregated approach to ask how land use change affects the distribution of flood protection among three beneficiary sectors (urban residents, rural communities, and the food sector). Our study focused on the Brigalow Belt Bioregion of Australia – an area affected by widespread deforestation – and assessed the effect of land use change on flood protection between 2002 and 2015. We estimated flood protection per beneficiary sector as the total upstream runoff retention (supply) linked to areas where flood protection is required for sector-specific infrastructure (demand). We calculated changes in flood protection between 2002 and 2015 at the local government area scale and for each beneficiary sector. Using counterfactual scenarios, we identified whether changes in flood protection were driven by forest loss or changes in the extent of infrastructure at risk of flooding. We found net declines in flood protection for all sectors. Urban residents experienced the greatest decline (28%), followed by rural communities (15%), and the food sector (14%). Overall declines in flood protection across the whole region were driven primarily by forest loss. However, for some local government areas and beneficiaries, changes in flood protection were also driven by increases in forest cover or spatial changes in demand. Recognition that beneficiary sectors can be impacted via different drivers of change is fundamental to revealing highly impacted sectors. In turn, this information can be used to develop management strategies to address inequalities in the distribution of ecosystem services among beneficiaries.Jaramar Villarreal-Rosas, Jessie A. Wells, Laura J. Sonter, Hugh P. Possingham, Jonathan R. Rhode

A Land System Science meta-analysis suggests we underestimate intensive land uses in land use change dynamics

A meta-analysis of the Land System Science literature identified that small-scale land uses currently receive little attention in studies seeking to understand land use change dynamics. We conceptualised two ways in which small-scale land uses operate to indirectly drive more extensive land use change: (1) through modifying spatial landscape attributes and (2) through altering underlying forces driving the expansion of other land uses. We then propose the concept of ‘intensive land uses’, those that occupy a small proportion of the landscape but indirectly drive land use change dynamics through their operation. Our discussion highlights that, with the exception of roads, we currently underestimate the importance of intensive land uses in the literature and we illustrate this with a case study of a commonly disregarded intensive land use: mining. We conclude that the inclusion or exclusion of land uses from analyses should extend beyond quantifying their land use area and instead incorporate an understanding of how land uses operate within their regional context. Finally, we present three future research opportunities to incorporate intensive land uses into analyses and models of land use change dynamics

Modeling the impact of revegetation on regional water quality: a collective approach to manage the cumulative impacts of mining in the Bowen Basin, Australia

In this paper we quantify the additional water quality benefits that can be achieved through coordinated cumulative impact management. To do this we simulate coordinated and un-coordinated revegetation investments and compare their impact on achieving regional water quality goals. Our results show that coordination between multiple mining companies achieves additional benefits since prioritization is enabled across a broader range of investment opportunities. Additionally, when coordinated investment is permitted beyond the boundaries of coal mining leases, results show that additional benefits are greatly enhanced since these regions provide more rewarding investment opportunities. Results illustrate (a) how regional coordination may influence reputational benefits of investments, and (b) that coordination is beneficial when investment opportunities are unevenly distributed across the landscape. When additional benefits are achievable, we suggest that mining companies should develop collective investment projects with an understanding of how coordination influences project costs. Similarly, investment projects should be developed with an understanding of investment tradeoffs and how these may adversely impact on regional stakeholders and hence industry reputation. The mining industry has significant potential to contribute to regional wellbeing; however, land management policies must be flexible and promote incentives to enable companies to invest beyond compliance