The world has pass away a third of the forest since the last ice age, and an estimated 15% of global greenhouse gases still come from deforestation and forest degradation.
Now, a new pledge made at the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow last month hopes to change this stark picture. The Glasgow leaders’ declaration on forests and land use, signed by key forest nations, aims to reduce deforestation to zero by 2030. The pledge has raised hope. that the world will see a new impetus to limit the devastating impact of deforestation.
Simon Lewis, a researcher in the science of global change at the University of Leeds and University College London, said: “If we can bring deforestation to zero, that would be an amazing achievement. “Also about carbon […] and for biodiversity and conservation, because two-thirds of the world’s species are in the world’s tropical forests. ”
But there are also dire warnings to the commitment, including the fact that similar claims have been made before — often with little effect.
New pledge about what?
It was announced at COP in early November and signed by 141 countries — about 72% of them — including Brazil, Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, three out of four countries with the most rainforests in 2020.
The countries pledged to “work together to prevent and reverse deforestation and land degradation by 2030” while “bringing about sustainable development and promoting inclusive rural transformation”. Crucially, it doesn’t qualify this by just referring to “illegal” deforestation like many other pledges, which means it’s trying to cover up all deforestation, not just Logging or clearing in violation of local laws.
Commitment is backed up by $12 billion in public funds and $7.2 billion in private capital. In this range, $1.7 billion will go to support the land rights of indigenous peoples and local communities and support their role as guardians of the forest.
However, Lewis says there is still ambiguity about whether the pledge means “zero” deforestation or “zero” deforestation. No deforestation means no loss of old-growth forests anywhere. But zero deforestation means that old-growth forests can still be cleared, as long as new forests are planted at the same rate. “The former is much better for carbon, and also better for biodiversity,” explains Lewis.
What impact could it have?
It’s hard to overstate the impact of ending deforestation on everything from climate change and water security to wildlife and the welfare of indigenous communities.
One analysis of the World Resources Institute (WRI) found that ending deforestation by 2030 in all signatories to the pledge would avoid the loss of 33 million hectares of forest, an area equivalent to Malaysia. It would also avoid emitting 19 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO2e), about twice as much China’s annual emissions.
“It would be a real contribution to reducing emissions overall,” said Adriana Ramos, political and legal coordinator at the Instituto Socioambiental (ISA) in Brazil. “For example, when Brazil, reduce emissions from deforestation, which is the largest emission reduction worldwide. Reducing deforestation is the cheapest and I would say almost the easiest way to reduce emissions. ”
