Planting trees is important, but reforestation can help, too

The story of global reforestation is far from a simple one; it’s a complex interplay of local economies, international industries, environmental stewardship, and the incessant forward march of climate change.

Imagine the forests as our planet’s lungs – inhaling carbon dioxide and exhaling oxygen.

But it seems the balance has been off for a while, and our planet is gasping for air. Today, however, a study from Duke University breathes new life into this narrative.

Power of reforestation

At the forefront of this research is Jeff Vincent, a professor of forest economics and management at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment.

Alongside lead author Jonah Busch, a Climate Economics Fellow at Conservation International, Vincent and his team have advanced a fresh perspective on the cost and impact of reforestation.

Their study reveals fascinating facts about the power of a combined approach to reforestation.

Reforestation sites

Simply put, reforestation involves growing back trees on lands where human activity has decimated original forests.

Presently, most reforestation programs across low- and middle-income countries focus solely on tree planting.

However, this study uncovers that nearly half of all suitable reforestation sites would be more effective in carbon sequestration if forests were allowed to regrow naturally.

Is it all about the wood?

“Wood markets are one key to large-scale reforestation,” Vincent states.

In fact, the study shows that in more than half the areas studied, timber plantations sequester carbon at a lower cost than naturally regenerated forests.

Could the key to reversing deforestation lie in our local wood markets?

Mix is the trick

According to Vincent, a combination of planted and naturally regenerated forests often offers the best solution for balancing society’s demands on forests.

Yet, Jonah Busch notes that this more biodiversity-rich method of reforestation is enormously underutilized.

To illustrate this, the researchers propose another method to sequester more carbon: replanting some forest regions while allowing nature to do her thing in others.

As it turns out, it’s not an ‘either-or’ situation – a mixed approach offers the most effective strategy to combat climate change.

Paying for the planet’s lungs

Companies and organizations seeking to offset their greenhouse gas emissions can help incentivize reforestation through carbon payments.

“Carbon payments can provide a sufficient reforestation incentive on their own in some locations,” Vincent explains.

He also adds that the net cost of carbon sequestration could be reduced in other places by income from sustainable wood harvests.

In essence, the total cost of capturing and storing carbon dioxide, minus any benefits gained from the process, can be significantly lowered through projects that generate income from timber sales or wood products.

Implementation of reforestation

Implementing the findings from Duke University’s study requires a coordinated effort among governments, NGOs, and local communities.

Policy frameworks must be developed to support mixed approaches to reforestation, providing guidelines for sustainable forestry and natural regeneration methods.

Furthermore, educational campaigns can raise awareness about the importance of biodiversity and the necessity of maintaining ecological balance.

Engaging local communities in the reforestation process ensures that initiatives are culturally sensitive and economically viable, ultimately leading to more successful outcomes in restoring our planet’s green spaces.

Factors affecting reforestation costs

Whether natural growth or planting trees is more cost-effective in a certain location depends on several factors.

These include forest growth rates, proximity to natural seed sources for regeneration and wood-processing mills for plantations, the value of land in its current use, and the costs of each method.

In their study, the team modeled these factors for the two reforestation methods and produced a world map showing the most cost-effective reforestation method by location.

“We hope our map will help governments, companies, and other organizations use their forest restoration budgets more efficiently,” Vincent concludes.

And so do we. After all, it’s not just about the trees. It’s about the air we breathe, the climate we wish to preserve, and the planet we hope to pass onto our children.

The study is published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates. 

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–