As the climate change and biodiversity crises continue to worsen globally, countries are increasingly turning towards nature-based solutions for carbon sequestration that also provide biodiversity conservation benefits. One of these solutions is the conservation and use of large animals for rewilding. However, while this is an attractive strategy, a paper published in Nature, Climate Change this week "injects a voice of caution into these arguments of the climate benefits of wildlife", says Professor Yadvinder Malhi, Ecosystems Programme lead and paper co-author.
The authors of the paper provide insights into how this climate change mitigation strategy may in fact be a hindrance to effective conservation and climate change mitigation. They argue that the impact of large wild animals on the carbon balance of ecosystems is not yet fully understood and is largely context-dependent, with generalisations not working for this strategy. For example, African savanna elephants have been shown to reduce carbon stocks in these systems, countering the argument that wildlife increase carbon sequestration. Further, they show that the effect of this strategy may not bring about the change needed in time to avoid peak global warming. Lastly, they argue that there are numerous practical and ethical problems with monetising wildlife as carbon offsets. While there is a need to act quickly to tackle the problem of climate change and biodiversity loss, it is imperative that the strategies used are properly tested to ensure that they do indeed provide their proclaimed outcomes.
Comments