@article{RiahiBertramHuppmannetal.2021,
  author    = {Riahi, Keywan and Bertram, Christoph and Huppmann, Daniel and Rogelj, Joeri and Bosetti, Valentina and Cabardos, Anique-Marie and Deppermann, Andre and Drouet, Laurent and Frank, Stefan and Fricko, Oliver and Fujimori, Shinichiro and Harmsen, Mathijs and Hasegawa, Tomoko and Krey, Volker and Luderer, Gunnar and Paroussos, Leonidas and Schaeffer, Roberto and Weitzel, Matthias and van der Zwaan, Bob and Vrontisi, Zoi and Longa, Francesco Dalla and Despr{\´e}s, Jacques and Fosse, Florian and Fragkiadakis, Kostas and Gusti, Mykola and Humpen{\"o}der, Florian and Keramidas, Kimon and Kishimoto, Paul and Kriegler, Elmar and Meinshausen, Malte and Nogueira, Larissa Pupo and Oshiro, Ken and Popp, Alexander and Rochedo, Pedro R. R. and {\"U}nl{\"u}, Gamze and van Ruijven, Bas and Takakura, Junya and Tavoni, Massimo and van Vuuren, Detlef P. and Zakeri, Behnam},
  title     = {Cost and attainability of meeting stringent climate targets without overshoot},
  series = {Nature climate change},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Nature climate change},
  number    = {12},
  publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1758-678X},
  doi       = {10.1038/s41558-021-01215-2},
  pages     = {1063 -- 1069},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Global emissions scenarios play a critical role in the assessment of strategies to mitigate climate change. The current scenarios, however, are criticized because they feature strategies with pronounced overshoot of the global temperature goal, requiring a long-term repair phase to draw temperatures down again through net-negative emissions. Some impacts might not be reversible. Hence, we explore a new set of net-zero CO2 emissions scenarios with limited overshoot. We show that upfront investments are needed in the near term for limiting temperature overshoot but that these would bring long-term economic gains. Our study further identifies alternative configurations of net-zero CO2 emissions systems and the roles of different sectors and regions for balancing sources and sinks. Even without net-negative emissions, CO2 removal is important for accelerating near-term reductions and for providing an anthropogenic sink that can offset the residual emissions in sectors that are hard to abate.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RoeStreckBeachetal.2021,
  author    = {Roe, Stephanie and Streck, Charlotte and Beach, Robert and Busch, Jonah and Chapman, Melissa and Daioglou, Vassilis and Deppermann, Andre and Doelman, Jonathan and Emmet-Booth, Jeremy and Engelmann, Jens and Fricko, Oliver and Frischmann, Chad and Funk, Jason and Grassi, Giacomo and Griscom, Bronson and Havlik, Petr and Hanssen, Steef and Humpen{\"o}der, Florian and Landholm, David and Lomax, Guy and Lehmann, Johannes and Mesnildrey, Leah and Nabuurs, Gert-Jan and Popp, Alexander and Rivard, Charlotte and Sanderman, Jonathan and Sohngen, Brent and Smith, Pete and Stehfest, Elke and Woolf, Dominic and Lawrence, Deborah},
  title     = {Land-based measures to mitigate climate change},
  series = {Global change biology},
  volume    = {27},
  journal   = {Global change biology},
  number    = {23},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {1365-2486},
  doi       = {10.1111/gcb.15873},
  pages     = {6025 -- 6058},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Land-based climate mitigation measures have gained significant attention and importance in public and private sector climate policies. Building on previous studies, we refine and update the mitigation potentials for 20 land-based measures in >200 countries and five regions, comparing "bottom-up" sectoral estimates with integrated assessment models (IAMs). We also assess implementation feasibility at the country level. Cost-effective (available up to \$100/tCO2eq) land-based mitigation is 8-13.8 GtCO2eq yr-1 between 2020 and 2050, with the bottom end of this range representing the IAM median and the upper end representing the sectoral estimate. The cost-effective sectoral estimate is about 40\% of available technical potential and is in line with achieving a 1.5°C pathway in 2050. Compared to technical potentials, cost-effective estimates represent a more realistic and actionable target for policy. The cost-effective potential is approximately 50\% from forests and other ecosystems, 35\% from agriculture, and 15\% from demand-side measures. The potential varies sixfold across the five regions assessed (0.75-4.8 GtCO2eq yr-1) and the top 15 countries account for about 60\% of the global potential. Protection of forests and other ecosystems and demand-side measures present particularly high mitigation efficiency, high provision of co-benefits, and relatively lower costs. The feasibility assessment suggests that governance, economic investment, and socio-cultural conditions influence the likelihood that land-based mitigation potentials are realized. A substantial portion of potential (80\%) is in developing countries and LDCs, where feasibility barriers are of greatest concern. Assisting countries to overcome barriers may result in significant quantities of near-term, low-cost mitigation while locally achieving important climate adaptation and development benefits. Opportunities among countries vary widely depending on types of land-based measures available, their potential co-benefits and risks, and their feasibility. Enhanced investments and country-specific plans that accommodate this complexity are urgently needed to realize the large global potential from improved land stewardship.},
  language  = {en}
}