@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}
}
@article{KramerBouriaudFeindtetal.2022,
  author    = {Kramer, Koen and Bouriaud, Laura and Feindt, Peter H. and van Wassenaer, Lan and Glanemann, Nicole and Hanewinkel, Marc and van der Heide, Martijn and Hengeveld, Geerten M. and Hoogstra, Marjanke and Ingram, Verina and Levermann, Anders and Lindner, Marcus and M{\´a}ty{\´a}s, Csaba and Mohren, Frits and Muys, Bart and Nabuurs, Gert-Jan and Palahi, Marc and Polman, Nico and Reyer, Christopher P. O. and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Seidl, Rupert and de Vries, Wim and Werners, Saskia E. and Winkel, Georg and Yousefpour, Rasoul},
  title     = {Perspective Roadmap to develop a stress test for forest ecosystem services supply},
  series = {One Earth},
  volume    = {5},
  journal   = {One Earth},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {2590-3330},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.oneear.2021.12.009},
  pages     = {25 -- 34},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Forests play a key role in a bio-based economy by providing renewable materials, mitigating climate change, and accommodating biodiversity. However, forests experience massive increases in stresses in their ecological and socioeconomic environments, threatening forest ecosystem services supply. Alleviating those stresses is hampered by conflicting and disconnected governance arrangements, competing interests and claims, and rapid changes in technology and social demands. Identifying which stresses threaten forest ecosystem services supply and which factors hamper their alleviation requires stakeholders' perceptions. Stakeholder-oriented stress tests for the supply of forest ecosystem services are therefore necessary but are not yet available. This perspective presents a roadmap to develop a stress test tailored to multiple stakeholders' needs and demands across spatial scales. We provide the Cascade and Resilience Rosetta, with accompanying performance- and resilience indicators, as tools to facilitate development of the stress test. The application of the stress test will facilitate the transition toward a bio-based economy in which healthy and diverse forests provide sustainable and resilient ecosystem services.},
  language  = {en}
}