CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 380Land Use and Ecosystem ServicesSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsForest Management and Policy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 134 of the 134 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Land-Management Options for Greenhouse Gas Removal and Their Impacts on Ecosystem Services and the Sustainable Development Goals

Open access
Smith, Pete, Adams, Justin, Beerling, David J., Beringer, Tim, Calvin, Katherine V., Fuss, Sabine, Griscom, Bronson, Hagemann, Nikolas, Kammann, Claudia, Kraxner, Florian, Minx, Jan C., Popp, Alexander, Renforth, Phil, Vicente Vicente, Jose Luis, Keesstra, Saskia·2019·Annual Review of Environment and Resources
DOI 10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033129
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Land-management options for greenhouse gas removal (GGR) include afforestation or reforestation (AR), wetland restoration, soil carbon sequestration (SCS), biochar, terrestrial enhanced weathering (TEW), and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). We assess the opportunities and risks associated with these options through the lens of their potential impacts on ecosystem services (Nature's Contributions to People; NCPs) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We find that all land-based GGR options contribute positively to at least some NCPs and SDGs. Wetland restoration and SCS almost exclusively deliver positive impacts. A few GGR options, such as afforestation, BECCS, and biochar potentially impact negatively some NCPs and SDGs, particularly when implemented at scale, largely through competition for land. For those that present risks or are least understood, more research is required, and demonstration projects need to proceed with caution. For options that present low risks and provide cobenefits, implementation can proceed more rapidly following no-regrets principles.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033129

Cites

134 of 134 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Citations

Cites

Show all 134 references

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2018, Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C
  2. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), 2018, The Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration. Summary for Policy Makers
  3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2015, Global Forest Resources Assessment (FRA) 2015. How are the World's Forests Changing?
  4. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 2017, Bonn Challenge Barometer of Progress: Spotlight Report 2017
  5. Hey DL, 2002, Flood Damage Reduction in the Upper Mississippi River Basin: An Ecological Means
  6. Gewin V., 2018, Scientific American
  7. Defra, 2009, Ecosystem services of peat - Phase 1. Project code: SP0572
  8. European Commission, 2006, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection, COM 231 Final
  9. Soil Science Society of America (SSSA), 2015, Soils and products we use. Soils Overview, October 2015
  10. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2018, Soil Health Nuggets
  11. Pachepsky YA, 2008, Int. Agrophys., 22, 61
  12. IFASTAT, 2018, Supply Reports for Potash, and Phosphorus
  13. Clarke LE, 2014, Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 413
  14. Ciais P, 2013, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 465
  15. International Energy Agency (IEA), 2018, World Energy Balances
  16. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2016, Increasing the resilience of agricultural livelihoods

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–380 of 380

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Smith, P., Adams, J., Beerling, D. J., Beringer, T., Calvin, K. V., Fuss, S., Griscom, B., Hagemann, N., Kammann, C., Kraxner, F., Minx, J. C., Popp, A., Renforth, P., Vicente Vicente, J. L., & Keesstra, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
  • World Economic Forum (CH)
  • Leverhulme Centre for Climate Change Mitigation (GB)
  • Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
  • Joint Global Change Research Institute (US)
  • The Nature Conservancy (US)
  • Ithaka Institute for Carbon Strategies (CH)
  • Hochschule Geisenheim University (DE)
  • International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (AT)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (DE)
  • Heriot-Watt University (GB)
  • Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, 10829 Berlin, Germany
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
ORCID
Venue
Annual Review of Environment and Resources
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2019-10-17
Volume
44
Issue
1
Pages
255-286
ISSN
  • 1543-5938 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-2050
DOI
10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033129
OpenAlex
W2949662106
Semantic Scholar
15e80f1310157addbd7b0c8ec53550a821444115
Cited by
380
References
134
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 73 · 2024: 69 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 5
FWCI
3.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Environment and Resources (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • Publication Database PIK (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)) (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/L024756/1)
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/M021327/1, NE/P019455/1, NE/P019730/2, NE/P019943/2)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Forest Management and Policy
Keywords
greenhouse gas removal, land management, afforestation and reforestation, wetland restoration, soil carbon sequestration, biochar, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, ecosystem services, nature's contributions to people, Sustainable Development Goals, land use competition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review