How the future of the global forest sink depends on timber demand,forest management,and carbon policies

Deforestation has contributed significantly to net greenhouse gas emissions, but slowing deforestation, regrowing forests and other ecosystem processes have made forests a net sink. Deforestation will still influence future carbon fluxes, but the role of forest growth through aging, management, and other silvicultural inputs on future carbon fluxes are critically important but not always recognized by bookkeeping and integrated assessment models. When projecting the future, it is vital to capture how management processes affect carbon storage in ecosystems and wood products. This study uses multiple global forest sector models to project forest carbon impacts across 81 shared socioeconomic (SSP) and climate mitigation pathway scenarios. We illustrate the importance of modeling management decisions in existing forests in response to changing demands for land resources, wood products and carbon. Although the models vary in key attributes, there is general agreement across a majority of scenarios that the global forest sector could remain a carbon sink in the future, sequestering 1.2–5.8 GtCO2e/yr over the next century. Carbon fluxes in the baseline scenarios that exclude climate mitigation policy ranged from −0.8 to 4.9 GtCO2e/yr, highlighting the strong influence of SSPs on forest sector model estimates. Improved forest management can jointly increase carbon stocks and harvests without expanding forest area, suggesting that carbon fluxes from managed forests systems deserve more careful consideration by the climate policy community.     

The climatic impacts of land surface change and carbon management, and the implications for climate-change mitigation policy

Strategies to mitigate anthropogenic climate change recognize that carbon sequestration in the terrestrial biosphere can reduce the build-up of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere. However, climate mitigation policies do not generally incorporate the effects of these changes in the land surface on the surface albedo, the fluxes of sensible and latent heat to the atmosphere, and the distribution of energy within the climate system. Changes in these components of the surface energy budget can affect the local, regional, and global climate. Given the goal of mitigating climate change, it is important to consider all of the effects of changes in terrestrial vegetation and to work toward a better understanding of the full climate system. Acknowledging the importance of land surface change as a component of climate change makes it more challenging to create a system of credits and debits wherein emission or sequestration of carbon in the biosphere is equated with emission of carbon from fossil fuels. Recognition of the complexity of human-caused changes in climate does not, however, weaken the importance of actions that would seek to minimize our disturbance of the Earth’s environmental system and that would reduce societal and ecological vulnerability to environmental change and variability.     

Finding a path for REDD+ between ODA and the CDM

Abstract

Strategies to mitigate anthropogenic climate change recognize that carbon sequestration in the terrestrial biosphere can reduce the build-up of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere. However, climate mitigation policies do not generally incorporate the effects of these changes in the land surface on the surface albedo, the fluxes of sensible and latent heat to the atmosphere, and the distribution of energy within the climate system. Changes in these components of the surface energy budget can affect the local, regional, and global climate. Given the goal of mitigating climate change, it is important to consider all of the effects of changes in terrestrial vegetation and to work toward a better understanding of the full climate system. Acknowledging the importance of land surface change as a component of climate change makes it more challenging to create a system of credits and debits wherein emission or sequestration of carbon in the biosphere is equated with emission of carbon from fossil fuels. Recognition of the complexity of human-caused changes in climate does not, however, weaken the importance of actions that would seek to minimize our disturbance of the Earth's environmental system and that would reduce societal and ecological vulnerability to environmental change and variability.

© 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.     

Economics of climate change mitigation forest policy scenarios for Ukraine

Abstract

This article reveals the contribution of woodland expansion in Ukraine to climate change mitigation policies. The opportunities for climate change mitigation of three policy scenarios: (1) carbon storage in forests, (2) carbon storage and additional wood-for-fuel substitution, and (3) carbon storage with additional sink policy for wood products, are investigated by using a simulation technique, in combination with cost—benefit analysis. The article concludes that the Ukraine's forests and their expansion offer a low-cost opportunity for carbon sequestration. Important factors that influence the results are the discount rate and the time horizon considered in the models. The findings provide evidence that the storage climate change mitigation forest policy scenario is most viable for the country, under the assumptions considered in this research.     

The interpretation and highlights on mitigation of climate change in IPCC AR6 WGIII report北大核心CSCD

2022年4月4日,IPCC第六次评估报告第三工作组《气候变化2022:减缓气候变化》报告和决策者摘要发布。报告全面评估了2010年以来减缓气候变化领域的最新科学进展,为国际社会深度认识和理解全球温室气体排放情况、不同温升水平下的减排路径以及可持续发展背景下的气候变化减缓和适应行动等提供了重要科学依据。基于报告主要结论,围绕温室气体排放的区域差异、减缓路径分类、与土地利用相关的排放评估及CO去除技术评估等方面的亮点,文中提出在应对气候变化减缓政策行动中,中国应坚定“双碳”战略目标,在综合考虑经济发展阶段和资源禀赋差异背景下,将可持续发展、公平和消除贫困植根于社会发展愿景中实施减缓路径,并加快提升气候变化综合评估核心科学技术的研发进度,以进一步提升国际影响力和话语权。     

Corrigendum to “Meeting the food security challenge for nine billion people in 2050: What impact on forests?” [Global Environ. Change 62 (2020) 102056]

As the world’s population continues to grow, agricultural expansion is expected to increase to meet future food demand often at the expense of other land uses. However, there are limited studies examining the degree to which forest cover will change and the underlying assumptions driving these projections. Focusing on food and forest scenarios for the middle to the end of the current century, we review 63 main scenarios and 28 global modelling studies to address variations in land use projections and evaluate the potential outcomes on forest cover. Further, their potential impacts on greenhouse gases (GHG) emission/sequestration and global temperature are explored. A majority (59%) of scenarios expected a reduction in both forests and pasturelands to make way for agricultural expansion (particularly reference and no mitigation scenarios). In most scenarios, the extent of forest loss is proportional to that of crop gain, which is associated with higher GHG emission and global temperature, loss of carbon sequestration potential and increase in soil erosion. However, 32% of scenarios predicted that meeting food security objectives is possible without leading to further deforestation if there is a global reduction in the demand for energy intensive foods, and improvements in crop yields. Forest gain and lower rates of deforestation are needed to achieve ambitious climate targets over the next decade. Our analysis also highlights carbon taxes (prices), reforestation/afforestation and bioenergy as important variables that can contribute to maintaining or increasing global forest area in the future.     

Set-asides for carbon sequestration: implications for permanence and leakage

This paper examines the potential role of forest set-asides in global carbon sequestration policy. While set asides that protect forests from timber harvests and land-use conversion may alleviate concerns with permanence, and they may provide large ancillary environmental benefits, they may also lead to large leakage. This paper uses a global land use and forestry model to examine the efficiency of three crediting schemes for set-asides. The results show that if set-asides are integrated into a global forestry carbon sequestration program that includes a wide range of other management options, then 300 million hectares of land would be set-aside, and up to 128 Pg C could be sequestered in global forests by 2105. Under alternative policies that focus exclusively on set-asides, more forestland can be set-asides, up to 3.2 billion hectare, but these policies invite large leakage in the near-term, and in the long-run, they less net carbon is removed from the atmosphere. Specifically, leakage is estimated to be 47–52%, depending on the policy, and by the end of the century, up to 17% less carbon will be sequestered in all forests.     

Greenhouse gas mitigation co-benefits across the global agricultural development programs

Global agricultural development programs aim to support smallholder farmers and farming communities by strengthening sustainable and resilient food production systems – which can also promote climate change mitigation as a co-benefit by reducing the emissions and enhancing removals of greenhouse gases (GHG). This study presents estimated GHG emissions reductions of almost 100 agricultural development projects over 51 low- and middle-income countries supported by the International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD), USAID-Feed the Future (FTF) Initiative, and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO, previously DfID). Together, these projects promoted a net GHG emissions reduction of 6.5 MtCO₂e per year. The forest management and promotion of improved agroforestry systems in the project areas contributed the most to the total mitigation co-benefits of the investment portfolios (∼3.9 MtCO₂e/y). Improved crop management with minimum tillage practices, residue incorporation, water management in paddy rice, and the use of organic fertilizers also made a large contribution to the GHG emissions reduction (∼1.5 MtCO₂e/y). Grass and pasture land management across the selected projects account for a net emission reduction of 0.2 MtCO₂e/y. The implementation of improved agricultural practices in combination proves more effective for improving productivity and generating mitigation co-benefits than used in isolation. However, the aggregate impacts of soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration should be interpreted carefully, which quickly can be lost quick. The interventions promoted by the global agricultural development programs have shown immense potential in reducing net GHG emissions or emission intensity in agriculture and allied sectors. For moving forward to achieve the net-zero and 1.5 °C goals including food security, the global agriculture development programs need to prioritize working on agriculture policy development and implementation so that agriculture expansion does not continue to drive land-use change. This needs to move from the traditional agriculture development programs to transformational changes.     

Designing policies to mitigate the agricultural contribution to climate change: an assessment of soil based carbon sequestration and its ancillary effects

Soil carbon sequestration has been regarded as a cheap and cost-effective way to sequester carbon until other technologies to tackle climate change become available or more cost-effective. An assessment of the social desirability of a soil carbon sequestration policy requires the consideration of all associated social costs and benefits. Measures to re-accumulate carbon in soils have ancillary or co-effects on the environment that can be beneficial or detrimental to social welfare and few of which are traded in markets. This paper discusses issues related to the development of soil carbon sequestration policies into agri-environmental schemes and reports findings from an application of a choice experiment to elicit preferences and estimate benefits of a soil carbon programme in Scotland under consideration of co-effects on biodiversity and rural viability. Preferences for soil carbon based mitigation are found to be heterogeneous and related to beliefs about climate change and attitudes towards its mitigation. Benefit estimates suggest that including co-effects can significantly change the outcome of cost?Cbenefit tests. Implications for the development of climate change policies are discussed.     

Incorporating blue carbon sequestration benefits into sub-national climate policies

The emissions reduction pledges made by individual countries through the 2015 Paris Agreement represent the current global commitment to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in the face of the enduring climate crisis. Natural lands carbon sequestration and storage are critical for successful pathways to global decarbonization (i.e., as a negative emissions technology). Coastal vegetated habitats maintain carbon sequestration rates exceeding forest sequestration rates on a per unit area basis by nearly two orders of magnitude. These blue carbon habitats and their associated carbon sequestration benefits are vulnerable to losses from land-use change and sea-level rise. Incorporation of blue carbon habitats in climate change policy is one strategy for both maintaining these habitats and conserving significant carbon sequestration capabilities. Previous policy assessments have found the potential for incorporation of coastal carbon sequestration in national-level policies, yet there has – to date – been little inclusion of blue carbon in the national-scale implementation of Paris commitments. Recently, sub-national jurisdictions have gained attention as models for pathways to decarbonization. However, few previous studies have examined sub-national level policy opportunities for operationalizing blue carbon into climate decision-making. California is uniquely poised to integrate benefits from blue carbon into its coastal planning and management and its suite of climate mitigation policies. Here, we evaluated legal authorities and policy contexts addressing sequestration specifically from blue carbon habitats. We synthesized the progressive action in California’s approaches to mitigate carbon emissions including statutory, regulatory, and non-regulatory opportunities to incorporate blue carbon ecosystem service information into state- and local-level management decisions. To illustrate how actionable blue carbon information can be produced for use in decision-making, we conducted a spatial analysis of blue carbon sequestration in several locations in California across multiple agencies and management contexts. We found that the average market values of carbon sequestration services in 2100 ranged from $7,730 to $44,000 per hectare and that the social cost of carbon sequestration value was 1.3 to 2.7 times the market value. We also demonstrated that restoration of small areas with high sequestration rates can be comparable to the sequestration of existing marshes. Our results illustrate how accessible information about carbon sequestration in coastal habitats can be directly incorporated into existing policy frameworks at the sub-national scale. The incorporation of blue carbon sequestration benefits into sub-national climate policies can serve as a model for the development of future policy approaches for negative emissions technologies, with consequences for the success of the Paris Agreement and science-based decarbonization by mid-century.     

Integrating national forestry initiatives in India with international climate change policy

Policy initiatives in India, such as the Social Forestry Program and later the Joint Forest Management, were introduced for their co-benefits, including forest protection, employment opportunities, and added income for communities living in and around the forests. The evolution of these forest policies is critically reviewed. It is argued that India is perfectly positioned to benefit from climate change mitigation efforts, due to a rich, albeit chequered, history in forest management. National forestry policies are examined to assess how they can complement international climate change mitigation instruments, such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the more recent Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD or REDD+ with conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks) and aid national sustainable development objectives. There is a need to heed the experiences from India's evolving forest policies, particularly those concerning land tenure and resource rights, which lack specificity within international mechanisms. The active engagement of rural communities must be integral to any programmes that make any claim to development and to environmental integrity as a whole.

Policy relevance

India's forestry programmes are examined for their effectiveness in informing international initiatives such as the CDM and REDD+. Forestry policies in India can evolve to complement international climate mitigation tools. By examining current and historical forest legislation, and their subsequent impacts, it is shown how communities can sustain their system of forest management and retain/obtain rights to land and resources under the CDM and REDD+. Looking for such synergies within existing national policies to implement newer international initiatives can greatly facilitate and increase the momentum of global environmental change.     

Ecological limits to terrestrial biological carbon dioxide removal

Terrestrial biological atmospheric carbon dioxide removal (BCDR) through bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECS), afforestation/reforestation, and forest and soil management is a family of proposed climate change mitigation strategies. Very high sequestration potentials for these strategies have been reported, but there has been no systematic analysis of the potential ecological limits to and environmental impacts of implementation at the scale relevant to climate change mitigation. In this analysis, we identified site-specific aspects of land, water, nutrients, and habitat that will affect local project-scale carbon sequestration and ecological impacts. Using this framework, we estimated global-scale land and resource requirements for BCDR, implemented at a rate of 1 Pg C y^?1. We estimate that removing 1 Pg C y^?1 via tropical afforestation would require at least 7?×?10⁶ ha y^?1 of land, 0.09 Tg y^?1 of nitrogen, and 0.2 Tg y^?1 of phosphorous, and would increase evapotranspiration from those lands by almost 50 %. Switchgrass BECS would require at least 2?×?10⁸ ha of land (20 times U.S. area currently under bioethanol production) and 20 Tg y^?1 of nitrogen (20 % of global fertilizer nitrogen production), consuming 4?×?10¹²?m³ y^?1 of water. While BCDR promises some direct (climate) and ancillary (restoration, habitat protection) benefits, Pg C-scale implementation may be constrained by ecological factors, and may compromise the ultimate goals of climate change mitigation.     

Land-use transition for bioenergy and climate stabilization: model comparison of drivers,impacts and interactions with other land use based mitigation options

In this article, we evaluate and compare results from three integrated assessment models (GCAM, IMAGE, and ReMIND/MAgPIE) regarding the drivers and impacts of bioenergy production on the global land system. The considered model frameworks employ linked energy, economy, climate and land use modules. By the help of these linkages the direct competition of bioenergy with other energy technology options for greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, based on economic costs and GHG emissions from bioenergy production, has been taken into account. Our results indicate that dedicated bioenergy crops and biomass residues form a potentially important and cost-effective input into the energy system. At the same time, however, the results differ strongly in terms of deployment rates, feedstock composition and land-use and greenhouse gas implications. The current paper adds to earlier work by specific looking into model differences with respect to the land-use component that could contribute to the noted differences in results, including land cover allocation, land use constraints, energy crop yields, and non-bioenergy land mitigation options modeled. In scenarios without climate change mitigation, bioenergy cropland represents 10–18 % of total cropland by 2100 across the different models, and boosts cropland expansion at the expense of carbon richer ecosystems. Therefore, associated emissions from land-use change and agricultural intensification as a result of bio-energy use range from 14 and 113 Gt CO2-eq cumulatively through 2100. Under climate policy, bioenergy cropland increases to 24–36 % of total cropland by 2100.     

Piecemeal or combined? Assessing greenhouse gas mitigation spillovers in US forest and agriculture policy portfolios

ABSTRACT

Forest and agricultural sector response to comprehensive climate policy is well represented in the literature. Less analysis has been devoted to piecemeal solutions. We use the Forest and Agriculture Sector Optimization Model with Greenhouse Gases (FASOMGHG) to project the individual and combined effect of three existing U.S. Department of Agriculture programmes with potential to increase greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. We find that a combined policy scenario may achieve greater mitigation than individual constituent programmes, suggesting the possibility of complementary spillover effects in some periods. Mitigation varies over time, however, and some periods experience net emissions as markets and management practices respond to initial policy shocks. The regional distribution of GHG mitigation also varies between policy scenario. Differences in the magnitude and imputed cost of mitigation under each scenario, generating negative values for some programmes and time periods, reinforces the need to evaluate portfolio design to cost-effectively achieve near-term GHG mitigation.

Key policy insights

• Increased near-term GHG mitigation in the forest and agriculture sectors in the US may be possible by expanding or refocusing the emphasis of existing programmes.

• Implementing several such forest and agricultural programmes simultaneously may lead to greater GHG mitigation than when implemented separately, indicating the possibility of positive spillover effects.

• Programmes targeted to agricultural management may hold outsized potential to achieve near-term GHG mitigation; Policies aimed at influencing land use conversion appear to be more vulnerable to reversion and subject to larger inter-annual swings.

• The staged implementation of programmes could also be useful, helping to encourage increased mitigation (or the retention of already achieved mitigation) over time as markets re-equilibrate to initial shocks.

• Though the particular scenarios assessed here are unique to the US, our findings may be applicable to other locations outside the US where land management is influenced by individual market actors and there is competition between forest and agricultural land uses.

     

The biogeophysical effects of extreme afforestation in modeling future climate

Afforestation has been deployed as a mitigation strategy for global warming due to its substantial carbon sequestration, which is partly counterbalanced with its biogeophysical effects through modifying the fluxes of energy, water, and momentum at the land surface. To assess the potential biophysical effects of afforestation, a set of extreme experiments in an Earth system model of intermediate complexity, the McGill Paleoclimate Model-2 (MPM-2), is designed. Model results show that latitudinal afforestation not only has a local warming effect but also induces global and remote warming over regions beyond the forcing originating areas. Precipitation increases in the northern hemisphere and decreases in southern hemisphere in response to afforestation. The local surface warming over the forcing originating areas in northern hemisphere is driven by decreases in surface albedo and increases in precipitation. The remote surface warming in southern hemisphere is induced by decreases in surface albedo and precipitation. The results suggest that the potential impact of afforestation on regional and global climate depended critically on the location of the forest expansion. That is, afforestation in 0°–15°N leaves a relatively minor impact on global and regional temperature; afforestation in 45°–60°N results in a significant global warming, while afforestation in 30°–45°N results in a prominent regional warming. In addition, the afforestation leads to a decrease in annual mean meridional oceanic heat transport with a maximum decrease in forest expansion of 30°–45°N. These results can help to compare afforestation effects and find areas where afforestation mitigates climate change most effectively combined with its carbon drawdown effects.     

Carbon sequestration in agroforestry systems

Abstract

Management of trees in agroecosystems such as agroforestry, ethnoforests, and trees outside forests can mitigate green house gas (GHG) emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Agroforestry systems are a better climate change mitigation option than oceanic, and other terrestrial options because of the secondary environmental benefits such as helping to attain food security and secure land tenure in developing countries, increasing farm income, restoring and maintaining above-ground and below-ground biodiversity, corridors between protected forests, as CH₄ sinks, maintaining watershed hydrology, and soil conservation. Agroforestry also mitigates the demand for wood and reduces pressure on natural forests. Promoting woodcarving industry facilitates long-term locking-up of carbon in carved wood and new sequestration through intensified tree growing. By making use of local knowledge, equity, livelihood security, trade and industry, can be supported. There is need to support development of suitable policies, assisted by robust country-wide scientific studies aimed at better understanding the potential of agroforestry and ethnoforestry for climate change mitigation and human well-being.     

Top-down and bottom-up modelling to support low-carbon scenarios: climate policy implications

Bottom-up and top-down models are used to support climate policies, to identify the options required to meet GHG abatement targets and to evaluate their economic impact. Some studies have shown that the GHG mitigation options provided by economic top-down and technological bottom-up models tend to vary. One reason for this is that these models tend to use different baseline scenarios. The bottom-up TIMES_PT and the top-down computable general equilibrium GEM-E3_PT models are examined using a common baseline scenario to calibrate them, and the extend of their different mitigation options and its relevant to domestic policy making are assessed. Three low-carbon scenarios for Portugal until 2050 are generated, each with different GHG reduction targets. Both models suggest close mitigation options and locate the largest mitigation potential to energy supply. However, the models suggest different mitigation options for the end-use sectors: GEM-E3_PT focuses more on energy efficiency, while TIMES_PT relies on decrease carbon intensity due to a shift to electricity. Although a common baseline scenario cannot be ignored, the models’ inherent characteristics are the main factor for the different outcomes, thereby highlighting different mitigation options.

Policy relevance

The relevance of modelling tools used to support the design of domestic climate policies is assessed by evaluating the mitigation options suggested by a bottom-up and a top-down model. The different outcomes of each model are significant for climate policy design since each suggest different mitigation options like end-use energy efficiency and the promotion of low-carbon technologies. Policy makers should carefully select the modelling tool used to support their policies. The specific modelling structures of each model make them more appropriate to address certain policy questions than others. Using both modelling approaches for policy support can therefore bring added value and result in more robust climate policy design. Although the results are specific for Portugal, the insights provided by the analysis of both models can be extended to, and used in the climate policy decisions of, other countries.     

A wedge-based approach to estimating health co-benefits of climate change mitigation activities in the United States

While it has been recognized that actions reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can have significant positive and negative impacts on human health through reductions in ambient fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) concentrations, these impacts are rarely taken into account when analyzing specific policies. This study presents a new framework for estimating the change in health outcomes resulting from implementation of specific carbon dioxide (CO₂) reduction activities, allowing comparison of different sectors and options for climate mitigation activities. Our estimates suggest that in the year 2020, the reductions in adverse health outcomes from lessened exposure to PM_2.5 would yield economic benefits in the range of $6 to $30 billion (in 2008 USD), depending on the specific activity. This equates to between $40 and $198 per metric ton of CO₂ in health benefits. Specific climate interventions will vary in the health co-benefits they provide as well as in potential harms that may result from their implementation. Rigorous assessment of these health impacts is essential for guiding policy decisions as efforts to reduce GHG emissions increase in scope and intensity.     

气候变化科学的最新进展:IPCC第四次评估综合报告解析

政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）第四次评估报告综合报告于2007年11月17日在西班牙正式发布。综合报告将温室气体排放、大气温室气体浓度与地球表面温度直接联系起来,综合评估了气候变化科学、气候变化的影响和应对措施的最新研究进展。综合报告指出：控制温室气体排放量的行动刻不容缓;能否减小全球变暖所带来的负面影响,将在很大程度上取决于人类在今后二三十年中在削减温室气体排放方面所作的努力和投资。这对国际社会和各国政府制定经济社会发展政策,适应和减缓气候变化有一定的指导和促进作用。     

GHG mitigation of agricultural peatlands requires coherent policies

As soon as peat soil is drained for agricultural production, the peat starts to degrade, which causes emissions to the atmosphere. In countries with large peatland areas, the GHG mitigation potential related to management of these soils is often estimated as the highest amongst the measures available in agriculture. Although the facts are well known, the policies leading to diminished emissions are often difficult to implement. We have analysed the reasons why the mitigation potential is not fully utilized and what could be done better in national implementation of climate policies. Four cases are used to illustrate the necessary steps to reach mitigation targets: determining the amount and properties of peat soils, estimating the potential, costs and feasibility of the mitigation measures, and selecting and implementing the best measures. A common feature for all of the cases was that national and international climate policies have increased the public interest in GHG emissions from peat soils and increased the pressure for mitigation. Basically the same factors restrict the implementation of mitigation measures in all countries with significant peat soil areas. The most important of these is lack of policy coherence, e.g. ignoring climate policies when planning land use or agricultural policies. We conclude that GHG mitigation is achieved only if other policies, especially national regulations and strategies, are in line with climate policies.

Policy relevance

Agricultural peat soils could be used to help reach GHG mitigation goals in many countries, but the full potential of mitigation of peat soils is not used. Although peatland cultivation inevitably leads to loss of the whole peat layer and high emissions, there are few incentives or regulation to effectively minimize these losses. This article discusses the possibilities to reduce GHG emissions from agricultural peat soils, with specific emphasis on the barriers of implementing mitigation measures nationally. The lessons learned from the selected cases emphasize the role of all policy makers and their cooperation in planning coherent policies for achieving the goals determined by climate policies.