The document summarizes the key findings from the IPCC's Special Report on Climate Change and Land regarding the synergies and trade-offs of large-scale expansion of land-based carbon dioxide removal strategies. It finds that all pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C or below 2°C require significant land use change through reforestation, afforestation, reduced deforestation, and bioenergy. Pathways with early mitigation and less land conversion have lower impacts, while those relying more on large-scale land conversion for carbon dioxide removal entail greater risks to ecosystems and land use sustainability. The land area required for bioenergy in 2050 ranges from 0.4-7 million km2 depending on the socioeconomic

1. Potential synergies and trade-offs
effects of large scale expansion of
land-based carbon dioxide removal
strategies: key findings from the Special
Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL)
1 7 N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 2
I P C C . C H
Joana Portugal Pereira
COP 27, Sharm El-Sheikh
Science for Climate Action Pavilion

2. Future land use landscapes depend
on the desired global warming levels
and portfolio of mitigation responses
The Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL) assessed
interlinkages between integrated assessment model (IAM) mitigation
pathways and terrestrial ecosystem services.
All assessed 1.5ºC and well below 2oC pathways require land-based
mitigation and land use change (reforestation, afforestation, reduced
deforestation, and bioenergy).
Modelled pathways that achieve 1.5ºC with reduced land conversion
present reduced impacts for ecosystem services (desertification, land
degradation, and food security).
Modelled pathways that achieved 1.5ºC with delayed mitigation
actions and require large-scale conversion of land for land-based
carbon dioxide removal responses entails potential negative
consequences to terrestrial ecosystem services and land use
sustainability.

3. Early mitigation actions and
sustainable land
management practices may
increase crop productive and
induce sustainable
intensification of pastures.
Required land in 2050 for
forest and bioenergy may
reach 5.5Mkm2.
Different storylines imply different land uses to achieve 1.5°C global warming
level by 2100.

4. Following historical trends
and current deforestation
rates, required land for
bioenergy and
afforestation reaches
~7.9Mkm2.
Different storylines imply different land uses to achieve 1.5°C global warming
level by 2100.

5. Different storylines imply different land uses to achieve 1.5°C global warming
level by 2100.
Delayed mitigation actions
and high consumption
patterns, imply higher needs
for land-based CDR options,
which may cause land use
competition for other land
uses. Bioenergy and forestry
area ~9.8Mkm2.

6. The land area
needed for bioenergy
and afforestation in
modelled pathways
varies significantly
depending on the
socio-economic
pathway, the
warming level, the
feedstock and
production system
used.
Source: IPCC SRCCL SPM.4b
Higher levels of global warming required lower land-based CDR
options, but translate more climate impacts.
Modelled pathways limiting global warming to 1.5°C use up to 7
Mkm2 for bioenergy in 2050
Bioenergy land area is smaller in 2°C (0.4 to 5 million km2) and 3°C
pathways (0.1 to 3 million km2)

7. The land area
needed for
bioenergy in
modelled pathways
varies significantly
depending on the
socio-economic
pathway, the
warming level, the
feedstock and
production system
used.
Source: IPCC SRCCL SPM.4b
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
RCP1.9 RCP2.6 RCP4.5 Baseline
Land
use
change
from
2010
to
2050
(Mkm
2
)
Land use implications of different levels of
warming (under SSP2)
Bioenergy
Afforestation

8. Impacts of land-based carbon dioxide removal responses
depend on specific implementation contexts and scales

9. Takeaway messages
• The deployment of mitigation response options have different implications for future land use
landscapes.
• All assessed modelled pathways in the SRCCL to limit warming to 1.5ºC or well below 2°C require
land-based mitigation and land-use change, with different combinations of reforestation,
afforestation, reduced deforestation, and bioenergy.
• Modelled pathways based on early actions to achieve 1.5ºC required reduced land conversion and
thus reduced consequences for desertification, land degradation, and food security.
• Pathways with large levels of land conversion may imply adverse side-effects impacting water
scarcity, biodiversity, land degradation, desertification, and food security, if not adequately and
carefully managed, whereas best practice implementation at appropriate scales can have co-
benefits, such as management of dryland salinity, enhanced biocontrol and biodiversity and
enhancing soil carbon sequestration.

10. @IPCC_CH
#IPCReport
For more information:
IPCC Secretariat: ipcc-sec@wmo.int
IPCC Press Office: ipcc-media@wmo.int
Visit ipcc.ch
@IPCC
@IPCC
linkedin.com/
company/ipcc
Thank you.
Joana Portugal Pereira
Assistant Professor, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
joana.portugal@ppe.ufrj.br
@Joanna_Portugal