Identifying Top Priority Areas for Carbon Emission Reduction via Nature-Based Solutions

Managing the benefits of nature-based solutions across climate, biodiversity and society is critical to achieving climate neutrality and biodiversity restoration goals. Recent studies call for research into the interaction between biodiversity and climate adaptation and mitigation as well as environmental justice outcomes.

Despite global policy challenges, little is known about how diverse knowledge and value systems are assessed and weaved into carbon and biodiversity trade-off assessments especially in urban settings.

The new paper from HELSUS and the Strategic Research Council project CO-CARBON examines the spatial relationships between biophysical and social values ​​of carbon sequestration potential and biodiversity in Helsinki, Finland. Biophysical models demonstrate biodiversity values ​​for nature-based urban solutions, including urban forests and other types of urban green spaces.

“The study assists urban planning by identifying priority areas for different types of implementation of nature-based solutions and capacity-building initiatives to ensure that a carbon-neutral and nature-positive future is achieved in ways that are socially acceptable to citizens,” says Professor Christopher Raymond. , the WP3 leader of CO-CARBON.

More specifically, these findings inform implementation of the City of Helsinki’s new forest management strategy, which grapples with conflicting conservation and development pressures. For example, increasing planned diversity in forest areas, allowing forests to age naturally and involving the local community in new management actions To adapt to climate change and the impact of a growing city.”

The paper has been published in the journal urban sustainability npj.

Consideration of social acceptance can direct success in preferred outcomes

The approach used combines methods from modeling carbon sequestration, expert assessment approaches to assess biodiversity and public participation in GIS. The results indicate strong spatial correlations between typical biodiversity and carbon sequestration priorities, but weaker links between these model values ​​and citizen values ​​for biodiversity conservation and carbon mitigation.

“We are concerned that climate mitigation, adaptation and biodiversity assessments that rely on biophysical assessments alone will be difficult to implement unless they rely on social factors,” says Professor Raymond.

The integration of social and biophysical values ​​leads to multiple pathways for protecting nature-based systems to achieve mitigation of carbon emissions and biodiversity outcomes. There are also open options for targeting education and capacity building programs to areas of local interest.