IPCC Sixth Assessment Report - Chapter 7: Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Uses (AFOLU)

The Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use1 (AFOLU) sector encompasses managed ecosystems and offers significant mitigation opportunities while delivering food, wood and other renewable resources as well as biodiversity conservation, provided the sector adapts to climate change. Land-based mitigation measures represent some of the most important options currently available. They can both deliver carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and substitute for fossil fuels, thereby enabling emissions reductions in other sectors. The rapid deployment of AFOLU measures is essential in all pathways staying within the limits of the remaining budget for a 1.5°C target ( high confidence). Where carefully and appropriately implemented, AFOLU mitigation measures are uniquely positioned to deliver substantial co-benefits and help address many of the wider challenges associated with land management. If AFOLU measures are deployed badly then, when taken together with the increasing need to produce sufficient food, feed, fuel and wood, they may exacerbate trade-offs with the conservation of habitats, adaptation, biodiversity and other services. At the same time the capacity of the land to support these functions may be threatened by climate change itself ( high confidence). {IPCC AR6 WGI, Figure SPM.7; IPCC AR6 WGII, 7.1, 7.6}

The AFOLU (managed land) sector, on average, accounted for 13–21% of global total anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the period 2010–2019 (medium confidence). At the same time managed and natural terrestrial ecosystems were a carbon sink, absorbing around one third of anthropogenic CO2 emissions (medium confidence). Estimated anthropogenic net CO2 emissions from AFOLU (based on book-keeping models) result in a net source of +5.9 ± 4.1GtCO2 yr –1 between 2010 and 2019 with an unclear trend. Based on FAOSTAT or national GHG inventories, the net CO2 emissions from AFOLU were 0.0 to +0.8 GtCO2 yr –1 over the same period. There is a discrepancy in the reported CO2AFOLU emissions magnitude because alternative methodological approaches that incorporate different assumptions are used. If the managed and natural responses of all land to both anthropogenic environmental change and natural climate variability, estimated to be a gross sink of –12.5 ± 3.2 GtCO2 yr –1 for the period 2010–2019, are included with land use emissions, then land overall, constituted a net sink of –6.6 ± 5.2 GtCO2 yr –1 in terms of CO2 emissions (medium confidence). {7.2, 7.2.2.5, Table 7.1; IPCC AR6 WGI}