Twentieth-century North American reforestation as an historical analogue for examining Natural Climate Solutions

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides insights into model uncertainties in forest carbon recovery, useful for improving land surface models.

🏢実務担当者:May inform corporate forestry or land-based offset strategies, but limited direct applicability.

🏛政策担当者:Relevant for designing forest-based climate policies, emphasizing the need for robust modeling.

Abstract Regional forests - their avoided conversion, reforestation, and even afforestation - are increasingly invoked as Natural Climate Solutions that can support climate change mitigation goals, particularly at national and subnational scales of decision-making. However, the response of regional forest carbon stocks to both natural disturbance cycles as well as anthropogenic forcings are uncertain, owing to limitations in data collection, land use and land cover change (LULCC) trajectories, and our understanding of key ecosystem processes. To bracket these uncertainties, we leveraged the TRENDY harmonized land model experimental results to evaluate land carbon stock recovery as a consequence of the last ~150 years of reforestation across the eastern US - an opportunistic, historical “experiment” in a region important to the global carbon sink. We found that the multi-model mean total carbon stock recovers from peak deforestation to values ~10-15% below the maximally forested 1700-1750 baseline, and that most of this recovery, at ~2%/year, is driven by rising [CO2], while increasing forest area contributes ~1%/year. While nearly all models produce strong positive carbon stock gains in response to rising [CO2], responses to climate change and LULCC are much more varied. Furthermore, this experimental design under-prescribes the area extent of historical regional reforestation in comparison to other datasets, which has implications for the carbon responses we identify. Our results underline the need to both better represent regional LULCC and management for land model experiments, and improve constraints on terrestrial carbon cycle processes in these models to improve their utility for regional applications. This will be increasingly critical as Natural Climate Solutions are implemented at local to regional scales, and these models are important tools for assessing future terrestrial carbon storage and sinks resulting from these projects.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ae8d3bfirst seen 2026-08-08 04:50:35