[ad_1]
Restoring forests is crucial for mitigating climate change, but it can be costly and there are different approaches to achieve it. A recent study, published in Nature Climate Change, compares the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of two common reforestation methods: tree plantations and natural regeneration.

Tree plantations involve planting trees, harvesting them later, and using the harvested trees for construction materials. On the other hand, natural regeneration allows forests to regrow on their own without human intervention. The study found that both methods have their own benefits, and the choice between them depends on the specific location.

Researchers analyzed nearly 140 low- and middle-income countries to determine the best reforestation methods in different areas. The study showed that both tree plantations and natural regeneration can be cost-effective in about half of the places. This information can help policymakers make informed decisions on how to balance costs, revenues, and climate commitments.

Interestingly, the research also revealed that reforestation is less expensive than previously thought, making it a more viable option for combating climate change. It is important to consider not only the climate and cost implications of reforestation but also the additional benefits that forests provide, such as supporting livelihoods, wildlife habitats, water filtration, and local communities.

In conclusion, finding the right mix of tree plantations and natural regeneration is essential for achieving reforestation goals effectively. This study provides valuable insights for countries looking to enhance their climate efforts through forest restoration.

[ad_2]
Source