Nature-based climate solutions (NbCS) — such as reforestation and forest conservation — are often seen as essential tools in addressing climate change. But a new study published in Nature warns that current approaches to NbCS are falling short and require major restructuring to be effective.
Led by University of Utah biologist William Anderegg, and involving researchers from UC Santa Barbara and other institutions, the study outlines four key criteria that NbCS must meet to truly contribute to climate mitigation: they must result in net global cooling, provide additional benefits beyond what would have occurred anyway, avoid carbon leakage, and ensure long-term carbon storage.

Associate Professor Anna Trugman, a co-author of the study and principal investigator at UCSB’s Marine Science Institute, emphasized that while forests offer great potential, most current NbCS projects fail to deliver real climate benefits due to poor design and oversight.

“Unfortunately, a broad body of literature has revealed widespread problems in forest NbCS projects and protocols that undermine the climate mitigation of forest carbon credits and hamper efforts to reach global net zero,” said Trugman.

The study highlights overlooked factors such as land albedo (how much sunlight is reflected by the Earth's surface) and the durability of carbon storage, which can be compromised by wildfires, pests, and climate-driven disturbances. Current safeguards, like carbon "buffer pools," are not considered robust enough to offset these risks.

To address these issues, the researchers propose shifting from the current offset model — where companies claim emissions reductions — to a contribution model, which more accurately reflects the scientific complexities and uncertainties of climate mitigation.

Adapted from original reporting by Harrison Tasoff, “For nature-based climate solutions to work, they must be restructured,” The Current, UC Santa Barbara, 2025. Brian Maffly at the University of Utah contributed to the original story.