Rangeland afforestation is not a natural climate solution

Abstract

Large‐scale tree planting on global rangelands is promoted as a natural climate solution (NCS), but there is little scientific evidence to support this narrative. The presumed benefits of rangeland afforestation originate from five major misconceptions: (1) conflation between reforestation and afforestation, (2) overestimation of carbon (C) sequestration potential, (3) insufficient recognition of rangeland ecosystem services, (4) potential for adverse ecological outcomes, and (5) neocolonial tendencies of afforestation programs. Rangeland afforestation possesses minimal potential for additional C storage, but it has high potential to reduce vital rangeland ecosystem services that benefit rangeland residents and non‐residents alike. Conservation of existing C—most of which is stored belowground, where it is less vulnerable to loss—may prove to be the most appropriate NCS for extensively managed rangelands. Stewardship strategies promoting rangeland multifunctionality will not only contribute to climate‐change mitigation but also support biodiversity conservation and sustainable production of high‐protein foods for marginalized populations.