For the first time, scientists from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) have been able to precisely quantify how land-use decisions – forests, grasslands, wetlands, and agricultural land – interact with the phase-out of fossil fuels. Their model shows that a balanced policy portfolio, combining carbon emission reduction with protection or restoration of terrestrial ecosystems, can keep transition costs at a moderate level for both households and biodiversity. This finding challenges the idea that climate action and soil preservation are incompatible goals.
What the study reveals: precise results and key figures
Researchers have demonstrated that fossil fuel divestment targets and soil management measures are not in competition but complementary. By integrating the effects of reforestation, wetland restoration, and sustainable agriculture, the model indicates that additional transition costs can be kept at a "low" level for populations and ecosystems. In other words, a policy combining coal reduction with preservation of natural areas avoids increasing household energy bills while protecting biodiversity.
The report also highlights that trade-offs arise when prioritizing emission reduction alone without accounting for land use. In these scenarios, pressures on agricultural resources increase, leading to food price hikes and social tensions. Conversely, a balanced mix, where every tonne of CO₂ avoided through soils is accounted for, generates economies of scale benefiting both the economy and nature.