land degradation assignment

Fact sheets

• Facts in pictures
• Publications
• Questions and answers
• Tools and toolkits
• Endometriosis
• Excessive heat
• Mental disorders
• Polycystic ovary syndrome
• All countries
• Eastern Mediterranean
• South-East Asia
• Western Pacific
• Data by country
• Country presence 
• Country strengthening 
• Country cooperation strategies 
• News releases
• Feature stories
• Press conferences
• Commentaries
• Photo library
• Afghanistan
• Cholera 
• Coronavirus disease (COVID-19)
• Greater Horn of Africa
• Israel and occupied Palestinian territory
• Disease Outbreak News
• Situation reports
• Weekly Epidemiological Record
• Surveillance
• Health emergency appeal
• International Health Regulations
• Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee
• Classifications
• Data collections
• Global Health Estimates
• Mortality Database
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Health Inequality Monitor
• Global Progress
• Data collection tools
• Global Health Observatory
• Insights and visualizations
• COVID excess deaths
• World Health Statistics
• Partnerships
• Committees and advisory groups
• Collaborating centres
• Technical teams
• Organizational structure
• Initiatives
• General Programme of Work
• WHO Academy
• Investment in WHO
• WHO Foundation
• External audit
• Financial statements
• Internal audit and investigations 
• Programme Budget
• Results reports
• Governing bodies
• World Health Assembly
• Executive Board
• Member States Portal
• Questions and answers /

Climate change: Land degradation and desertification

Land degradation is caused by multiple forces, including extreme weather conditions, particularly drought. It is also caused by human activities that pollute or degrade the quality of soils and land utility. It negatively affects food production, livelihoods, and the production and provision of other ecosystem goods and services. Desertification is a form of land degradation by which fertile land becomes desert.

Land degradation has accelerated during the 20 th and 21 st centuries due to increasing and combined pressures of agricultural and livestock production (over-cultivation, overgrazing, forest conversion), urbanization, deforestation and extreme weather events such as droughts and coastal surges, which salinate land.

These social and environmental processes are stressing the world's arable lands and pastures essential for the provision of food and water and quality air. Land degradation and desertification can affect human health through complex pathways. As land is degraded and deserts expand in some places, food production is reduced, water sources dry up and populations are pressured to move to more hospitable areas.

The potential impacts of desertification on health include:

• higher threats of malnutrition from reduced food and water supplies;
• more water- and food-borne diseases that result from poor hygiene and a lack of clean water;
• respiratory diseases caused by atmospheric dust from wind erosion and other air pollutants;
• the spread of infectious diseases as populations migrate.

WHO's Technical work on climate change and health

• Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Desertification Synthesis (2005) [pdf 3Mb]  Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
• Global Environment Outlook: environment for development GEO-4 assessment is a comprehensive and authoritative UN report on environment, development and human well-being, providing incisive analysis and information for decision making.

• News & Events
• Eastern and Southern Africa
• Eastern Europe and Central Asia
• Mediterranean
• Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean
• North America
• South America
• West and Central Africa
• IUCN Academy
• IUCN Contributions for Nature
• IUCN Library
• IUCN Red List of Threatened Species TM
• IUCN Green List of Protected and Conserved Areas
• IUCN World Heritage Outlook
• IUCN Leaders Forum
• Protected Planet
• Union Portal (login required)
• IUCN Engage (login required)
• Commission portal (login required)

Data, analysis, convening and action.

• Open Project Portal
• SCIENCE-LED APPROACH
• INFORMING POLICY
• SUPPORTING CONSERVATION ACTION
• GEF AND GCF IMPLEMENTATION
• IUCN CONVENING
• IUCN ACADEMY

The world’s largest and most diverse environmental network.

CORE COMPONENTS

• Expert Commissions
• Secretariat and Director General
• IUCN Council

• IUCN WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS
• REGIONAL CONSERVATION FORA
• CONTRIBUTIONS FOR NATURE
• IUCN ENGAGE (LOGIN REQUIRED)

IUCN tools, publications and other resources.

Get involved

Land degradation and climate change

The multiple benefits of sustainable land management in the drylands

• The world’s soils store more carbon than the planet’s biomass and atmosphere combined.
• An increase of just 1% of the carbon stocks in the top metre of soils would be higher than the amount corresponding to the annual anthropogenic CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel burning.
• Many innovations in sustainable land management are now known and recognised for their multiple environmental, social and economic benefits.
• Sustainable land management can be mainstreamed in national development and conservation planning based on existing commitments under the Sustainable Development Goals and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).
• Urgent improvements are needed to monitor soil organic carbon and increase awareness of, and capacity to pursue, the many opportunities of sustainable land management.

November 2015

What is the issue?

Soil is the biggest terrestrial carbon sink. The world’s soils store more carbon than the planet’s biomass and atmosphere combined. This includes soil organic carbon, which is essentially biodiversity: microbes, fungi and invertebrates, as well as root matter and decomposing vegetation. Soil carbon stocks can be increased through appropriate land management to provide many benefits besides offsetting greenhouse gas emissions.

Loss of soil organic carbon is one of the principal signs of land degradation, and land degradation is one of the leading challenges for sustainable development, biodiversity conservation, and mitigating and adapting to climate change. It is defined as a reduction or loss of the biological or economic productivity and complexity of land. In drylands, land degradation is known as desertification.

When land is degraded, soil carbon can be released into the atmosphere, along with nitrous oxide, making land degradation one of the biggest contributors to climate change. An estimated two-thirds of all terrestrial carbon stores from soils and vegetation have been lost since the 19 th century through land degradation. Agriculture, forest and other land-use sectors generate roughly a quarter of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

Why is it important?

Recent estimates of the global loss of ecosystem services due to land degradation and desertification are between US$ 6.3 and 10.6 trillion annually. These high costs have not received adequate attention, partly due to the complexity of accurately measuring the knock-on effects and externalities of land degradation. There is a tendency by countries to only consider the impact on food production and to overlook ecosystem services such as water supply and regulation or reduction in carbon sequestration. IUCN’s work in Jordan has shown that these values can dwarf the value of food production by an order of magnitude.

Managing land sustainably means less carbon emissions and more carbon capture. Soil organic carbon contributes to the fertility of the soil and to its capacity to hold water, and therefore to a large extent determines the capacity of the soil to produce food and to support other biodiversity. The resilience of societies and ecosystems is increased where soil productivity, and hence carbon stock, is increased.

What can be done?

A broad suite of agro-ecology practices can be used to increase carbon in the soil, including agroforestry, fallows (resting soil for a year or more), and sustainable pasture management through managed herd mobility. In many countries these are known – and even Indigenous – practices that can be revived with the right support.

Recent studies suggest that soil carbon management presents one of the most cost-effective climate change mitigation options. Rangelands, for example, contain more than a third of all the terrestrial above- and below-ground carbon reserves. With improved rangeland management they could potentially sequester a further 1,300-2,000 million metric tons of CO 2 by 2030.

Small increases in global soil organic carbon will have a high impact on the global carbon cycle and on the atmospheric concentration of CO 2 . An increase of just 1% of the carbon stocks in the top metre of soils would be higher than the amount corresponding to the annual anthropogenic CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel burning. Reversing land degradation and increasing soil organic carbon provides one of the surest and lowest-cost multiple-wins: climate change mitigation and adaptation, conservation of biodiversity, and increased food production.

There are several options that countries can consider to increase soil organic carbon stocks.

Sustainable land management can be accelerated through policy and financial instruments, to increase soil organic carbon in a way that simultaneously combats desertification, prevents biodiversity loss and helps climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Other measures include treating land-based approaches to climate change mitigation as integral to global and national strategies; promoting awareness and sharing experience of the multiple benefits provided by sustainable land management; and ensuring that soil organic carbon is fully accounted for across all sectors as an indicator of the multiple benefits of sustainable land management.

Moving ahead, countries can improve monitoring and reporting by fulfilling their commitment to the three priority land-based progress indicators of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD): trends in land cover; trends in land productivity or functioning of the land; and trends in carbon stock above and below ground.

More information:

• iucn.org/drylands
• UNCCD Science-Policy Interface  
• Technical Brief  

Related content

Our living planet is and has always been on the move. Many species move in search of …

This publication provides initial guidance to countries on key enabling tools for attracting public…

An Introduction to the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on…

Sign up for an IUCN newsletter

Land Degradation: Causes, Impacts, and Interlinks with the Sustainable Development Goals

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 22 June 2021
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Md Shahidulla Kaiser 7  

Part of the book series: Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals ((ENUNSDG))

417 Accesses

3 Citations

Climate change ; Environment pollution ; Land pollution ; Soil degradation ; Soil erosion

Definitions

Land degradation has been an elusive term in geographical literature and environmental studies because of its association with similar natural occurrences, such as deforestation, desertification, and soil erosion. In an understandable sentence, land degradation is perceived as the impairment of the quality of the land and its surrounding associate elements because of natural or human-made causes. This is a process in which the value of the biophysical environment is affected, and the changes or disturbances to the land and its related components have been identified as deleterious or undesirable for the whole environment and its inhabitants.

Land degradation affects people and ecosystems across the planet. The term can also be referred to as soil degradation, but there are some basic differences between the concepts of land and soil. The land comprises soil and also consists of...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Aleksakhin RM (2009) Radioactive contamination as a type of soil degradation. Eurasian Soil Sci 42(12):1386–1396

Article   Google Scholar  

Alloway BJ (ed) (2012) Heavy metals in soils: trace metals and metalloids in soils and their bioavailability, vol 22. Springer Science & Business Media

Google Scholar  

Bai ZG, Dent DL, Olsson L, Schaepman ME (2008) Proxy global assessment of land degradation. Soil Use Manag 24(3):223–234

Blaikie P, Brookfield H (eds) (2015) Land degradation and society. Routledge

Cherlet M, Hutchinson C, Reynolds J, Hill J, Sommer S, Von Maltitz G (eds) (2018) World atlas of desertification: rethinking land degradation and sustainable land management. Publications Office of the European Union

Clark M (2012) Deforestation in Madagascar: consequences of population growth and unsustainable agricultural processes. Global Majority E-J 3(1):61–71

Dooley E, Roberts E, Wunder S, Sgorbati G, Dotti N, Verschuuren J, … Berthier A (2015) Land degradation neutrality under the SDGs: national and international implementation of the land degradation neutral world target. Elni Rev 1(2):2015

ELD Initiative (2015) The value of land quick guide to the report. https://www.greengrowthknowledge.org/sites/default/files/downloads/resource/The_Value_of_Land_Quick_guide_to_the_report.pdf . Retrieved 23 Oct 2020

ELD Initiative & UNEP (2015) The economics of land degradation in Africa: benefits of action outweigh the costs. Available from http://www.eld-initiative.org

Elmi AA (2017) Food security in the Arab Gulf Cooperation Council States. In: Sustainable agriculture reviews. Springer, Cham, pp 89–114

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Elum ZA, Mopipi K, Henri-Ukoha A (2016) Oil exploitation and its socioeconomic effects on the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(13):12880–12889

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Eswaran H, Lal R, Reich PF (2001) Land degradation: an overview. In: Bridges EM, Hannam ID, Oldeman LR, de Vries FWTP, Scherr SJ, Sompatpanit S (eds) Responses to land degradation. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on land degradation and desertification, Khon Kaen, Thailand. Oxford Press, New Delhi

Gilbey B, Davies J, Metternicht G, Magero C (2019) Taking land degradation neutrality from concept to practice: early reflections on LDN target setting and planning. Environ Sci Pol 100:230–237

Gisladottir G, Stocking M (2005) Land degradation control and its global environmental benefits. Land Degrad Dev 16(2):99–112

Giuliani G, Chatenoux B, Benvenuti A, Lacroix P, Santoro M, Mazzetti P (2020) Monitoring land degradation at national level using satellite earth observation time-series data to support SDG15–exploring the potential of data cube. Big Earth Data 4(1):3–22

Gonzalez-Roglich M, Zvoleff A, Noon M, Liniger H, Fleiner R, Harari N, Garcia C (2019) Synergizing global tools to monitor progress towards land degradation neutrality: trends. Earth and the world overview of conservation approaches and technologies sustainable land management database. Environ Sci Policy 93:34–42

Gupta GS (2019) Land degradation and challenges of food security. Rev Eur Stud 11:63

Hassan R, Scholes R, Ash N (eds) (2005) Millennium ecosystem assessment: ecosystems and human well-being. Island Press, Washington, DC

Heger MP, Zens G, Bangalore M (2020) Land and poverty: the role of soil fertility and vegetation quality in poverty reduction. Environ Dev Econ 25(4):315–333

Hilker T, Natsagdorj E, Waring RH, Lyapustin A, Wang Y (2013) Satellite observed widespread decline in Mongolian grasslands largely due to overgrazing. Glob Chang Biol 20(2):418–428

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (2017) Deforestation and forest degradation, issue brief, November. Available at https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/deforestation-and-forest-degradation . Retrieved 08 Oct 2020

Issaka S, Ashraf MA (2017) Impact of soil erosion and degradation on water quality: a review. Geol Ecol Landsc 1(1):1–11

Jackson H, Prince SD (2016) Degradation of net primary production in a semiarid rangeland. Biogeosciences 13(16):4721

Khamzina A, Lamers JPA, Worbes M, Botman E, Vlek PLG (2006) Assessing the potential of trees for afforestation of degraded landscapes in the Aral Sea Basin of Uzbekistan. Agrofor Syst 66(2):129–141

Khor M (1996) Land degradation causes $10 billion loss to South Asia annually. Third World Resurgence:5–6

Kirui OK (2016) Impact of land degradation on household poverty: evidence from a panel data simultaneous equation model (No. 310-2016-5325)

Kust G, Andreeva O, Cowie A (2017) Land degradation neutrality: concept development, practical applications and assessment. J Environ Manag 195:16–24

Lorenz K, Lal R, Ehlers K (2019) Soil organic carbon stock as an indicator for monitoring land and soil degradation in relation to United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Land Degrad Dev 30(7):824–838

McLeman R (2017) Migration and land degradation. Global Land Outlook working paper. UNCCD

Milesi O, Jarroud M (2016) Combating desertification and drought soil degradation threatens nutrition in Latin America, IPS News Agency Report. Available at http://www.ipsnews.net/2016/06/soil-degradation-threatens-nutrition-in-latin-america/ . Retrieved 03 Oct 2020

Minelli S, Erlewein A, Castillo V (2017) Land degradation neutrality and the UNCCD: from political vision to measurable targets. In: International yearbook of soil law and policy 2016. Springer, Cham, pp 85–104

Mirzabaev A, Nkonya E, von Braun J (2015) Economics of sustainable land management. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 15:9–19

Motavalli P, Nelson K, Udawatta R, Jose S, Bardhan S (2013) Global achievements in sustainable land management. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 1(1):1–10

Nachtergaele F, Petri M, Biancalani R (2011) Land degradation. SOLAW background thematic report, 3

Nunez C (2019) Desertification, explained, National Geographic Environment Reference. Available at https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/habitats/desertification . Retrieved 11 Oct 2020

Oldeman LR, Hakkeling RTA, Sombroek WG (1991) World map of the status of human-induced soil degradation: an explanatory note. Global Assessment of Soil Degradation (GLASOD), 2nd edn. Winand Staring Center, International Society for Soil Science, FAO, International Institute for Aerospace Survey and Earth Science, Wageningen

Pacheco FAL, Fernandes LFS, Junior RFV, Valera CA, Pissarra TCT (2018) Land degradation: multiple environmental consequences and routes to neutrality. Curr Opin Environ Sci Health 5:79–86

Pohit S (2009) Land degradation and trade liberalization: an Indian perspective. Available at SSRN 1457666

Prince SD (2016) Where does desertification occur? Mapping dryland degradation at regional to global scales. In R. Behnke & M. Mortimore (Eds.), In The End of Desertification? Disputing Environmental Change in the Drylands. Springer-Praxis Earth System Science Series.

Rowntree K, Duma M, Kakembo V, Thornes J (2004) Debunking the myth of overgrazing and soil erosion. Land Degrad Dev 15(3):203–214

Saad AMA, Shariff NM, Gairola S (2011) Nature and causes of land degradation and desertification in Libya: need for sustainable land management. Afr J Biotechnol 10(63):13680–13687

Safriel UN (2007) The assessment of global trends in land degradation. In: Climate and land degradation. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 1–38

Scherr SJ (1999) Poverty-environment interactions in agriculture: key factors and policy implications. United Nations Development Programme

Singh K, Pandey VC, Singh B, Singh RR (2012) Ecological restoration of degraded sodic lands through afforestation and cropping. Ecol Eng 43:70–80

Sonneveld BGJS, Keyzer MA, Ndiaye D (2016) Quantifying the impact of land degradation on crop production: the case of Senegal. Solid Earth 7(1):93

Stavi I, Lal R (2015) Achieving zero net land degradation: challenges and opportunities. J Arid Environ 112:44–51

Sutton PC, Anderson SJ, Costanza R, Kubiszewski I (2016) The ecological economics of land degradation: impacts on ecosystem service values. Ecol Econ 129:182–192

Symeonakis E, Drake N (2004) Monitoring desertification and land degradation over sub-Saharan Africa. Int J Remote Sens 25(3):573–592

Teketay D (2001) Deforestation, wood famine, and environmental degradation in Ethiopia’s highland ecosystems: urgent need for action. Northeast Afr Stud 8:53–76

The Lancet P. H (2018) Land degradation: a solution is possible. The Lancet 2(5):e184

Thomas DS, Middleton NJ (1994) Desertification: exploding the myth. Wiley

Tóth G, Hermann T, da Silva MR, Montanarella L (2018) Monitoring soil for sustainable development and land degradation neutrality. Environ Monit Assess 190(2):57

UN Stats (2020). https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/ . Retrieved 10 Oct 2020

UNCCD (2017a) The global land outlook. Available at https://knowledge.unccd.int/glo/GLO_first_edition . Retrieved 10 Oct 2020

UNCCD (2017b) Land degradation neutrality transformative action, tapping opportunities. Available at https://www.unccd.int/publications/land-degradation-neutrality-transformative-action-tapping-opportunities . Retrieved 04 Oct 2020

UNCCD (2020). https://www.unccd.int/actions/achieving-land-degradation-neutrality#:~:text=Land%20Degradation%20Neutrality%20(LDN)%20has,and%20spatial%20scales%20and%20ecosystems . Retrieved 10 Oct 2020

UNDP (2020) Goal 15: life on land. Available at https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals/goal-15-life-on-land.html . Retrieved 05 Oct 2020

Uyigue E, Agho M (2007) Coping with climate change and environmental degradation in the Niger Delta of southern Nigeria, vol 1(30). Community Research and Development Centre Nigeria (CREDC)

Wessels, K. J., van den Bergh, F., & Scholes, R. J. (2012). Limits to detectability of land degradation by trend analysis of vegetation index data. Remote Sens Environ, 125(0), 10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.06.022

World Meteorological Organization (WMO) (2005) Climate and Land Degradation, WMO-No 989. Available at http://www.wamis.org/agm/pubs/brochures/wmo989e.pdf . Retrieved 06 Oct 2020

Wunder S, Kaphengst T, Frelih-Larsen A (2018) Implementing land degradation neutrality (SDG 15.3) at national level: general approach, indicator selection and experiences from Germany. In: International yearbook of soil law and policy 2017. Springer, Cham, pp 191–219

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Public Administration, University of Chittagong, Chattogram, 4331, Bangladesh

Md Shahidulla Kaiser

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md Shahidulla Kaiser .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

European School of Sustainability, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Walter Leal Filho

Center for Neuroscience & Cell Biology, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Anabela Marisa Azul

Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Passo Fundo University Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Passo Fundo, Brazil

Luciana Brandli

Istinye University, Istanbul, Turkey

Pinar Gökcin Özuyar

International Centre for Thriving, University of Chester, Chester, UK

Section Editor information

Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland

Ulla A. Saari

Jönköping International Business School, Jönköping University, Jönköping, Sweden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Kaiser, M.S. (2021). Land Degradation: Causes, Impacts, and Interlinks with the Sustainable Development Goals. In: Leal Filho, W., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Özuyar, P.G., Wall, T. (eds) Responsible Consumption and Production. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71062-4_48-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71062-4_48-1

Received : 29 January 2021

Accepted : 16 March 2021

Published : 22 June 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-71062-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-71062-4

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Earth and Environm. Science Reference Module Physical and Materials Science Reference Module Earth and Environmental Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Data & knowledge
• Land & life

Land Degradation Neutrality

• LDN principles
• Projects & programmes
• News & stories

Land degradation is the result of human-induced actions which exploit land, causing its utility, biodiversity, soil fertility, and overall health to decline.​

Land is being degraded rapidly worldwide. Ensuring food security for a growing global population requires healthy land resources and flourishing ecosystems. Yet our current agricultural practices are causing soils worldwide to be eroded up to 100 times faster than natural processes replenish them. ​

We have already altered 70 percent of all ice-free land, impacting over 3.2 billion people. At current rates, 90 percent of land will bear our imprint by 2050. The impacts of land degradation will be felt by most of the world’s population. ​Land degradation also changes and disrupts rainfall patterns, exacerbates extreme weather like droughts or floods, and drives further climate change.​ It results in social and political instability, which drives poverty, conflict, and migration. ​

The UNCCD’s goal of land degradation neutrality (LDN) can halt, and then reverse, this alarming picture of the future. ​We are already helping 131 of the world’s 196 countries that have pledged (or are aiming) to arrest land degradation by 2030. ​More than 100 countries participate in the Changwon Initiative, which supports national voluntary target setting processes to achieve land degradation neutrality (LDN). We define LDN as “a state whereby the amount and quality of land resources necessary to support ecosystem functions and services to enhance food security remain stable, or increase, within specified temporal and spatial scales and ecosystems.”​

Achieving LDN requires three concurrent actions: ​

• firstly, avoiding new degradation of land by maintaining existing healthy land; ​
• secondly, reducing existing degradation by adopting sustainable land management practices that can slow degradation while increasing biodiversity, soil health, and food production; and ​
• thirdly, ramping up efforts to restore and return degraded lands to a natural or more productive state.​

The UNCCD’s objectives for LDN include:​

• maintaining or improving the sustainable delivery of ecosystem services​
• maintaining or improving land productivity to enhance global food security​
• Increasing the resilience of land and the populations dependent on it​
• seeking synergies with other social, economic, and environmental objectives​
• reinforcing and promoting responsible and inclusive land governance​

gigatons of carbon ​will be lost from the land due to intensive agriculture between 2015-2030​ ​ ​

of all ice-free land has already been altered by human activity impacting over 3.2 billion people​

Related news

UNCCD welcomes G7 decisive statement on land

Business4Land: Mobilizing private sector to reverse land degradation 

New e-learning course: “Using land-cover information to monitor progress on Sustainable Development Goal 15”

Publications

The achievement of land degradation neutrality (LDN) can lead to multiple environmental, social and economic benefits, but only through the establishment of an enabling environment.

The report “Land Degradation Neutrality for Biodiversity Conservation: How Healthy Land Safeguards Nature” highlights how LDN can address the priorities of both the CBD and the UNCCD in an effective and complementary manner. According to the report, LDN and the CBD’s…

• Assessing knowledge Monitoring assessment Second global assessment Nexus assessment Transformative change assessment Business and biodiversity assessment Biodiversity and climate change Invasive alien species assessment Sustainable use of wild species assessment Values assessment Global assessment Land degradation and restoration assessment Land degradation and restoration assessment events Land degradation and restoration assessment experts Regional assessments Scenarios and models assessment Pollination assessment Guide on the production of assessments
• Building capacity
• Strengthening the knowledge foundations
• Supporting policy
• Communicating and engaging
• Improving the effectiveness of the platform

Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration

The assessment of land degradation and restoration covers the global status of and trends in land degradation, by region and land cover type; the effect of degradation on biodiversity values, ecosystem services and human well-being; and the state of knowledge, by region and land cover type, of ecosystem restoration extent and options. The assessment aims to enhance the knowledge base for policies for addressing land degradation, desertification and the restoration of degraded land.

In January 2015, at IPBES 3, the Plenary approved the launch of the land degradation and restoration assessment together with an agreed scope.

The Plenary approved the Summary for Policymakers and accepted the chapters of the Assessment at its 6 th session in March 2018 in Medellin, Colombia (IPBES 6). IPBES would like to acknowledge and thank all of the experts who contributed to the Assessment .

The IPBES Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration is composed of:

• A Summary for Policymakers (SPM); and
• A set of 8 chapters.

Please see below to access the Assessment Report and related documents.

Editors : Luca Montanarella, Robert Scholes, Anastasia Brainich

Members of the management committee who provided guidance for the production of this assessment:  Günay Erpul, Yi Huang, Marie Roué, Leng Guan Saw (Multidisciplinary Expert Panel), Rashad Zabid Oglu Allahverdiyev, Ivar Andreas Baste, Fundisile Goodman Mketeni (Bureau).

Suggested citation:  IPBES (2018): The IPBES assessment report on land degradation and restoration. Montanarella, L., Scholes, R., and Brainich, A. (eds.). Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany. 744 pages. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3237392

Summary for policymakers

Summary for policymakers (spm) - land degradation and restoration (laid out), summary for policymakers (spm) - land degradation and restoration (plain text), the assessment report on land degradation and restoration (full report, including spm and chapters; laid out), supplementary material, comments first review, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 1, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 2, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 3, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 4, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 5, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 6, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 7, comment/first review/ldr/chapter 8, comments second review, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 1, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 2, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 3, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 4, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 5, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 6, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 7, comments/second review/ldr/chapter 8, comments/second review/ldr/spm.

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

A Handbook for the Field Assessment of Land Degradation

DOI link for A Handbook for the Field Assessment of Land Degradation

Get Citation

With the increasing concern over rural livelihoods and the food security of poor communities in developing countries, it is vital that land quality is maintained. Yet, land degradation is widespread and is lowering the productive capacity of the land in these countries. This practical handbook presents simple, non-technical indicators for assessing land degradation in the field. Based on the perspective of the farmer, the methods selected lend meaning to real farming situations, helping the field professional to understand not only the impact of degradation but also the benefits to be gained from reversing it. The handbook shows how to calculate indicators such as those of soil loss, explains the interpretation of results and in particular how combinations of different indicators can give conclusive evidence of the severity of land degradation. The focus of the book is firmly on understanding the farmer‘s interaction with the land, and how environmental protection, food security and the well-being of rural land users may be assured. With detailed figures, photographs, worked examples and sample forms based on assessment techniques validated by field professionals in Africa, Asia and Latin America, this will be an essential training manual will be invaluable for field-workers in NGOs and in governmental and educational institutions. It will also be of interest to researchers and academics in development, environment and agriculture.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1 | 8  pages, gaining a farmer-perspective on land degradation, chapter 2 | 16  pages, what is land degradation, chapter 3 | 14  pages, what about the land user, chapter 4 | 42  pages, indicators of soil loss, chapter 5 | 12  pages, indicators of production constraints, chapter 6 | 16  pages, combining indicators, chapter 7 | 9  pages, consequences of land degradation for land users, chapter 8 | 9  pages, the benefits of conservation.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Taylor & Francis Online
• Taylor & Francis Group
• Students/Researchers
• Librarians/Institutions

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited

MINI REVIEW article

Land degradation neutrality and carbon neutrality: approaches, synergies, and challenges.

• 1 Department of Zoology and Environment Sciences, University of Colombo, Colombo, Sri Lanka
• 2 Department of Forestry and Environmental Science, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Nugegoda, Sri Lanka

Land is being degraded rapidly worldwide. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in 2015 has invited countries to formulate voluntary targets to achieve Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN). Under the Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty adopted in 2015, the world is transitioning toward Carbon Neutrality (CN) with more mitigation actions. This paper intended to review the concepts of land degradation, LDN along with CN emphasizing the degradation types, approaches, models available to analyze, synergies, economic aspects and challenges. The review explores approaches and models available for achieving LDN and CN which are both synergistic, economically efficient and could overcome the common challenges. Land degradation has to focus beyond the traditional definitions to incorporate more persistent and the difficult to restore degradation causes. Such complex land degradation requires specialized LDN approaches. The level of degradation and restoration progress could be analyzed using a variety of modeling approaches including economic models. Approaches for LDN and CN can bring significant synergies for each other. The approach proposed by the present study will provide a logical flow for decision-making while minimizing time and effort and avoiding a piecemeal approach. The approach therefore maximizes the output in relation to the inputs thus enhancing sustainability.

1 Introduction

The modern agricultural, industrial and urban development implies that the land is continuously being degraded and that degradation could sometimes stay as a permanent state. Land degradation is caused by a variety of reasons and traditionally associated with soil erosion ( Chalise et al., 2019 ) and desertification ( Briassoulis, 2019 ). However, increasing levels of chemicals and pollutants in the environment means that the degradation has wider spatial and temporal dimensions. The nature of the materials that are added to the environment, their behavior and sensitivity of the receiving environment will determine the severity of the degradation, and the possibility of recovery. The level of degradation could be analyzed using a variety of models ranging from simple map-based models to complex models that require multiple data. The feasibility of recovery or restoration could be assessed by various economic tools. Degradation that is difficult to recover, unrecoverable or unrestorable implies a large economic cost.

Emission of higher levels of greenhouse gases (GHGs) have increased the humanity’s vulnerability to climate change. Global actions have proposed mechanisms for carbon neutrality (CN) which are nicely linked with the land degradation neutrality (LDN). Assessment and modeling of carbon neutralizing options, their feasibility from both technical and economic viewpoint will enable us to recognize cost minimizing synergies for achieving LDN and CN. Although land degradation is a local issue carbon dioxide is a global pollutant. Properly implemented LDN actions therefore generate global benefits. It is therefore worthwhile finding the matching pairs that could achieve both LDN and CN.

The study intends to understand the degradation types at a deeper level to recognize easy to remediate degradation types and more persistent degradation types. This knowledge is further enhanced by models that predict future outcomes resulting from the degradation. Among the options available for achieving LDN and CN, the ones that maximizes the economic efficiency can be chosen while understanding challenges. This approach will provide a logical flow in making the decision while minimizing the time and effort. The approach therefore maximizes the output in relation to the inputs thus enhancing sustainability.

2 Methodology

Literature was searched using variety of search engines such as google scholar and ScienceDirect with search words of the main topic including Land Degradation, Land Degradation Neutrality and Carbon Neutrality. Then for each term the following search words were added; definitions, global actions, approaches, models, economics, challenges. Then combinations of main topics including LDN and CN were searched with the word synergy. After screening the abstracts and contents of the articles, most significant sources of information were selected and reviewed for analysis and synthesis. Only the papers published in indexed peer-reviewed journals that are included in Scopus database and book chapters from recognized publishers were used. Eighty-four publications were found which were relevant. Non-English articles and articles that do not focus on the goal of the study were excluded. Then the results obtained from the above search were synthesized, edited and presented under each topic. Supplementary Figure S1 summarizes the review protocol.

3 Land degradation and its impact on nature and humans

Land degradation is defined as a “reduction or loss of biological or economic productivity and complexity of agroecological systems as a consequence of land use, or from one or more processes that may arise from human activities” ( UNCCD, 2024 ). Land degradation exerts severe negative impacts on global and regional economic and social development and food security ( Deng and Li, 2016 ; Chan et al., 2023 ). Highly degraded areas cover about 29% of global land area which is home to about 3.2 billion people ( Le et al., 2016 ). Agricultural lands and natural habitats are degraded due to various forms of land degradation. For example, livelihood of two-third of the population of India, are vulnerable due to land degradation ( Mythili and Goedecke, 2016 ) and land degradation hotspots cover about 51% of land area in Tanzania and 41% in Malawi ( Kirui, 2016 ).

Analysis of causes of land degradation and their extents ( Mythili and Goedecke, 2016 ) adopting multidimensional perspective ( Prăvălie, 2021 ) help to design suitable policies to overcome the degradation. Traditionally, land degradation is explained in relation to erosion by water and by wind, salinization, and soil acidification and vegetation degradation. However, more severe and permanent land degradation could result from land pollution from a variety of chemicals and plastic. Land degradation due to chemicals is a complex phenomenon which requires understanding of system dynamics ( Gunawardena, 2022 ).

Pesticides including insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, rodenticides can lead to sterile soils ( UNCCD, 2017 ; Tang et al., 2021 ). These may also lead to depletion of soil biodiversity ( Beaumelle et al., 2023 ) and overall biodiversity in the landscape due to impairment of pollination function ( Hashimi et al., 2020 ). In addition, mixtures of insecticides and herbicides could bring significant synergistic ecotoxicological effects to the earthworms ( Uwizeyimana et al., 2017 ) in the presence of heavy metals. Heavy metals could bring a variety of negative impacts on soil organisms ( Liu et al., 2021 ) including earthworms ( Morgan and Morgan, 1992 ; Fourie et al., 2007 ).

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) resulting from industrial activities may be either directly dumped onto the land or land filled. Sludge applications to crops is another source of POPs resulting from industrial wastewaters ( Arvaniti and Stasinakis, 2015 ). This may lead to contamination of ecosystems, food chains, and water. The damages resulting from landfills could be severe with large loads of contaminants with future risk that may last for centuries ( Weber et al., 2011 ) due to their capacity to bioconcentrate, bioaccumulate, and biomagnify. In addition, electronic waste recycling sites can also generate complex mixtures of dioxin-related compounds which can contaminate surface soils ( Manz et al., 2001 ).

Mining activities, for example, coal ( Dhyani et al., 2023 ), mineral and metal mining cause land degradation. Increasing mining efforts lead to generation of higher waste quantities per unit of useful product which is disposed into tailing dumps ( Slipenchuk et al., 2019 ). Adverse effects of plastics and microplastics in soils ( Rillig, 2012 ) are likely due to dumping of disused or abandoned plastic, municipal wastewater effluents, landfilling with sewage sludge and plastic used in agricultural activities ( Chae and An, 2018 ; Hale et al., 2020 ). Furthermore, microplastics can be bioaccumulated among organisms ( Yang et al., 2023 ).

Deforestation leads to land degradation and water depletion due to the increased levels of soil erosion and associated nutrient depletion and sediment transport ( Chan et al., 2023 ). Land degradation could result in significant loss of ecosystem services. Millennium ecosystem assessment report defines land degradation as the long-term loss of ecosystem services ( Nkonya et al., 2016a ).

4 International actions and multilateral environmental agreements related to land and climate change

The 1992 Earth Summit initiated three Rio Conventions on climate change, desertification, and biodiversity. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) aims to prevent “dangerous” human interference with the climate system ( UNFCCC, 2024 ). The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) is dedicated to combatting desertification and mitigating the impacts of drought in countries facing severe desertification or drought conditions ( UNCCD, 1994 ).

Under the Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty adopted in 2015, the world is transitioning toward CN with more mitigation actions. In October 2015, the 12th Conference of the Parties (COP12) of the UNCCD proposed a definition for land degradation neutrality (LDN). In 2017, an LDN Scientific Conceptual Framework was developed and endorsed by UNCCD Member States ( Cowie et al., 2018 ).

There have been several chemical-related multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) that have a relevance to land degradation including the Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal, Rotterdam Convention on the prior informed consent procedure for certain hazardous chemicals and pesticides in international trade and Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants. However, the linkages of these conventions with land degradation have been less obvious.

During the UN Summit for the adoption of the post-2015 development agenda, an agreement on set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) ( UN, 2015 ) was made. Under SDG 15 Life on Land, target 15.3 intends to achieve a land degradation neutral world while target 2.4 of SDG 2 encourages resilient agricultural practices and gender equality over land resources is emphasized under Target 5.a. Achieving LDN increases ecosystem services and improves soil quality, contributing to several other SDGs, including SDG 3 (good health and wellbeing), SDG 5 (gender equality), SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation), SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities), SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production), SDG 13 (climate action), SDG 14 (life below water), and SDG 15 (life on land) ( Feng et al., 2022 ). It is important to note here that each SDG has synergies and trade-offs with other SDGs. On the other hand, the key MEAs related to land and climate change are reflected in several SDGs. For example, UNCCD is linked to seven SDGs, UNFCCC is linked to nine SDGs, and chemical conventions are linked to six SDGs ( UNEP, 2016 ).

5 Land degradation neutrality

It is important to discuss the causes of land degradation and also how to neutralize the impacts. Land degradation will effectively reduce the useful amount of land available for ecosystems, biodiversity and other living beings. For example, built up land or urban infrastructure implies permanent loss of land and their ecosystem services ( Maes et al., 2015 ) where the concept of LDN is not applicable or not achievable. Urban vegetation including vertical gardens and roof top gardens may bring some nature that will improve the greenery, but the loss of soil or permanent cover of soil will lead to permanent loss of primary ecosystem services such as soil formation ( Jayakody et al., 2023 ). Increasing built-up land and pavements and disturbed landscapes will reduce the water that is infiltrated to the ground and increase the runoff and degrade further the quality of the water that is added to the waterways ( Kriech and Osborn, 2022 ).

Other transformed landscapes, such as agricultural and plantation areas, when managed under organic conditions, imply higher ecosystem services. However, under chemically intensive conditions, they imply a permanent loss of ecosystem services ( Kremen and Miles, 2012 ) and non-achievement of LDN, since such chemicals act as stock pollutants and tend to stay in the soil for a long period of time. When the soils are contaminated with POPs, such soils cannot be restored because effective removal of the POPs is extremely costly. Achieving LDN in such contexts is therefore a non-attainable goal. Certain pesticides that are classified under POPs could have contaminated large extents of tropical soils before their ban under the Stockholm Convention.

Materials considered as chemically inactive such as plastic will be detrimental to earthworms and other soil microorganisms. Microplastics and nanoplastics contaminated soil cannot be reversed to the original situation and currently most agricultural soils are faced with this problem due to the higher and higher use of plastic-based materials in agricultural areas ( Serrano-Ruiz et al., 2021 ; Scopetani et al., 2022 ). Such soils will be in a permanent degraded state and any productivity will have to be achieved with very high level of externally supplied inputs yet with uncertainty in outcomes. Extremely high costs associated with of such type of LDN may not be cost effective given the limited resources available in low-income tropical countries. It is worth noting here that the investments in sustainable land management (SLM) have been low in the developing countries where the impact of land degradation are most crucial ( Chen et al., 2022 ).

Even the most common type of land degradation caused by soil erosion is assumed to be recoverable when the replacement is done for the lost nutrients, organic matter and macro and microorganisms ( Lal, 2015 ) known to occur in the original soil. However, due to uncertainty of such information, it may not be fully recovered. For example, information on types and numbers of soil microorganisms present in a soil is extremely difficult to find and the replacement will be incomplete.

6 Carbon neutrality, the need and approaches

Carbon neutrality, a state of net zero carbon emission is proposed to be achieved with decarbonization strategies. A hierarchical approach has been defined to achieve this. The first in the list is avoiding carbon intensive actions, the next is reduction of carbon emitting activities by efficiency improvements. Replacing carbon intensive activities with alternatives is the third option and finally, offsetting any leftover emissions that are unavoidable is suggested ( Finkbeiner and Bach, 2021 ). Carbon neutrality can be defined for a country, company, product, activity, or at individual level and the total emissions emitted directly or indirectly has to be balanced by offset or removal mechanisms ( UNFCCC, 2021 ). Carbon neutrality has to be achieved involving all sectors of the economy ( Nkonya et al., 2016b ). Figure 1 indicates options available for LDN and CN and their interrelations.

Figure 1 . Approaches to achieve LDN and CN.

Proper forest management can effectively improve the carbon storage of the forests. Examples include different rotation periods ( Hektor et al., 2016 ), use of different tree species especially those with high carbon storage potentials ( de Morais et al., 2019 ), enriching with lianas and climbers ( Shukla et al., 2020 ) and different forest management measures that could improve soil organic carbon ( Ma et al., 2021 ). Agricultural crops when grown under organic conditions, will bring both LDN and CN benefits. Options such as agroforestry will improve soil health, carbon sinks and bring additional benefits to the farming communities. Water conservation will improve soil biodiversity thus generating positive effects toward LDN while reducing carbon footprints. Use of renewable energy will also reduce the carbon footprint with lesser emissions deposited in land thus minimizing land pollution. Moreover, to achieve net-zero carbon emissions and sustainable development, sequestration in terrestrial and marine ecosystems must be promoted ( Cheng, 2020 ). In addition, deploying negative-emission technologies at large scale, promoting regional low-carbon development and establishing a nationwide “green market” have been proposed for China ( Liu et al., 2022 ). Carbon sink technology is another option for CN. Carbon sink refers to the process of absorbing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through afforestation, vegetation restoration and other measures. It generally consists of terrestrial carbon sinks and ocean carbon sinks ( Wu et al., 2022 ).

The above options indicate range of opportunities with differing efficiency in addressing LDN and CN. As such, a combination of approaches would be useful in addressing land degradation and carbon emission issues in a given socioeconomic and ecological landscape.

Increment of soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration is considered as a possible solution to mitigate climate change as well as to reduce the land degradation. A study done by Minasny et al. (2017) reports SOC stocks from 20 regions in the world. The top 1 m layer of soil contains about 600 Gt of carbon and if SOC stocks are increased by 0.4%, it can mitigate about 30% of global GHG emission. The study reports mean SOC stocks for each country and how much SOC sequestration rate is required to achieve the 0.4% initiative and also it reports opportunities available to sequester more carbon. This finding has been translated into an initiative named “4 per mille Soils for Food Security and Climate” that was launched at the COP21 of the UNCCD to increase global soil organic matter by 4 per 1,000 (or 0.4%) per year. In order to encourage better management practices among farmers that sequester more carbon, economic incentives could be provided such as direct payments, tax concessions and emission trading tools.

7 Synergies between land degradation neutrality and carbon neutrality

There are clear synergies between LDN and CN as indicated in Figure 1 . Synergistic implementation of the neutralities will reduce the total cost and the need for many different expertise. LDN actions will always result in multiple benefits including socioeconomic benefits. Soil organic carbon is an indicator for LDN and therefore many countries have established links between LDN and National Determined Contributions (NDCs). There are several synergistic sectoral impacts. Carbon neutrality will result in positive health outcomes, poverty alleviation, and improvements in national and global security and in the economy.

7.1 Carbon neutrality and health links

There are positive health outcomes from achieving CN. Achieving CN by decarbonizing energy sector, for example, could result in cleaner air which can bring large improvement to the human and ecosystem health. Achieving a net-zero status by the year 2050 will result in a decrease in pollutants like particulate matter (PM), ozone, PM precursors, nitrous oxides (NO x ), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), and other harmful air pollutants ( Kerry and McCarthy, 2021 ).

7.2 Carbon neutrality and poverty link

Many of the climate extreme related costs are mostly borne by the low-income countries and low-income communities ( EPA, 2021 ). Among thermal energy dependent countries, large amounts of NO x and SO 2 are inevitable. Reductions of such pollutants will result in significant productivity increases of the workforce as a result of health improvements. It has been found that air pollutants can affect educational attainment and thus could result in lowered labor productivity ( Zivin and Neidell, 2018 ). Extreme weather events can also bring disruption of critical health care and such impacts are mostly felt by low-income communities ( Mach et al., 2019 ). Carbon neutrality achieved through LDN provides cost effective solutions for both.

7.3 Synergy between carbon neutrality and economy

Projections from the USA economy shows that avoided damages from fewer deaths, less damage to infrastructure, and fewer lost wages could be $49 billion/year in 2050 if 1.5°C-compatible scenarios have been adopted ( Kerry and McCarthy, 2021 ). For India, net zero will result in net increase in employment opportunities, creating about 15 million jobs beyond a baseline scenario by 2047. Households could save as much as $9.7bn in energy costs by 2060 ( ASPI, 2022 ).

7.4 Synergy between carbon neutrality and security

LDN and CN together could establish national and global security. Continuous disasters drain national financial and infrastructure resources leading to national financial insecurity. More frequent diversion of military assets and personnel to assist and recover the disaster affected regions could result in risks to the national security ( Kerry and McCarthy, 2021 ). In addition, extreme climatic events could bring additional conflicts within the same community and between communities and between nations ( Mach et al., 2019 ).

7.5 Enhancing synergies and minimizing negative feedbacks

In order to enhance the synergies, it is important to adopt actions at different levels. First, it is important to establish linkages within and between biophysical, biogeochemical, and socioeconomic interactions. Second, in order to identify the priority response actions and policy responses, vulnerabilities need to be identified. Thirdly, exchanging the knowledge among stakeholders at various levels and integrating different knowledge systems (e.g., indigenous, citizen science), and co-generating new knowledge, ( Raymond et al., 2010 ; Reed et al., 2011 ) are essential in fast tracking the response strategies. Finally, innovation is needed to adapt with the changing circumstances ( Webb et al., 2017 ).

When things operate in opposing directions, it implies negative feedback mechanisms. It is therefore important to understand any such negative feedbacks prior to proposing more resilient solutions. Impacts of climate change could lead to desertification and abandonment of lands. Climate change could accelerate land degradation. For example, more frequent droughts, changes in soil properties and vegetation growth can induce land degradation. Therefore, mitigating climate change will inevitably mitigate desertification, too ( Reed and Stringer, 2015 ).

In order to minimize land degradation and climate change negative feedbacks, four core multi-level actions could be adopted. These include, establishing links between land degradation and climate change impacts, identifying most vulnerable systems, improving knowledge and investigate policy options. Reducing emissions from forest degradation and deforestation (REDD+) projects offer a “triple-win,” encompassing climate change mitigation, biodiversity conservation, and the well-being of local communities ( Siril et al., 2022 ).

7.6 Synergies among multilateral environmental agreements related to land and climate change

In 2016, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) agreed to create a special report on desertification, land degradation, and climate change, which would complement the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). Coordination among the UNCCD, UNFCCC, and UN Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) has been improved to identify and harness synergies in response to land degradation and climate change ( Chotte et al., 2019 ). There is further need to integrate chemical related conventions to identify their linkages with land and climate related conventions.

8 Modeling approaches for land degradation neutrality and carbon neutrality

Analysis of a complex problem is easily done with models as they represent the reality in a manageable scale. Understanding the impacts of land degradation and effectiveness of LDN and CN is best done with modeling approaches since they are capable of characterizing impacts that span across much wider spatial and temporal scales. The simplest and the oldest type of models were soil erosion models which provide considerable amount of information toward land degradation from a conventional point of view.

The next type of models has been GIS based maps which are mostly supported by remotely sensed data which provides useful source of information on extents and the severity of land degradation at national and global levels. For example, degradation hotspots among major land cover types were identified using biomass productivity as an indicator of land degradation ( Le et al., 2016 ). This type of information could be verified with ground-based measurements ( Anderson and Johnson, 2016 ).

Recent IPCC reports have illustrated a variety of scenarios, pathways and models that explore future emissions, climate change related impacts and risks, and possible mitigation and adaptation strategies. Most common type of scenarios is Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSPs) that cover a range of possible future development of anthropogenic drivers of climate change. Under this, the very high GHG emission scenarios (SSP5-8.5) assume CO 2 emissions that roughly double from current levels and the very low scenario (SSP1-1.9) assumes CO 2 emissions declining to net zero around 2050 ( IPCC, 2023 ). In addition, Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) were used by the Working Group I and Working Group II of the IPCC to assess regional climate changes, impacts and risks. There have been several models of combining land degradation, LDN and CN scenarios around the world and Table 1 provides a summary.

Table 1 . Examples of land degradation and climate change related models.

Modeling approaches provide useful basis toward assessment of degradation and restoration effectiveness. In order to design restoration options, it is required to assess the status of degradation. In order to assess the effectiveness of restoration efforts and level of achievement of LDN and CN, there is the need for accurate measurements. The assessment of degradation is, however, still based on conventional approaches, taking mainly the soil erosion as the main cause of degradation. Soil pollution aspects have rarely been considered in modeling, which poses a greater challenge in restoring majority of landscapes in the coming years.

9 Economics of land degradation neutrality and carbon neutrality

Economics is about allocation of scarce resources with a view to maximize economic efficiency. Environmental and social concerns have become essential components of such analyses lately. Economic efficiency implies maximizing net benefits or minimizing the cost. In the context of LDN or CN, economic analysis becomes an important decision-making tool in allocating scarce resources toward land degradation and carbon emissions while selecting the most efficient option. The essential first step of such an analysis is to identify and to quantify the costs and benefits of each option and then estimate monetary values ( Mishra and Rai, 2014 ). Whenever the full range of monetary estimates are not available, multicriteria analysis could be adopted to overcome issues associated with monetary estimates ( Imbrenda et al., 2021 ). Cost benefit analysis is the most promising approach in evaluating various options applying monetary estimates since it can incorporate the temporal dimensions also to the analysis. Monetary estimates related to LDN and CN could provide a strong basis for implementing economic instruments such as taxes and subsidies.

A variety of estimates available on land degradation is summarized by Nkonya et al. (2016b) using various case studies across several countries. Those studies highlight that preventing land degradation in the first place is much cheaper than letting the damage happen and repairing it later. On average, one USD investment toward restoration of degraded land gives a return of five USD. This stand as a strong incentive for taking action against land degradation ( Nkonya et al., 2016d ).

10 Challenges

There are several types of challenges in achieving LDN and CN. The complexities associated with understanding the land degradation, uncertainties associated with carbon dynamics and vulnerable socioeconomic situations in developing countries bring the challenges that need to be addressed. First, identification of degradation is a challenge when the complex nature of the current degradation types is considered. For example, although the traditionally considered degradation such as soil erosion are prominent, and can be measured easily in the field context, most of the chemical pollution related degradation are not visible to the naked eye. Specific techniques, assessments and models are required to determine the degradation status and this becomes a challenge in tropical developing countries.

Lack of relevant data could pose another challenge in modeling ( Baumgartner and Cherlet, 2016 ). Correct projections of land degradation toward future requires a large amount of good quality data and these are largely not available or difficult to generate in developing countries. The most appropriate remedial measures are also outcomes of science and technology for the most part and hence expensive. This can be another challenge in identifying and prioritizing suitable remedial measures. Importance of local traditional knowledge can ease the situation to a certain extent, but the complex degradation causes such as chemical pollutants have not yet generated a set of traditional knowledge outcomes and cannot expect those to arise in the near future.

It is important to recognize clearly whether we are moving in the correct pathways in adopting remedial measures since some of remedial measures would involve longer time frames. One should be able to recognize the milestones that ensure the movement in the correct direction. In such contexts, modeling has a role to play and lack of expertise and quality data will pose a challenge for the developing countries.

There is an obligation toward implementation of NDCs under the Paris agreement. However, LDN is not obligatory. Among the NDCs also, there are voluntary components and non-voluntary components which will only be implemented with financial assistance. The larger the non-obligatory component, it is difficult to expect that land and carbon neutralities are priorities of national governments and hence may largely result in non-adoption. This is further exacerbated by the frequent risks associated with many tropical Asian developing countries for example, internal conflicts, financial crises, debt burdens, poor governance ( Khan and Al Shoumik, 2022 ) and disasters which are often the result of climate change ( Webb et al., 2017 ).

One of the biggest challenges is to establish and demonstrate links between LDN and other sectors of the economy. For example, improved LDN and CN may generate forest outputs, agricultural outputs, and better health outcomes as indicated under the Section 7. The main subsequent challenge is to establish quantitative links in physical terms and monetary terms between LDN measures and associated benefits and CN measures and associated benefits. For example, there is a monetary estimate available for social cost of carbon, indicating how much global damage is caused by a ton of carbon emitted to the atmosphere. Similarly, one unit of land degradation reversed could be associated with some x units of agricultural or y units of forest product improvements. Establishing such linkages for different land use and ecosystem types would be a next challenge. Establishing values for other sectors could help the decision making in identifying the best LDN or CN measure that contributes toward other overall of the economy.

11 Discussion

Assessment of degradation of land and proposing the level of intervention needed to restore requires information at various levels. First, the level of degradation and the type and level of restoration need to be assessed. Biophysical assessments are the first level of information which can also be model based. Secondly, it is required to assess whether the society is willing to pay to full cost of restoration by looking at full range of costs and benefits of the operation. Economic analysis is important in this respect. Developing countries in the tropical belt may be restrained by the information and the expertise in making such judgments and therefore LDN may remain as a distant prospect.

Carbon neutrality when achieved together with the LDN may present a win-win case for the poor countries. However, when it is not possible, countries may have to look for financial transfer mechanisms that could provide support for achieving NDCs. This may require a more detailed analysis with emphasis on each and every individual NDC being subjected to an in-depth analysis under the local socioeconomic and technical knowhow conditions.

It is worthwhile understanding the best approaches available both biophysical and policy contexts. Carbon stored by forest tree planting can generate carbon credits which can be sold in the Emissions Trading System (ETS) market ( van der Gaast et al., 2018 ). This is further facilitated by carbon accounting standards that are available and global agreements that are encouraging carbon related payments. However, inclusion of forests in ETS schemes around the world has been complicated due to issues of carbon leakage, permanence and complexity of accounting. International initiatives such as 4 per mille will face challenges during their implementation due to lack of data, limitation of soil sinks and issues related to resource poor farmers and small land holders ( Lal, 2016 ).

Agroforestry involves establishing trees, mostly forest trees in croplands and silvopastoral systems. It enhances carbon sequestration ( Zomer et al., 2016 ) since number of trees in a unit area is higher and it utilizes vertical space. Successful implementation of agroforestry systems toward CN or LDN require careful selection of agroforestry species, monitoring of carbon dynamics and finding suitable financing mechanisms. In the city context, achieving both LDN and CN could be possible with urban forestry and green infrastructure. Maintaining forest cover in urban contexts provides variety of ecosystem services ( Khan et al., 2022 ) including human health benefits.

Complex problems such as climate change and land degradation can be tackled by implementing a full spectrum of complementary policies across multiple sectors rather than relying on any single policy of single sector. Implementing LDN and CN simultaneously would bring multiple benefits since it minimizes the effort and resources required. In the future planning, LDN and CN can be inbuilt into single projects so that it will minimize the efforts of experts, resources and land requirement.

One of the limitations of the study is that majority of modeling studies were available from limited locations. For example, mainland China dominated the modeling studies in the literature. In order to overcome these issues, it is essential that studies are conducted covering a wider geographical context.

12 Summary and conclusion

This paper intended to review the concepts of land degradation, LDN along with CN emphasizing the degradation types, approaches, models available to analyze, synergies, economic aspects and challenges. Different degradation types result in different consequences including short- and long term and sometimes persistent impacts. Understanding degradation as well as monitoring the mitigation requires proper models that are built upon good quality physical data and supported by quantitative economic analysis. Efforts toward LDN and CN may generate multiple benefits across national and global scales. In order to synergize LDN and CN actions with current activities, such benefits need to be quantitatively linked with necessary policy instruments.

The study highlights the need to go beyond the traditional degradation types, the role of different approaches specially in reaching synergies between LDN and CN in order to minimize costs. Such synergies are best brought to light by meeting the challenge of establishing and demonstrating links between LDN and other sectors of the economy in a quantitative way using both physical terms and monetary terms. One unit of land degradation or carbon neutrality could be associated with some x units of another economic sector, be it agriculture, human health, or national security and there is a need to establish such linkages for different land use and ecosystem types in a move toward a carbon neutral and land degradation neutral earth.

Author contributions

MG: Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Investigation, Conceptualization, Writing – original draft. EL: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Investigation. PG: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Investigation, Conceptualization.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2024.1398864/full#supplementary-material

Supplementary Figure S1 | Review protocol.

Anderson, W., and Johnson, T. (2016). “Evaluating global land degradation using ground-based measurements and remote sensing” in Economics of land degradation and improvement–a global assessment for sustainable development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer), 85–116.

Google Scholar

Arvaniti, O. S., and Stasinakis, A. S. (2015). Review on the occurrence, fate and removal of perfluorinated compounds during wastewater treatment. Sci. Total Environ. 524–525, 81–92. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.023

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

ASPI. (2022). Getting India to net zero . Available at: https://asiasociety.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/ASPI_Getting%20India%20to%20Net%20Zero_Report.pdf

Baumgartner, P., and Cherlet, J. (2016). “Institutional framework of (in) action against land degradation” in Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement – A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer), 33–54.

Beaumelle, L., Tison, L., Eisenhauer, N., Hines, J., Malladi, S., Pelosi, C., et al. (2023). Pesticide effects on soil fauna communities—a meta-analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 60, 1239–1253. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.14437

Briassoulis, H. (2019). Combating land degradation and desertification: the land-use planning quandary. Land 8:27. doi: 10.3390/land8020027

Chae, Y., and An, Y. J. (2018). Current research trends on plastic pollution and ecological impacts on the soil ecosystem: a review. Environ. Pollut. 240, 387–395. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.008

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chalise, D., Kumar, L., and Kristiansen, P. (2019). Land degradation by soil erosion in Nepal: a review. Soil Syst 3:12. doi: 10.3390/soilsystems3010012

Chan, F. K. S., Chen, J., Li, P., Wang, J., Wang, J., and Zhu, Y. (2023). The cross-boundary of land degradation in Mongolia and China and achieving its neutrality-challenges and opportunities. Ecol. Indic. 151:110311. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110311

Chen, L., Msigwa, G., Yang, M., Osman, A. I., Fawzy, S., Rooney, D. W., et al. (2022). Strategies to achieve a carbon neutral society: a review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 20, 2277–2310. doi: 10.1007/s10311-022-01435-8

Chen, N., Xin, C., Zhang, B., Xin, S., Tang, D., Chen, H., et al. (2023). Contribution of multi-objective land use optimization to carbon neutrality: a case study of Northwest China. Ecol. Indic. 157:111219. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111219

Cheng, H. (2020). Future earth and sustainable developments. Innovation 1:100055. doi: 10.1016/j.xinn.2020.100055

Chotte, J. L., Aynekulu, E., Cowie, A., Campbell, E., Vlek, P., Lal, R., et al. (2019). Realising the carbon benefits of sustainable land management practices: guidelines for estimation of soil organic carbon in the context of land degradation neutrality planning and monitoring . A report of the Science-Policy Interface. Bonn, Germany: United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).

Cowie, A. L., Orr, B. J., Castillo Sanchez, V. M., Chasek, P., Crossman, N. D., Erlewein, A., et al. (2018). Land in balance: the scientific conceptual framework for land degradation neutrality. Environ. Sci. Pol. 79, 25–35. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2017.10.011

de Morais, V. T. M., Jacovine, L. A. G., Torres, C. M. M. E., Alves, E. B. B. M., de Paiva, H. N., Cruz, R. A. D., et al. (2019). Early assessment of tree species with potential for carbon offset plantations in degraded area from the southeastern Brazil. Ecol. Indic. 98, 854–860. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.12.004

Deng, X., and Li, Z. (2016). “Economics of land degradation in China” in: Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement – A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development .(eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer, 385–399.

Dhyani, S., Santhanam, H., Dasgupta, R., Bhaskar, D., Murthy, I. K., and Singh, K. (2023). Exploring synergies between India’s climate change and land degradation targets: lessons from the Glasgow climate COP. Land Degrad. Dev. 34, 196–206. doi: 10.1002/ldr.4452

EPA (2021). Climate change and social vulnerability in the United States: a focus on six impacts : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 430-R-21-003. Available at: www.epa.gov/cira/social-vulnerability-report .

Feng, S., Zhao, W., Zhan, T., Yan, Y., and Pereira, P. (2022). Land degradation neutrality: a review of progress and perspectives. Ecol. Indic. 144:109530. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109530

Finkbeiner, M., and Bach, V. (2021). Life cycle assessment of decarbonization options—towards scientifically robust carbon neutrality. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 26, 635–639. doi: 10.1007/s11367-021-01902-4

Fourie, F., Reinecke, S. A., and Reinecke, A. J. (2007). The determination of earthworm species sensitivity differences to cadmium genotoxicity using the comet assay. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 67, 361–368. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2006.10.005

Gunawardena, U. A. D. P. (2022). “Soil degradation: causes, consequences, and analytical tools” in Land degradation neutrality: achieving SDG 15 by forest management . (eds) P. Panwar, G. Shukla, J. A. Bhat, and S. Chakravarty (Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore), 155–170.

Hale, R. C., Seeley, M. E., La Guardia, M. J., Mai, L., and Zeng, E. Y. (2020). A global perspective on microplastics. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 125:e2018JC014719. doi: 10.1029/2018JC014719

Hashimi, M. H., Hashimi, R., and Ryan, Q. (2020). Toxic effects of pesticides on humans, plants, animals, pollinators and beneficial organisms. Asian Plant Res. J. 5, 37–47. doi: 10.9734/aprj/2020/v5i430114

Hektor, B., Backéus, S., and Andersson, K. (2016). Carbon balance for wood production from sustainably managed forests. Biomass Bioenergy 93, 1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.05.025

Imbrenda, V., Quaranta, G., Salvia, R., Egidi, G., Salvati, L., Prokopovà, M., et al. (2021). Land degradation and metropolitan expansion in a peri-urban environment. Geomat. Nat. Haz. Risk 12, 1797–1818. doi: 10.1080/19475705.2021.1951363

IPCC (2023). “Summary for policymakers” in Climate change 2023: synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change , Core Writing Team. eds. H. Lee and J. Romero (Geneva: IPCC), 1–34.

Jayakody, G. D. C., Weerasinghe, K. G. N. H., Jayasinghe, G. Y., and Halwatura, R. U. (2023). Economical sustainability of vertical greeneries in tropical climate. Energ. Buildings 299:113580. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.113580

Jones, S. M., Smith, A. C., Leach, N., Henrys, P., Atkinson, P. M., and Harrison, P. A. (2023). Pathways to achieving nature-positive and carbon–neutral land use and food systems in Wales. Reg. Environ. Chang. 23:37. doi: 10.1007/s10113-023-02041-2

Kerry, J., and McCarthy, G. (2021). The long-term strategy of the United States, pathways to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 . Washington, DC: The United States Department of State and the United States executive Office of the President.

Khan, M. Z., and Al Shoumik, B. A. (2022). Land degradation neutrality concerns in Bangladesh. Soil Secur. 9:100075. doi: 10.1016/j.soisec.2022.100075

Khan, N., Jhariya, M. K., Raj, A., Bargali, K., Devi, A., and Ghanshyam,. (2022). “Urban Forest resources: a strategy for achieving land degradation neutrality” in Land degradation neutrality: achieving SDG 15 by forest management . (eds) P. Panwar, G. Shukla, J. A. Bhat, and S. Chakravarty (Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore), 363–380.

Kirui, O. K. (2016). “Economics of land degradation and improvement in Tanzania and Malawi” in Economics of land degradation and improvement–a global assessment for sustainable development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer), 609–649.

Kremen, C., and Miles, A. (2012). Ecosystem services in biologically diversified versus conventional farming systems: benefits, externalities, and trade-offs. Ecol. Soc. 17:25. doi: 10.5751/ES-05035-170440

Kriech, A. J., and Osborn, L. V. (2022). Review of the impact of stormwater and leaching from pavements on the environment. J. Environ. Manag. 319:115687. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115687

Lal, R. (2015). Restoring soil quality to mitigate soil degradation. Sustain. For. 7, 5875–5895. doi: 10.3390/su7055875

Lal, R. (2016). Beyond COP 21: potential and challenges of the “4 per thousand” initiative. J. Soil Water Conserv. 71, 20A–25A. doi: 10.2489/jswc.71.1.20A

Le, Q. B., Nkonya, E., and Mirzabaev, A. (2016). “Biomass productivity-based mapping of global land degradation hotspots” in Economics of land degradation and improvement–a global assessment for sustainable development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer), 55.

Li, L., Huang, X., and Yang, H. (2023). Optimizing land use patterns to improve the contribution of land use planning to carbon neutrality target. Land Use Policy 135:106959. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106959

Liu, Z., Deng, Z., He, G., Wang, H., Zhang, X., Lin, J., et al. (2022). Challenges and opportunities for carbon neutrality in China. Nat Rev Earth Environ 3, 141–155. doi: 10.1038/s43017-021-00244-x

Liu, S., Wang, X., Guo, G., and Yan, Z. (2021). Status and environmental management of soil mercury pollution in China: a review. J. Environ. Manag. :277. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111442

Liu, J., Yan, Q., and Zhang, M. (2023). Ecosystem carbon storage considering combined environmental and land-use changes in the future and pathways to carbon neutrality in developed regions. Sci. Total Environ. 903:166204. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166204

Ma, S., Chen, G., Du, E., Tian, D., Xing, A., Shen, H., et al. (2021). Effects of nitrogen addition on microbial residues and their contribution to soil organic carbon in China’s forests from tropical to boreal zone. Environ. Pollut. 268:115941. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115941

Mach, K. J., Kraan, C. M., Adger, W. N., Buhaug, H., Burke, M., Fearon, J. D., et al. (2019). Climate as a risk factor for armed conflict. Nature 571, 193–197. doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1300-6

Maes, J., Barbosa, A., Baranzelli, C., Zulian, G., Batista e Silva, F., Vandecasteele, I., et al. (2015). More green infrastructure is required to maintain ecosystem services under current trends in land-use change in Europe. Landsc. Ecol. 30, 517–534. doi: 10.1007/s10980-014-0083-2

Manz, M., Wenzel, K. D., Dietze, U., and Schüürmann, G. (2001). Persistent organic pollutants in agricultural soils of Central Germany. Sci. Total Environ. 277, 187–198. doi: 10.1016/S0048-9697(00)00877-9

Minasny, B., Malone, B. P., McBratney, A. B., Angers, D. A., Arrouays, D., Chambers, A., et al. (2017). Soil carbon 4 per mille. Geoderma 292, 59–86. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.01.002

Mishra, P. K., and Rai, S. C. (2014). A cost–benefit analysis of indigenous soil and water conservation measures in Sikkim Himalaya, India. Mount. Res. Dev. 34, 27–35. doi: 10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-12-00013.1

Morgan, J. E., and Morgan, A. J. (1992). Heavy metal concentrations in the tissues, ingesta and faeces of ecophysiologically different earthworm species. Soil Biol. Biochem. 24, 1691–1697. doi: 10.1016/0038-0717(92)90171-S

Mythili, G., and Goedecke, J. (2016). “Economics of land degradation in India” in Economics of land degradation and improvement–a global assessment for sustainable development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun 431–469.

Nkonya, E., Anderson, W., Kato, E., Koo, J., Mirzabaev, A., von Braun, J., et al. (2016a). “Global cost of land degradation” in Economics of land degradation and improvement–A global assessment for sustainable development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer), 117–165.

Nkonya, E., Mirzabaev, A., and Von Braun, J. (2016b). Economics of land degradation and improvement–a global assessment for sustainable development . (Cham: Springer Nature).

Nkonya, E., Mirzabaev, A., and von Braun, J. (2016d). “Economics of land degradation and improvement: an introduction and overview” in Economics of land degradation and improvement–a global assessment for sustainable development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer), 1–14.

Nkonya, E., Srinivasan, R., Anderson, W., and Kato, E. (2016c). “Economics of land degradation and improvement in Bhutan” in Economics of land degradation and improvement–a global assessment for sustainable development . (eds) E. Nkonya, A. Mirzabaev, and J. von Braun (Cham: Springer), 327–383.

Prăvălie, R. (2021). Exploring the multiple land degradation pathways across the planet. Earth Sci. Rev. 220:103689. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103689

Raymond, C. M., Fazey, I., Reed, M. S., Stringer, L. C., Robinson, G. M., and Evely, A. C. (2010). Integrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management. J. Environ. Manag. 91, 1766–1777. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.03.023

Reed, M. S., Buenemann, M., Atlhopheng, J., Akhtar-Schuster, M., Bachmann, F., Bastin, G., et al. (2011). Cross-scale monitoring and assessment of land degradation and sustainable land management: a methodological framework for knowledge management. Land Degrad. Dev. 22, 261–271. doi: 10.1002/ldr.1087

Reed, M., and Stringer, L. C. (2015). Climate change and desertification: anticipating, assessing & adapting to future change in drylands . Montpellier: Agropolis International.

Rillig, M. C. (2012). Microplastic in terrestrial ecosystems and the soil? Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 6453–6454. doi: 10.1021/es302011r

Scopetani, C., Chelazzi, D., Cincinelli, A., Martellini, T., Leiniö, V., and Pellinen, J. (2022). Hazardous contaminants in plastics contained in compost and agricultural soil. Chemosphere 293:133645. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.133645

Serrano-Ruiz, H., Martin-Closas, L., and Pelacho, A. M. (2021). Biodegradable plastic mulches: impact on the agricultural biotic environment. Sci. Total Environ. 750:141228. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141228

Shukla, G., Rai, P., Manohar, K. A., and Chakravarty, S. (2020). Quantification of diversity, biomass and carbon storage of climber and liana community in a foothill forest of Indian eastern Himalayas. Acta Ecol. Sin. 40, 478–482. doi: 10.1016/j.chnaes.2020.09.009

Siril, S., Singh, M., Shahina, N. N., Bhat, J. A., Shukla, G., Panwar, P., et al. (2022). “Role of REDD+ in reducing land degradation and achieving SDGs” in Land degradation neutrality: achieving SDG 15 by Forest management . (eds) P. Panwar, G. Shukla, J. A. Bhat, and S. Chakravarty (Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore), 303–313.

Slipenchuk, M., Kirillov, S., Vorobievskaya, E., and Sedova, N. (2019). “Anthropogenic pollution of the southern part of the khibiny mountain massif and foothills” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science . 302:012024. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/302/1/012024

Tang, F. H., Lenzen, M., McBratney, A., and Maggi, F. (2021). Risk of pesticide pollution at the global scale. Nat. Geosci. 14, 206–210. doi: 10.1038/s41561-021-00712-5

Udayakumara, E. P. N., and Gunawardena, P. (2022). Modelling soil erosion and hydropower linkages of Rantambe reservoir, Sri Lanka: towards payments for ecosystem services. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 8, 1617–1634. doi: 10.1007/s40808-021-01169-6

UN. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development . A/RES/70/1. United Nations.

UNCCD (1994). United Nations convention to combat desertification in those countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification . Paris: Particularly in Africa Available at: https://catalogue.unccd.int/936_UNCCD_Convention_ENG.pdf .

UNCCD (Ed.) (2017). United Nations convention to combat desertification – Global land outlook . 1st Edn. Bonn: UNCCD Secretariat.

UNCCD. (2024). Land degradation neutrality . Available at: https://www.unccd.int/land-and-life/land-degradation-neutrality/overview (Accessed March 9, 2024).

UNEP (2016). Enhancing cooperation among the seven biodiversity related agreements and conventions at the national level using national biodiversity strategies and action plans . Nairobi: United Nations environment Programme (UNEP).

UNFCCC. (2021). Climate neutral now: guidelines for participation . Available at: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Guidelines%20CNN%20version%201.4.pdf

UNFCCC. (2024). What is the United Nations framework convention on climate change? Available at: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/what-is-the-united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change (Accessed February 24, 2024).

Uwizeyimana, H., Wang, M., Chen, W., and Khan, K. (2017). The eco-toxic effects of pesticide and heavy metal mixtures towards earthworms in soil. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 55, 20–29. doi: 10.1016/j.etap.2017.08.001

van der Gaast, W., Sikkema, R., and Vohrer, M. (2018). The contribution of forest carbon credit projects to addressing the climate change challenge. Clim. Pol. 18, 42–48. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2016.1242056

Wang, K., Li, X., Lyu, X., Dang, D., Dou, H., Li, M., et al. (2022). Optimizing the land use and land cover pattern to increase its contribution to carbon neutrality. Remote Sens. 14:4751. doi: 10.3390/rs14194751

Wang, Z., Zhang, F., Liu, S., and Xu, D. (2023). Land use structure optimization and ecological benefit evaluation in Chengdu-Chongqing urban agglomeration based on carbon neutrality. Land 12:1016. doi: 10.3390/land12051016

Webb, N. P., Marshall, N. A., Stringer, L. C., Reed, M. S., Chappell, A., and Herrick, J. E. (2017). Land degradation and climate change: building climate resilience in agriculture. Front. Ecol. Environ. 15, 450–459. doi: 10.1002/fee.1530

Weber, R., Watson, A., Forter, M., and Oliaei, F. (2011). Persistent organic pollutants and landfills-a review of past experiences and future challenges. Waste Manag. Res. 29, 107–121. doi: 10.1177/0734242X10390730

Williams, J. H., Jones, R. A., Haley, B., Kwok, G., Hargreaves, J., Farbes, J., et al. (2021). Carbon-neutral pathways for the United States. AGU Adv. 2:e2020AV000284. doi: 10.1029/2020AV000284

Wu, X., Tian, Z., and Guo, J. (2022). A review of the theoretical research and practical progress of carbon neutrality. Sustain. Operat. Comput. 3, 54–66. doi: 10.1016/j.susoc.2021.10.001

Yang, X., Zhang, X., Shu, X., Gong, J., Yang, J., Li, B., et al. (2023). The effects of polyethylene microplastics on the growth, reproduction, metabolic enzymes, and metabolomics of earthworms Eisenia fetida . Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 263:115390. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2023.115390

Zivin, J. G., and Neidell, M. (2018). Air pollution’s hidden impacts. Science 359, 39–40. doi: 10.1126/science.aap7711

Zomer, R. J., Neufeldt, H., Xu, J., Ahrends, A., Bossio, D., Trabucco, A., et al. (2016). Global tree cover and biomass carbon on agricultural land: the contribution of agroforestry to global and national carbon budgets. Sci. Rep. 6:29987. doi: 10.1038/srep29987

Keywords: land degradation, climate change, land degradation neutrality, carbon neutrality, synergy

Citation: Gunawardena MA, Lokupitiya E and Gunawardena P (2024) Land degradation neutrality and carbon neutrality: approaches, synergies, and challenges. Front. For. Glob. Change . 7:1398864. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2024.1398864

Received: 10 March 2024; Accepted: 26 June 2024; Published: 16 July 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Gunawardena, Lokupitiya and Gunawardena. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: M. Amritha Gunawardena, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Climate & Pollution Climate

Resources for Journalists

• Food & Farming Media Network
• How to Pitch Us
• Freelance Charter
• Work With Us

Sentient Media

• Environmental Policy
• Code of Ethics
• Testimonials

The Causes and Effects of Deforestation, Explained

A big aspect of climate change, summarized briefly.

Explainer • Climate • Environment

Words by Seth Millstein

Deforestation is the process of clearing forests and using the land for other purposes. Although it’s been a part of human society for thousands of years, the pace of deforestation has exploded in recent years, and the planet is paying the price. The causes and effects of deforestation are complex and intertwined, and the impacts are far-reaching and undeniable. Let’s take a closer look at how deforestation works , and how it negatively impacts the planet, animals and humanity.

What Is Deforestation?

Deforestation is the permanent clearing and repurposing of previously forested land. Though there are a number of motivations behind deforestation, it’s generally carried out to repurpose the land for other uses, mainly agriculture, or to extract resources.

Deforestation itself is nothing new, as humans have been clearing forested land for millennia . But the rate at which we destroy forests has increased dramatically: half of all deforestation that’s occurred since 8,000 BC took place in the last 100 years .

In addition to deforestation, forested land is also lost through a similar process known as forest degradation. This is when some, but not all, of the trees in a forested area are cleared, and the land is not repurposed for any other use.

While forest degradation isn’t a good thing by any measure, it’s much less harmful in the long-term than deforestation. Degraded forests will grow back over time, but the trees lost to deforestation are usually lost forever.

How Much Land Has Already Been Deforested?

When the last Ice Age ended around 10,000 years ago, there were roughly six billion hectares of forest on Earth. Since then, around a third of that forest , or two billion hectares, has been destroyed. Around 75 percent of this loss occurred over the last 300 years.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that currently, humans destroy around 10 million hectares of forest every year.

Where Does Deforestation Occur?

Although it happens around the world to some degree, around 95 percent of deforestation occurs in the tropics , and one-third of that takes place in Brazil. Another 14 percent occurs in Indonesia ; collectively, Brazil and Indonesia account for about 45 percent of all deforestation worldwide. About 20 percent of tropical deforestation takes place in South American countries other than Brazil, and another 17 percent occurs in Africa.

By contrast, around two-thirds of all forest degradation occurs in temperate regions , primarily North America, China, Russia and South Asia.

What Are the Biggest Drivers of Deforestation?

Humans deforest land for a number of reasons, but the biggest by far is agriculture. According to the United Nations, 90 percent of global deforestation is carried out to repurpose the land for agricultural use — mostly to raise cattle, grow soybeans and produce palm oil.

Beef Production

Beef production is the single-biggest driver of deforestation , tropical and otherwise. Around 39 percent of global deforestation , and 72 percent of deforestation in Brazil alone, is carried out to create grazing pastures for cattle.

Soy Production (Mostly to Feed Livestock)

Another significant driver of agricultural deforestation is soybean production. While soy is a popular meat and dairy replacement, only around seven percent of global soy is directly consumed by humans. The majority of soy —  75 percent — is used to feed livestock , meaning that most soy-driven deforestation is carried out to aid in agricultural expansion.

Palm Oil Production

The conversion of forested land to palm oil plantations is another primary motivation behind tropical deforestation. Palm oil is a versatile ingredient that’s used in a wide variety of everyday products, including nuts, bread, margarine, cosmetics, fuel and more. It’s derived from the fruit of oil palm trees, and is grown mostly in Indonesia and Malaysia.

Paper and Other Agriculture

Beef, soy and palm oil are collectively responsible for 60 percent of tropical deforestation. Other notable drivers include forestry and the production of paper (13 percent of tropical deforestation), rice and other cereals (10 percent), and vegetables, fruits and nuts (seven percent).

What Are the Environmental Impacts of Deforestation?

Deforestation impacts the environment in a number of negative ways, some more obvious than others.

Global Warming and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Deforestation emits massive amounts of greenhouse gasses, and is a significant contributor to rising global temperatures, in a few different ways.

Trees trap carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it in their trunks, branches, leaves and roots. This makes them a crucial tool for reducing global warming, as carbon dioxide is a potent greenhouse gas. When those trees are removed, however, that carbon dioxide is then released back into the air.

The greenhouse emissions don’t end there, however. As we’ve seen, the vast majority of deforested land is converted for agricultural use, and agriculture itself is a huge contributor to global warming as well. Animal agriculture is especially damaging, with scientists estimating that between 11 and 20 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions come from livestock farms .

Finally, the absence of trees on deforested land means that carbon dioxide that’s emitted from other sources, such as vehicles or local communities, is no longer being stored by trees. As such, deforestation increases net greenhouse emissions in three ways: it releases the carbon that’s already stored in the forest, it prevents the trapping of additional carbon from other sources and it facilitates the release of “new” greenhouse gasses through its conversion to agricultural land.

Loss of Biodiversity

Earth is a vast, interconnected ecosystem, and a certain level of biodiversity is required to ensure that it maintains its equilibrium. Deforestation is reducing this biodiversity every day.

Forests are teeming with life. Millions of different animals, plants and insects call the forest their home, including three million different species in the Amazon rainforest alone. Over a dozen animal species can only be found in the Amazon rainforest .

Destroying these forests destroys these animals’ homes and, in the long term, threatens the continued survival of their species. This isn’t a hypothetical concern: every day, about 135 plant and animal species go extinct because of deforestation , and an estimated 10,000 additional species — including 2,800 species of animal — are at risk of extinction due to deforestation in the Amazon alone. Palm oil production in particular has driven orangutans to the brink of extinction .

We are living in a period mass extinction — the sixth to occur during Earth’s lifetime. This matters not only because it’s sad when cute animals die, but rather, because accelerated periods of extinction threaten to disrupt the delicate equilibrium that allows Earth’s ecosystem to continue existing.

A 2023 study found that over the last 500 years, entire genuses have been going extinct at a rate 35 times higher than the historical average. This rate of extinction, the authors of the study wrote, is “destroying the conditions that make human life possible.”

Soil Erosion and Degradation

It may not get as much attention as oil or gold, but soil is a vital natural resource that we and countless other creatures rely on to survive. Trees and other natural vegetation shield soil from the sun and rain, and help hold it in place. When those trees are removed, the nutrient-rich topsoil becomes loosened, and is more susceptible to erosion and degradation by the elements.

Soil erosion and soil degradation have a number of dangerous effects. In the most general sense, degradation and erosion make soil less viable for supporting plant life, and reduces the number of plants that the land can support. Degraded soil is also worse at retaining water, thus increasing the risk of flooding . Sediment from eroded soil is also a major water pollutant that imperils fish populations and human drinking water alike.

These effects can continue for decades after deforested land is repurposed, as the crops grown on deforested land often don’t hold onto the topsoil as firmly as the natural vegetation did.

What Can Be Done to Reduce Deforestation?

Government regulation.

In Brazil, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has reduced deforestation rates in his country significantly since taking office in 2019. His administration has accomplished this largely by empowering regulatory agencies to more closely track and monitor illegal deforestation, increasing enforcement of anti-deforestation laws, and in general, cracking down on illegal deforestation.

Industry Pledges

There’s also some sign that voluntary industry pledges can help curb deforestation. In 2006, a collective of major soybean traders agreed to no longer buy soy that was grown on deforested land. Eight years later, the share of soybean expansion on previously-forested lands fell from 30 percent to one percent.

Reforestation and Afforestation

Lastly, there is reforestation and afforestation — the process of planting trees on deforested land or new land, respectively. In China, afforestation initiatives enacted by the government in the late 1970s have increased the country’s tree cover from 12 percent to 22 percent, while local reforestation programs have planted at least 50 million additional trees around the Earth in the last 35 years.

The Bottom Line

Deforestation’s environmental impact is clear: it releases greenhouse gasses, pollutes the water, kills plants and animals, erodes the soil and reduces the planet’s biodiversity. Unfortunately, it’s also become more and more common over the centuries, and without focused, aggressive action to curb it, deforestation will likely only get worse over time.

Independent Journalism Needs You

Seth Millstein is a writer and musician living in the Bay Area. He has helped launch several early-stage journalism startups, including Bustle and Timeline, and his work has been published in Bustle, Huffington Post, The Daily Dot and elsewhere.

• A New Wildlife Crossing Provides Safe Passage Over a Busy Interstate

Climate • 8 min read

More Climate & Pollution

How Ecotourism Became an Unexpected Climate Solution in an At-Risk Guatemalan National Park

Climate • 3 min read

Humans Destroying Ecosystems: How to Measure Our Impact on the Environment

You might have heard the claim humans are “destroying” the planet — but how do you actually measure that?

Climate • 7 min read

Why Eating Organic Isn’t a Climate Solution

Unfortunately, many organic foods are actually less climate-friendly.

• 13 Animals Going Extinct — in Large Part Thanks To Humans

Impossible’s New Ad Campaign Doubles Down on Dudes

Food • 6 min read

Got Bird Flu? Milk Production May Lead to More Human Infections, Study Finds

Health • 4 min read

What Do New Organic Rules for Livestock Mean, and How Do They Compare With Other Welfare Labels?

Future of Food • 12 min read

Cars Harm Animals — Could Wildlife Crossings Be a Solution?

Research • 11 min read

Most Read Today

• Chipotle’s Founder Is Betting on Plant-Forward Food
• The 30 Most Intelligent Animals in the World Might Surprise You
• What Foods to Avoid If You Are Lactose Intolerant
• How Much Protein You Need to Be Healthy, Explained
• Are Zoos Good or Bad for Animals? The Argument, Explained
• How Does Livestock Farming Affect Climate Change?

• Bahasa Indonesia
• Eastern Europe
• Moscow Oblast

Elektrostal

Elektrostal Localisation : Country Russia , Oblast Moscow Oblast . Available Information : Geographical coordinates , Population, Area, Altitude, Weather and Hotel . Nearby cities and villages : Noginsk , Pavlovsky Posad and Staraya Kupavna .

Information

Find all the information of Elektrostal or click on the section of your choice in the left menu.

• Update data

Elektrostal Demography

Information on the people and the population of Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Geography

Geographic Information regarding City of Elektrostal .

Elektrostal Distance

Distance (in kilometers) between Elektrostal and the biggest cities of Russia.

Elektrostal Map

Locate simply the city of Elektrostal through the card, map and satellite image of the city.

Elektrostal Nearby cities and villages

Elektrostal Weather

Weather forecast for the next coming days and current time of Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Sunrise and sunset

Find below the times of sunrise and sunset calculated 7 days to Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Hotel

Our team has selected for you a list of hotel in Elektrostal classified by value for money. Book your hotel room at the best price.

Elektrostal Nearby

Below is a list of activities and point of interest in Elektrostal and its surroundings.

Elektrostal Page

• Information /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#info
• Demography /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#demo
• Geography /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#geo
• Distance /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#dist1
• Map /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#map
• Nearby cities and villages /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#dist2
• Weather /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#weather
• Sunrise and sunset /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#sun
• Hotel /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#hotel
• Nearby /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#around
• Page /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#page
• Terms of Use
• Copyright © 2024 DB-City - All rights reserved
• Change Ad Consent Do not sell my data

• Visit Our Blog about Russia to know more about Russian sights, history
• Check out our Russian cities and regions guides
• Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to better understand Russia
• Info about getting Russian visa , the main airports , how to rent an apartment
• Our Expert answers your questions about Russia, some tips about sending flowers

Russian regions

• Belgorod oblast
• Bryansk oblast
• Ivanovo oblast
• Kaluga oblast
• Kostroma oblast
• Kursk oblast
• Lipetsk oblast
• Moskovskaya oblast
• Sergiev Posad
• Orlovskaya oblast
• Ryazan oblast
• Smolensk oblast
• Tambov oblast
• Tula oblast
• Tver oblast
• Vladimir oblast
• Voronezh oblast
• Yaroslavl oblast
• Map of Russia
• All cities and regions
• Blog about Russia
• News from Russia
• How to get a visa
• Flights to Russia
• Russian hotels
• Renting apartments
• Russian currency
• FIFA World Cup 2018
• Submit an article
• Flowers to Russia
• Ask our Expert

Moscow Oblast, Russia

The capital city of Moskovskaya oblast: Moscow .

Moscow Oblast - Overview

Moscow Oblast is a federal subject of Russia located in the Central Federal District. Moscow, the capital city of the country, is the administrative center of Moscow Oblast. At the same time, Moscow is not part of this region, it is a separate federal subject of Russia, a city of federal importance.

The population of Moscow Oblast is about 7,769,000 (2022), the area - 44,379 sq. km.

Moskovskaya oblast flag

Moskovskaya oblast coat of arms.

Moskovskaya oblast map, Russia

Moskovskaya oblast latest news and posts from our blog:.

23 June, 2022 / Natural Spring Gremyachiy Klyuch in Moscow Oblast .

23 March, 2022 / Main Cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces .

31 January, 2022 / Vasilyevsky (Shcherbatovsky) Castle in Moscow Oblast .

1 August, 2021 / Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery near Moscow .

4 August, 2020 / Sights of Moscow Oblast - the heart of Russia .

More posts..

History of Moscow Oblast

The territory of the Moscow region was inhabited more than 20 thousand years ago. In the first millennium AD, this land was inhabited mostly by the Finno-Ugric peoples (Meryane and Meshchera). In the 9th-10th centuries, the Slavs began active development of the region. The population was engaged in hunting, fisheries, agriculture, and cattle breeding.

In the middle of the 12th century, the territory of the present Moscow region became part of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, the first towns were founded (Volokolamsk in 1135, Moscow in 1147, Zvenigorod in 1152, Dmitrov in 1154). In the first half of the 13th century, the Vladimir-Suzdal principality was conquered by the Mongols.

In the 14th-16th centuries, Moscow principality became the center of unification of Russian lands. The history of the Moscow region is inextricably linked to military events of the Time of Troubles - the siege of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery by the troops of False Dmitry II, the first and second militias.

More historical facts…

In 1708, by decree of Peter the Great, Moskovskaya gubernia (province) was established. It included most of the territory of present Moscow oblast. In 1712, St. Petersburg became the capital of the Russian Empire and the significance of the Moscow region as the country’s economic center began to decrease.

In 1812, the Battle of Borodino took place near Moscow. It was the biggest battle of the Russian-French War of 1812. In the second half of the 19th century, especially after the peasant reform of 1861, the Moscow province experienced economic growth. In 1851, the first railway connected Moscow and St. Petersburg; in 1862 - Nizhny Novgorod.

The population of the Moscow region increased significantly (in 1847 - 1.13 million people, in 1905 - 2.65 million). On the eve of the First World War, Moscow was a city with a population of more than one million people.

In November, 1917, the Soviet power was established in the region. In 1918, the country’s capital was moved from St. Petersburg to Moscow that contributed to economic recovery of the province. In the 1920s-1930s, a lot of churches located near Moscow were closed, a large number of cultural monuments were destroyed. On January 14, 1929, Moscow Oblast was formed.

In 1941-1942, one of the most important battles of the Second World War took place on the territory of the region - the Battle for Moscow. In the postwar years, the growth of economic potential of the region continued; several science cities were founded (Dubna, Troitsk, Pushchino, Chernogolovka).

In the 1990s, the economy of Moscow Oblast experienced a deep crisis. Since the 1990s, due to the motorization of the population and commuting, road traffic situation in the Moscow region significantly deteriorated. Traffic jams have become commonplace.

Pictures of Moscow Oblast

Moscow Oblast scenery

Author: Mikhail Grizly

At the airport in the Moscow region

Author: Evgeny Davydov

Nature of Moscow Oblast

Author: Alexander Khmelkov

Moscow Oblast - Features

Moscow Oblast is located in the central part of the East European Plain, in the basin of the rivers of Volga, Oka, Klyazma, Moskva. The region stretches from north to south for 310 km, from west to east - 340 km. It was named after the city of Moscow, which however is not part of the region. Part of the administrative authorities of the region is located in Krasnogorsk.

On the territory of the Moscow region, there are 77 cities and towns, 19 of them have a population of more than 100 thousand people. The largest cities are Balashikha (518,300), Podolsk (309,600), Mytishchi (262,700), Khimky (256,300), Korolyov (225,300), Lubertsy (209,600), Krasnogorsk (174,900), Elektrostal (149,000), Odintsovo (138,900), Kolomna (136,800), Domodedovo (136,100).

The climate is temperate continental. Summers are warm, winters are moderately cold. The average temperature in January is minus 10 degrees Celsius, in July - plus 19 degrees Celsius.

One of the most important features of the local economy is its proximity to Moscow. Some of the cities (Odintsovo, Krasnogorsk, Mytishchi) have become in fact the “sleeping districts” of Moscow. The region is in second place in terms of industrial production among the regions of Russia (after Moscow).

The leading industries are food processing, engineering, chemical, metallurgy, construction. Moscow oblast has one of the largest in Russia scientific and technological complexes. Handicrafts are well developed (Gzhel ceramics, Zhostov trays, Fedoskino lacquered miniatures, toy-making).

Moscow railway hub is the largest in Russia (11 radial directions, 2,700 km of railways, the density of railways is the highest in Russia). There are two large international airports - Sheremetyevo and Domodedovo. Vnukovo airport is used for the flights within the country.

Attractions of Moscow Oblast

Moscow Oblast has more than 6,400 objects of cultural heritage:

• famous estate complexes,
• ancient towns with architectural monuments (Vereya, Volokolamsk, Dmitrov, Zaraysk, Zvenigorod, Istra, Kolomna, Sergiev Posad, Serpukhov),
• churches and monasteries-museums (the Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, Joseph-Volokolamsk monastery, Pokrovsky Khotkov monastery, Savvino Storozhevsky monastery, Nikolo Ugresha monastery).

The most famous estate complexes:

• Arkhangelskoye - a large museum with a rich collection of Western European and Russian art of the 17th-19th centuries,
• Abramtsevo - a literary and artistic center,
• Melikhovo - an estate owned by A.P. Chekhov at the end of the 19th century,
• Zakharovo and Bolshiye Vyazyomy included in the History and Literature Museum-Reserve of Alexander Pushkin,
• House-Museum of the composer P.I. Tchaikovsky in Klin,
• Muranovo that belonged to the poet F.I. Tyutchev,
• Shakhmatovo - the estate of the poet Alexander Blok.

The architectural ensemble of the Trinity Sergius Lavra is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The largest museum of the Moscow region is located in Serpukhov - Serpukhov Historical and Art Museum.

The places of traditional arts and crafts are the basis of the souvenir industry of Russia:

• Fedoskino - lacquer miniature painting,
• Bogorodskoe - traditional manufacture of wooden toys,
• Gzhel - unique tradition of creating ceramics,
• Zhostovo - painted metal crafts,
• Pavlovsky Posad - fabrics with traditional printed pattern.

Some of these settlements have museums dedicated to traditional crafts (for example, a toy museum in Bogorodskoe), as well as centers of learning arts and crafts.

Moskovskaya oblast of Russia photos

Landscapes of moscow oblast.

Nature of the Moscow region

Country road in the Moscow region

Moscow Oblast landscape

Author: Mikhail Kurtsev

Moscow Oblast views

Author: Asedach Alexander

Country life in Moscow Oblast

Author: Andrey Zakharov

Church in Moscow Oblast

Author: Groshev Dmitrii

Churches of Moscow Oblast

Church in the Moscow region

Cathedral in Moscow Oblast

The questions of our visitors

• Currently 2.85/5

Rating: 2.9 /5 (197 votes cast)

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

Elektrostal

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Elektrostal , city, Moscow oblast (province), western Russia . It lies 36 miles (58 km) east of Moscow city. The name, meaning “electric steel,” derives from the high-quality-steel industry established there soon after the October Revolution in 1917. During World War II , parts of the heavy-machine-building industry were relocated there from Ukraine, and Elektrostal is now a centre for the production of metallurgical equipment. Pop. (2006 est.) 146,189.

Current time by city

For example, New York

Current time by country

For example, Japan

Time difference

For example, London

For example, Dubai

Coordinates

For example, Hong Kong

For example, Delhi

For example, Sydney

Geographic coordinates of Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast, Russia

Coordinates of elektrostal in decimal degrees, coordinates of elektrostal in degrees and decimal minutes, utm coordinates of elektrostal, geographic coordinate systems.

WGS 84 coordinate reference system is the latest revision of the World Geodetic System, which is used in mapping and navigation, including GPS satellite navigation system (the Global Positioning System).

Geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) define a position on the Earth’s surface. Coordinates are angular units. The canonical form of latitude and longitude representation uses degrees (°), minutes (′), and seconds (″). GPS systems widely use coordinates in degrees and decimal minutes, or in decimal degrees.

Latitude varies from −90° to 90°. The latitude of the Equator is 0°; the latitude of the South Pole is −90°; the latitude of the North Pole is 90°. Positive latitude values correspond to the geographic locations north of the Equator (abbrev. N). Negative latitude values correspond to the geographic locations south of the Equator (abbrev. S).

Longitude is counted from the prime meridian ( IERS Reference Meridian for WGS 84) and varies from −180° to 180°. Positive longitude values correspond to the geographic locations east of the prime meridian (abbrev. E). Negative longitude values correspond to the geographic locations west of the prime meridian (abbrev. W).

UTM or Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system divides the Earth’s surface into 60 longitudinal zones. The coordinates of a location within each zone are defined as a planar coordinate pair related to the intersection of the equator and the zone’s central meridian, and measured in meters.

Elevation above sea level is a measure of a geographic location’s height. We are using the global digital elevation model GTOPO30 .

Elektrostal , Moscow Oblast, Russia

• Cover Letters
• Jobs I've Applied To
• Saved Searches
• Subscriptions

Marine Corps

Coast guard.

• Space Force
• Military Podcasts
• Benefits Home
• Military Pay and Money
• Veteran Health Care
• VA eBenefits
• Veteran Job Search
• Military Skills Translator
• Upload Your Resume
• Veteran Employment Project
• Vet Friendly Employers
• Career Advice
• Military Life Home
• Military Trivia Game
• Veterans Day
• Spouse & Family
• Military History
• Discounts Home
• Featured Discounts
• Veterans Day Restaurant Discounts
• Electronics
• Join the Military Home
• Contact a Recruiter
• Military Fitness

Navy SEALs, Sailors Who Refused COVID Vaccine Will Have Records Expunged After Legal Settlement

The U.S. Navy has reached a settlement with sailors who filed a lawsuit over the service's COVID-19 vaccine mandate, ending a nearly four-year saga that pitted Navy SEALs and other service members against their commander in chief.

Under an agreement in the case announced Wednesday, Navy sailors who refused the vaccine for religious reasons can now have their records corrected and will be protected against discrimination on promotion boards for the next three years, according to their attorneys.

Promotion boards "must not consider any adverse information related solely to COVID-19 vaccine refusal in cases in which a religious accommodation was requested," according to a release from the First Liberty Institute, a nonprofit legal organization that defends religious liberties, and the law firm Hacker Stephens LLP.

Read Next: Pentagon Reviewing 20 Medal of Honor Awards Given to Soldiers at the Wounded Knee Massacre

The Navy also agreed to review the personnel records of all plaintiffs to ensure that the service expunged any information on administrative separation, counseling or nonjudicial punishment for failing to comply with the mandate.

It will also correct the records of members who left the service and post a public statement "affirming the Navy's respect for religious service members," among other requirements.

The lawsuit, U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Biden, alleged that the Navy and the Defense Department violated their First Amendment rights to religious freedom by "categorically denying" their requests for religious exemptions from the COVID-19 vaccine.

The plaintiffs cited religious reasons for refusing the immunizations, objecting to the mRNA technology used to make several variations of the vaccine, citing the use of cell lines from fetuses aborted in the 1970s and 1980s to develop them. The vaccines themselves contain no aborted fetal tissue.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin issued a mandate on Aug. 24, 2021 , requiring all service members to be immunized against COVID-19. At the time, tens of thousands of U.S. troops had contracted the illness, and 41 had died.

The SEALs' case, filed in November 2021, later became a class action, representing at least 3,000 Navy service members who had filed religious accommodation requests by March 2022.

In the case, a district court judge quashed the Navy's ability to punish the sailors for refusing the vaccine order, a ruling upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that was later rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court .

Although the Defense Department lifted the vaccine mandate in January 2023 as required by the fiscal 2023 National Defense Authorization Act , the Fifth Circuit ruled that the case could continue in order to allow the district court to consider the Navy's record on religious accommodations.

The Justice Department had requested that the suit be dismissed, but the court denied the request and "the parties reached a settlement on behalf of all class members," according to attorneys for the plaintiffs.

The Navy also agreed to pay $1.5 million in legal fees to the plaintiffs' attorneys. Previously, the attorneys were awarded $1.8 million in a separate settlement of a suit against the Defense Department.

The plaintiffs will not receive any of the compensation in either settlement, and a settlement is not an admission of guilt or wrongdoing by either party.

Between March 2020 and December 2022, the Pentagon recorded 740,942 cases of COVID-19 among troops, family members, DoD employees and contractors, and 690 deaths, including 96 service members .

Roughly 17,000 service members refused the vaccine, and more than 8,400 were discharged for their decision, including 3,717 Marines, 2,041 Navy sailors, 1,841 Army soldiers, and 834 Air Force and Space Force members.

By March 2022, when the Navy stopped discharging sailors for refusing the vaccine, the service had received 3,320 requests for religious exemptions from active-duty sailors and 864 from the Navy Reserve. None had been approved.

Danielle Runyan, senior counsel at the First Liberty Institute, described the case in a statement as "long and difficult" but said the Navy SEALs "never gave up."

"We are thrilled that those members of the Navy who were guided by their conscience and steadfast in their faith will not be penalized in their Navy careers," Runyan said.

"This case was always about maintaining careers," the organization added on its website. "To ensure that personnel files are corrected quickly and protective language is included in the selection board convening orders for the next three years ... settlement is the best way to achieve that."

The Navy did not provide a comment on the settlement by publication.

Those interested in learning more about the settlement can check out First Liberty Institute's website on the subject .

Related: Supreme Court Rejects Military Chaplains' Lawsuit Claiming Refusal of COVID-19 Vaccine Hurt Their Careers

Patricia Kime

You May Also Like

A B-1B Lancer valued at more than $450 million that crashed in South Dakota at the start of this year missed the runway by...

Is Navy boot camp different than veterans remember it? Is it still hard? And what do those changes say about the sailors...

Sgt. David S. Price, who died in 1968, was stationed at Lima Site 85 -- a highly covert tactical air navigation radar site on...

The introduction of the new digital medical records system at a joint Veterans Affairs-Defense Department hospital went well...

Military News

• Investigations and Features
• Military Opinion

Select Service

• National Guard

Most Popular Military News

The Corps wants to make sure every individual Marine is equipped to deal with low-cost, weaponized drones no matter where...

As vice president, Harris has supported Biden's major initiatives on service members and veterans, including the massive...

Sgt. 1st Class Robert Card, the Army reservist who went on a shooting rampage in Lewiston, Maine, in October, seemed like a...

A senior noncommissioned officer at Fort Novosel, Alabama, was arrested Thursday on charges related to producing child...

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has directed a five-person panel to review the 20 Medals of Honor that the Army awarded to...

Latest Benefits Info

• The GI Bill Can Pay for Testing
• VA Fertility Benefits for Military Veterans
• The Next Deadline for Backdated PACT Act Payments Is Coming Soon. Here’s What You Need to Know
• Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI): What You Need to Know
• Using Your GI Bill For Graduate School

More Military Headlines

Austin, a retired four-star Army general and now a civilian Cabinet member and Biden appointee, painted Harris as prepared...

The indictment of Rim Jong Hyok by a grand jury in Kansas City accuses him of laundering the money through a Chinese bank and...

• The Army Is Reducing Job Choice for New Recruits in 2 Critical Fields
• Pentagon Reviewing 20 Medal of Honor Awards Given to Soldiers at the Wounded Knee Massacre
• Are Chemicals Still Spreading from a Titan-1 Missile Site in California? New Data Shows the Latest.
• Remains of Airman Killed in Vietnam War Attack on Secret CIA Radar Base in Laos Identified
• National Guard May Be Without Leadership After Last-Minute White House Nomination for New Chief
• $450 Million B-1B Lancer Crash Attributed to Crew Failures and 'Degradation of Airman Skills'
• Why 'Back in My Day' Views of Navy Boot Camp Changes May Be Missing the Point
• Rare Criminal Trial of a 4-Star Admiral Heats Up with Allegations of Lies, Affairs and Competing Stories
• US Navy Confirms Trash that Washed Ashore on Outer Banks Was from One of Its Ships

Military Benefits Updates

• Virginia Veterans Rally the Troops, State Leaders in Support of Education Benefits
• Marine Corps Wants Rifle-Mounted Jammers, 'Buckshot-Like' Ammo to Help Grunts Counter Drones
• Volunteer or Voluntold: Marines Announce Special Duty Assignment Campaign for Active Reserves
• Troops Will Start Getting Economic Hardship Bonuses This Month, Though Only $20 on Average
• Coast Guard Investigating Academy Official Who Threatened to Resign over its Handling of Sexual Assault Scandal
• Disaster Response Training at RIMPAC in Hawaii Grows
• Coast Guard Rescue Swimmer Honored for Saving 3 Imperiled Sailors in Alaska

Entertainment

• Brendan Fraser to Star as Dwight D. Eisenhower in New D-Day Movie 'Pressure'
• ‘Rabbids: Legends of the Multiverse’ Adds Strategic Twists to a Tower Defense Game
• Navy SEAL Vet Jack Carr's First-Ever Nonfiction Book Traces the Roots of the Global War on Terror

Get ready for assigned seats: Southwest Airlines ushers in big changes

It's the end of an era at Southwest Airlines.

After more than 50 years , the airline is getting rid of its open seating policy.

In a press release Thursday, the Dallas-based airline acknowledged "preferences have evolved with more customers taking longer flights where a seat assignment is preferred." The airline hopes moving to assigned seats and revamping its boarding process will broaden Southwest's appeal to both new and existing customers, four out of five who prefer assigned seats, according to the airline, which did not give an exact date for the switch. More details are expected in late September.

Assigned seating is just one is one several major operational changes in store. Southwest also plans to introduce premium seating options on all flights and introduce red-eye flights.

"While specific cabin layout details are still in design, Southwest expects roughly one-third of seats across the fleet to offer extended legroom, in line with that offered by industry peers on narrowbody aircraft," the airline said.

Southwest already unveiled a cabin refresh earlier this year and is in the middle of upgrading its fleet with changes announced in 2022, including in-seat USB charging and stronger Wi-Fi .

Booking for the airline's new red-eye flights opened Thursday. The first overnight flights will land next Valentine's Day, in five initial nonstop markets:

• Las Vegas to Baltimore
• Las Vegas to Orlando
• Los Angeles to Baltimore
• Los Angeles to Nashville
• Phoenix to Baltimore

The airline plans to eventually roll out red-eye flights to other markets and offer 24-hour operational capabilities.

The sweeping changes aim to add value for both customers and investors.

"Our goal is to restore industry-leading margins and historical levels of shareholder returns through our comprehensive plan to deliver transformational commercial initiatives, improved operational efficiency, and capital allocation discipline," Southwest's President, CEO and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors Bob Jordan said in a separate press release, announcing second quarter earnings . Operating revenues were up 4.5% year-over-year and hit an all-time quarterly high of $7.4 billion.

The airline's earnings have been under pressure in recent quarters, partly because of delays in plane deliveries from Boeing, which have impacted revenue and worsened cost pressures. Southwest is also facing pricing pressure as industry-wide overcapacity has dampened domestic airfares.

Contributing: Reuters