Reforestation is a cost-effective natural climate solution. Estimates suggest that reforestation since 2000 is on pace to remove 103 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere between 2020-2050. Increasing the pace of tropical reforestation would remove substantial amounts of additional carbon dioxide at a low cost. However, the primary solution will still be cutting carbon emissions since trees have a biological limit in response to climate change.

Please have a look here: https://earthinnovation.org/2019/05/reforestation-can-help-reverse-the-climate-and-extinction-crises/#:~:text=Reforestation%20is%20a%20cost%2Deffective,carbon%20dioxide%20at%20low%20cost.

And here: https://journalajee.com/index.php/AJEE/article/view/30113

Thanks, Abdun Naqib Jimmy, for your comments.

Reforestation without native species, traditional practice, Indigenous land rights may create more challenges to many Indigenous people than the solutions. It also can encourage clear-cut many traditionally maintained forests. There are many examples of how reforestation created many challenges to many Indigenous communities all over the world.

As such, given the importance native species, traditional practice and indigenous land rights play in creating a holistic solution, has there been any research developed/published that has evaluated their response to reforestation in a data-driven way?

For a successful long term reforestation plan, of course, it should be advocated to firstly, to collaborate a reforestation strategy through contextual dialogues with stakeholders (including local community members/indigenous people), secondly, commit to involving these stakeholders as then the indigenous would have vested interest in protecting their resources. Consequently, such a long term plan should ideally involve continuous evaluation and adjust reforestation interventions.

To better understand the dynamic trade-offs reforestation poses for stakeholders and promote forest recovery, is there any way to quantify the challenges faced by indigenous communities over the world, in order to benchmark future reforestation plans that involve the indigenous?

My point is, how to empirically indicate reforestation addressing all the points you mentioned is the better approach?

Thanks Abdun Naqib Jimmy There is much academic research is already done by many Indigenous and Indigenous scholars, if you google you may find those.

I surmise that that you have been influenced to think (along with most of the global society) that we can stage manage what is mainly NATURAL climate change by curbing the emissions of carbon containing greenhouse gases that result from human activity.

I offer actual climate science that shows further additions of carbon containing greenhouse gases to the CURRENT global atmosphere will have little or no effect on the climate.

I hope what I am sending to you will influence you to investigate actual climate science that is at odds with the conventional mantra that we are in a manmade "climate crisis".

In the interest of bringing, you up to date on just how wrong and misinformed most of society has become over the climate issue......

.......I suggest that you read the email (below) that I recently sent this to Canada's Environment and Climate Change Minister, the Minister of Finance and Prime Minister ... as well as the leaders of the other major federal political parties.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MY EMAIL follows:

I am offering for your perusal and edification Dr. Happer's March 25, 2021, presentation titled :

'CO₂ is not a Pollutant — Exposing the Fraud Behind the Global Reset/Green New Deal' ....

..... however, it could be labelled.....

........ 'A mandatory short course on climate for policy makers'.

Please take the time to watch AT LEAST the important physics presented by Happer starting at  12:30.

Happer speaks for about 25 minutes with illustrative slides .... and at about 12:30 Happer presents the rock-solid physics that show further additions of CO2 (and methane) to the CURRENT global atmosphere will have an insignificant effect on global warming.

Happer's presentation is followed by a fascinating 15-minute summary of the decades-long history that led to the current misinformed climate alarmism, and the economically suicidal implications of President Biden's recent executive orders dealing with the climate and CO2 emissions.

Quoting some of Happer's statements:

“Policies to slow CO2 emissions are based on flawed computer models which exaggerate warming by factors of 2 or 3. “More CO2 is an overall benefit, so costly ‘mitigation’ schemes are harmful. We should have the courage to do nothing about CO2 emissions.”

....see:

CO₂ is not a Pollutant — Exposing the Fraud Behind the Global Reset/Green New Deal - YouTube

I hope this helps in shining a new light on the climate discussion ... which almost certainly will be news to those of you who are being held captive by the currently predominant 'groupthink' concerning the supposed climate crisis/emergency and the touted necessity of curbing emissions of carbon containing greenhouse gases.

Peter Salonius

Thanks Peter Salonius for your comment. Please send me some readings to educate me. Thanks

Hello Ranjan Datta

For your education concerning actual climate science, please listen carefully to the entirety of Dr. Happer's presentation at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qhxj6GkWpE

Please refer to the link Preprint Formation of CO and CO2 molecules under the tree roof and th...

Thanks Peter Salonius and Mubarak Ali for your comments and suggested readings and videos