IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/TS - Revision history

Laura at 05:32, 3 June 2026

2026-06-03T05:32:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:32, 3 June 2026
Line 45:		Line 45:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts2~~.jpg~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts2.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->

Laura: /* Technical Summary */

2026-05-29T08:53:28Z

Technical Summary

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:53, 29 May 2026
Line 505:		Line 505:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS15a???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts15-a.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.15 \| Pathways linking socioeconomic development, mitigation responses and land (Panel A).'''		'''Figure TS.15 \| Pathways linking socioeconomic development, mitigation responses and land (Panel A).'''
Line 512:		Line 513:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS15b???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts15-a.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.15 \| Pathways linking socioeconomic development, mitigation responses and land (Panel B).'''<br>		'''Figure TS.15 \| Pathways linking socioeconomic development, mitigation responses and land (Panel B).'''<br>

Laura: /* TS.7 Risk management and decision making in relation to sustainable development */

2026-05-29T08:52:48Z

TS.7 Risk management and decision making in relation to sustainable development

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:52, 29 May 2026
Line 400:		Line 400:

	'''Significant gaps in knowledge exist when it comes to understanding the effectiveness of policy instruments and institutions related to land use management, forestry, agriculture and bioenergy.''' Interdisciplinary research is needed on the impacts of policies and measures in land sectors. Knowledge gaps are due in part to the highly contextual and local nature of land and climate measures and the long time periods needed to evaluate land use change in its socio-economic frame, as compared to technological investments in energy or industry that are somewhat more comparable. Significant investment is needed in monitoring, evaluation and assessment of policy impacts across different sectors and levels. {7.8}		'''Significant gaps in knowledge exist when it comes to understanding the effectiveness of policy instruments and institutions related to land use management, forestry, agriculture and bioenergy.''' Interdisciplinary research is needed on the impacts of policies and measures in land sectors. Knowledge gaps are due in part to the highly contextual and local nature of land and climate measures and the long time periods needed to evaluate land use change in its socio-economic frame, as compared to technological investments in energy or industry that are somewhat more comparable. Significant investment is needed in monitoring, evaluation and assessment of policy impacts across different sectors and levels. {7.8}

	<!-- START TABLE -->		<!-- START TABLE -->
	'''Table TS.1 \| Selection of Policies/Programmes/Instruments that support response options.'''		'''Table TS.1 \| Selection of Policies/Programmes/Instruments that support response options.'''

	<!-- TABLE -->		<!-- TABLE -->
	{\| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse:collapse; width:100%;"		{\| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse:collapse; width:100%;"

Laura: /* TS.7 Risk management and decision making in relation to sustainable development */

2026-05-29T08:52:22Z

TS.7 Risk management and decision making in relation to sustainable development

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:52, 29 May 2026
Line 384:		Line 384:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS14???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts14.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.14 \| Risks to land-related human systems and ecosystems from global climate change, socio-economic development and mitigation choices.'''<br>		'''Figure TS.14 \| Risks to land-related human systems and ecosystems from global climate change, socio-economic development and mitigation choices.'''<br>

Laura: /* TS.6 Interlinkages between desertification, land degradation, food security and GHG fluxes: Synergies, trade-offs and integrated response options */

2026-05-29T08:51:57Z

TS.6 Interlinkages between desertification, land degradation, food security and GHG fluxes: Synergies, trade-offs and integrated response options

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:51, 29 May 2026
Line 324:		Line 324:

	'''Many response options have been practised in many regions for many years; however, there is limited knowledge of the efficacy and broader implications of other response options (''high confidence'').''' For the response options with a large evidence base and ample experience, further implementation and upscaling would carry little risk of adverse side effects (''high confidence''). However, for other options, the risks are larger as the knowledge gaps are greater; for example, uncertainty in the economic and social aspects of many land response options hampers the ability to predict their effects (''medium confidence''). Furthermore, Integrated Assessment Models, like those used to develop the pathways in the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15), omit many of these response options and do not assess implications for all land challenges (''high confidence''). {6.4}		'''Many response options have been practised in many regions for many years; however, there is limited knowledge of the efficacy and broader implications of other response options (''high confidence'').''' For the response options with a large evidence base and ample experience, further implementation and upscaling would carry little risk of adverse side effects (''high confidence''). However, for other options, the risks are larger as the knowledge gaps are greater; for example, uncertainty in the economic and social aspects of many land response options hampers the ability to predict their effects (''medium confidence''). Furthermore, Integrated Assessment Models, like those used to develop the pathways in the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15), omit many of these response options and do not assess implications for all land challenges (''high confidence''). {6.4}

	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS12???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts12.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.12 \| Potential deployment area of land management responses (see Table 6.1) across land-use types (or anthromes, see Section 6.3), when selecting responses having only co-benefits for local challenges and for climate change mitigation and no large adverse side effects on global food security.''' See Figure 6.2 for the criteria used to map challenges considered (desertification, land degradation, climate change adaptation, chronic undernourishment, biodiversity, groundwater stress and water quality). No response option was identified for barren lands.		'''Figure TS.12 \| Potential deployment area of land management responses (see Table 6.1) across land-use types (or anthromes, see Section 6.3), when selecting responses having only co-benefits for local challenges and for climate change mitigation and no large adverse side effects on global food security.''' See Figure 6.2 for the criteria used to map challenges considered (desertification, land degradation, climate change adaptation, chronic undernourishment, biodiversity, groundwater stress and water quality). No response option was identified for barren lands.
Line 333:		Line 335:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS13a???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts13-a.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.13 \| Potential global contribution of response options to mitigation, adaptation, combating desertification and land degradation, and enhancing food security (Panel A).'''		'''Figure TS.13 \| Potential global contribution of response options to mitigation, adaptation, combating desertification and land degradation, and enhancing food security (Panel A).'''
Line 340:		Line 343:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS13b???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts13-b.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.13 \| Potential global contribution of response options to mitigation, adaptation, combating desertification and land degradation, and enhancing food security (Panel B).'''<br>		'''Figure TS.13 \| Potential global contribution of response options to mitigation, adaptation, combating desertification and land degradation, and enhancing food security (Panel B).'''<br>

Laura: /* TS.5 Food security */

2026-05-29T08:51:01Z

TS.5 Food security

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:51, 29 May 2026
Line 283:		Line 283:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS11???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts11.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.11 \| Response options related to food system and their potential impacts on mitigation and adaptation.''' Many response options offer significant potential for both mitigation and adaptation.		'''Figure TS.11 \| Response options related to food system and their potential impacts on mitigation and adaptation.''' Many response options offer significant potential for both mitigation and adaptation.

Laura: /* TS.5 Food security */

2026-05-29T08:50:42Z

TS.5 Food security

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:50, 29 May 2026
Line 271:		Line 271:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS10???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts10.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.10 \| AgMIP median yield changes (%) for RCP8.5''' (2070–2099 in comparison to 1980–2010 baseline) with CO2 effects and explicit nitrogen stress over five GCMsfour Global Gridded Crop Models (GGCMs) for rainfed maize, wheat, rice, and soy (20 ensemble members from EPIC, GEPIC, pDSSAT, and PEGASUS; except for rice which has 15). Grey areas indicate historical areas with little to no yield capacity. All models use a 0.5° grid, but there are differences in grid cells simulated to represent agricultural land. While some models simulated all land areas, others simulated only potential suitable cropland area according to evolving climatic conditions. Others utilised historical harvested areas in 2000 according to various data sources (Rosenzweig et al. 2014).		'''Figure TS.10 \| AgMIP median yield changes (%) for RCP8.5''' (2070–2099 in comparison to 1980–2010 baseline) with CO2 effects and explicit nitrogen stress over five GCMsfour Global Gridded Crop Models (GGCMs) for rainfed maize, wheat, rice, and soy (20 ensemble members from EPIC, GEPIC, pDSSAT, and PEGASUS; except for rice which has 15). Grey areas indicate historical areas with little to no yield capacity. All models use a 0.5° grid, but there are differences in grid cells simulated to represent agricultural land. While some models simulated all land areas, others simulated only potential suitable cropland area according to evolving climatic conditions. Others utilised historical harvested areas in 2000 according to various data sources (Rosenzweig et al. 2014).

Laura: /* TS.5 Food security */

2026-05-29T08:50:24Z

TS.5 Food security

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:50, 29 May 2026
Line 249:		Line 249:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS9???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts9.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.9 \| Global trends in (a)''' yields of maize, rice, and wheat (FAOSTAT 2018) – the top three crops grown in the world; '''(b)''' production of crop and animal calories and use of crop calories as livestock feed (FAOSTAT 2018); '''(c)''' production from marine and aquaculture fisheries (FishStat 2019); '''(d)''' land used for agriculture (FAOSTAT 2018); '''(e)''' food trade in calories (FAOSTAT 2018); '''(f)''' food supply and required food (i.e., based on human energy requirements for medium physical activities) from 1961–2012 (FAOSTAT 2018; Hiç et al. 2016); '''(g)''' prevalence of overweight, obesity and underweight from 1975–2015 (Abarca-Gómez et al. 2017); and '''(h)''' GHG emissions for the agriculture sector, excluding land-use change (FAOSTAT 2018). For figures (b) and (e), data provided in mass units were converted into calories using nutritive factors (FAO 2001b). Data on emissions due to burning of savanna and cultivation of organic soils is provided only after 1990 (FAOSTAT 2018).		'''Figure TS.9 \| Global trends in (a)''' yields of maize, rice, and wheat (FAOSTAT 2018) – the top three crops grown in the world; '''(b)''' production of crop and animal calories and use of crop calories as livestock feed (FAOSTAT 2018); '''(c)''' production from marine and aquaculture fisheries (FishStat 2019); '''(d)''' land used for agriculture (FAOSTAT 2018); '''(e)''' food trade in calories (FAOSTAT 2018); '''(f)''' food supply and required food (i.e., based on human energy requirements for medium physical activities) from 1961–2012 (FAOSTAT 2018; Hiç et al. 2016); '''(g)''' prevalence of overweight, obesity and underweight from 1975–2015 (Abarca-Gómez et al. 2017); and '''(h)''' GHG emissions for the agriculture sector, excluding land-use change (FAOSTAT 2018). For figures (b) and (e), data provided in mass units were converted into calories using nutritive factors (FAO 2001b). Data on emissions due to burning of savanna and cultivation of organic soils is provided only after 1990 (FAOSTAT 2018).

Laura: /* TS.4 Land degradation */

2026-05-29T08:50:01Z

TS.4 Land degradation

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:50, 29 May 2026
Line 215:		Line 215:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS7???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts7.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.7 \| Conceptual figure illustrating that climate change impacts interact with land management to determine sustainable or degraded outcome.''' Climate change can exacerbate many degradation processes (Table 4.1) and introduce novel ones (e.g., permafrost thawing or biome shifts), hence management needs to respond to climate impacts in order to avoid, reduce or reverse degradation. The types and intensity of human land-use and climate change impacts on lands affect their carbon stocks and their ability to operate as carbon sinks. In managed agricultural lands, degradation typically results in reductions of soil organic carbon stocks, which also adversely affects land productivity and carbon sinks. In forest land, reduction in biomass carbon stocks alone is not necessarily an indication of a reduction in carbon sinks. Sustainably managed forest landscapes can have a lower biomass carbon density but the younger forests can have a higher growth rate, and therefore contribute stronger carbon sinks, than older forests. Ranges of carbon sinks in forest and agricultural lands are overlapping. In some cases, climate change impacts may result in increased productivity and carbon stocks, at least in the short term.		'''Figure TS.7 \| Conceptual figure illustrating that climate change impacts interact with land management to determine sustainable or degraded outcome.''' Climate change can exacerbate many degradation processes (Table 4.1) and introduce novel ones (e.g., permafrost thawing or biome shifts), hence management needs to respond to climate impacts in order to avoid, reduce or reverse degradation. The types and intensity of human land-use and climate change impacts on lands affect their carbon stocks and their ability to operate as carbon sinks. In managed agricultural lands, degradation typically results in reductions of soil organic carbon stocks, which also adversely affects land productivity and carbon sinks. In forest land, reduction in biomass carbon stocks alone is not necessarily an indication of a reduction in carbon sinks. Sustainably managed forest landscapes can have a lower biomass carbon density but the younger forests can have a higher growth rate, and therefore contribute stronger carbon sinks, than older forests. Ranges of carbon sinks in forest and agricultural lands are overlapping. In some cases, climate change impacts may result in increased productivity and carbon stocks, at least in the short term.
Line 222:		Line 223:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS8???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts8.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.8 \| Interaction of human and climate drivers can exacerbate desertification and land degradation. Figure shows key desertification and land degradation issues, how they impact climate change, and the key drivers, with potential solutions.''' Climate change exacerbates the rate and magnitude of several ongoing land degradation and desertification processes. Human drivers of land degradation and desertification include expanding agriculture, agricultural practices and forest management. In turn, land degradation and desertification are also drivers of climate change through GHG emissions, reduced rates of carbon uptake, and reduced capacity of ecosystems to act as carbon sinks into the future. Impacts on climate change are either warming (in red) or cooling (in blue).		'''Figure TS.8 \| Interaction of human and climate drivers can exacerbate desertification and land degradation. Figure shows key desertification and land degradation issues, how they impact climate change, and the key drivers, with potential solutions.''' Climate change exacerbates the rate and magnitude of several ongoing land degradation and desertification processes. Human drivers of land degradation and desertification include expanding agriculture, agricultural practices and forest management. In turn, land degradation and desertification are also drivers of climate change through GHG emissions, reduced rates of carbon uptake, and reduced capacity of ecosystems to act as carbon sinks into the future. Impacts on climate change are either warming (in red) or cooling (in blue).

Laura: /* TS.3 Desertification */

2026-05-29T08:49:33Z

TS.3 Desertification

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:49, 29 May 2026
Line 179:		Line 179:
	<!-- START IMG -->		<!-- START IMG -->
	<!-- IMG FILE -->		<!-- IMG FILE -->
	[[File:~~FigureTS6???~~.jpg]]		[[File:SRCCL_Technical-Summary-figure-ts6.jpg]]

	<!-- IMG TITLE -->		<!-- IMG TITLE -->
	'''Figure TS.6 \| Geographical distribution of drylands, delimited based on the aridity index (AI).''' The classification of AI is: Humid AI > 0.65, Dry sub-humid 0.50 < AI ≤ 0.65, Semi-arid 0.20 < AI ≤ 0.50, Arid 0.05 < AI ≤ 0.20, Hyper-arid AI < 0.05. Data: TerraClimate precipitation and potential evapotranspiration (1980–2015) (Abatzoglou et al. 2018).		'''Figure TS.6 \| Geographical distribution of drylands, delimited based on the aridity index (AI).''' The classification of AI is: Humid AI > 0.65, Dry sub-humid 0.50 < AI ≤ 0.65, Semi-arid 0.20 < AI ≤ 0.50, Arid 0.05 < AI ≤ 0.20, Hyper-arid AI < 0.05. Data: TerraClimate precipitation and potential evapotranspiration (1980–2015) (Abatzoglou et al. 2018).