Clearing small areas of rainforest has outsized climate impact study
Clearing small areas of rainforest has outsized climate impact study

As humans continue to destroy Earth's forests at an alarming rate, a new study suggests that small-scale deforestation may have just as big an impact on climate change as large-scale destruction like wildfires or chainsaws.
Deforestation of less than 2 hectares represents only a tiny fraction of tropical deforestation but accounts for nearly half of carbon losses from vital sinks. This means that the quieter and smaller acts of forest destruction are responsible for most of the carbon losses observed over the past 30 years in these forests, which play an essential role in locking away carbon from the atmosphere.
These findings highlight the disproportionate climate impact of small-scale deforestation and underscore the need to address this scourge at a local level. Smaller clearings may be more likely to fly beneath the radar, overshadowed by larger and more spectacular destruction in better-known hotspots like the Amazon.
The researchers used satellite observations to examine deforestation in tropical zones since 1990 and built on previous research by factoring tree regrowth into the equation. They found that, while a major fire could reduce vast stretches of forest to ashes, the carbon impact is offset over the longer term as lush vegetation grows back. However, small-scale deforestation often represents a permanent change as the cleared land is turned into farms, roads, and villages.
The study also concluded that these areas have lost more carbon than they have absorbed over the past 30 years and stressed the importance of allowing forests to regrow after destruction. If we were able to act to significantly reduce activities related to degradation and deforestation, forests could regenerate very quickly and thus shift from a source to a sink for carbon.
For many underdeveloped nations, it is simply more profitable to clear forests than protect them, and breaking that perverse economic model has proved difficult. Policies to combat deforestation should take into account the reality for farmers on the ground and seek to provide additional sources of income so deforestation is not necessary.
As humans continue to destroy Earth's forests at an alarming rate, a new study suggests that small-scale deforestation may have just as big an impact on climate change as large-scale destruction like wildfires or chainsaws. Deforestation of less than 2 hectares represents only a tiny fraction of tropical deforestation but accounts for nearly half of carbon losses from vital sinks. This means that the quieter and smaller acts of forest destruction are responsible for most of the carbon losses observed over the past 30 years in these forests, which play an essential role in locking away carbon from the atmosphere.
These findings highlight the disproportionate climate impact of small-scale deforestation and underscore the need to address this scourge at a local level. Smaller clearings may be more likely to fly beneath the radar, overshadowed by larger and more spectacular destruction in better-known hotspots like the Amazon. The researchers used satellite observations to examine deforestation in tropical zones since 1990 and built on previous research by factoring tree regrowth into the equation. They found that, while a major fire could reduce vast stretches of forest to ashes, the carbon impact is offset over the longer term as lush vegetation grows back. However, small-scale deforestation often represents a permanent change as the cleared land is turned into farms, roads, and villages.
The study also concluded that these areas have lost more carbon than they have absorbed over the past 30 years and stressed the importance of allowing forests to regrow after destruction. If we were able to act to significantly reduce activities related to degradation and deforestation, forests could regenerate very quickly and thus shift from a source to a sink for carbon.
For many underdeveloped nations, it is simply more profitable to clear forests than protect them, and breaking that perverse economic model has proved difficult. Policies to combat deforestation should take into account the reality for farmers on the ground and seek to provide additional sources of income so deforestation is not necessary.