Editing IPCC:AR6/SR15/Chapter-5 (section)

==== 5.4.1.3 Land-based agriculture, forestry and ocean: mitigation response options and carbon dioxide removal ====

<div id="section-5-4-1-3-block-1"></div>

In the AFOLU sector, dietary change towards global healthy diets, that is, a shift from over-consumption of animal-related to plant-related diets, and food waste reduction (see Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1) are in synergy with SDGs 2 and 6, and SDG 3 through lower consumption of animal products and reduced losses and waste throughout the food system, contributing to achieving SDGs 12 and 15 (Bajželj et al., 2014; Bustamante et al., 2014; Tilman and Clark, 2014; Hiç et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r219|219]]</sup> .

Power dynamics play an important role in achieving behavioural change and sustainable consumption (Fuchs et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r220|220]]</sup> . In forest management (see Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.2), encouraging responsible sourcing of forest products and securing indigenous land tenure has the potential to increase economic benefits by creating decent jobs (SDG 8), maintaining biodiversity (SDG 15), facilitating innovation and upgrading technology (SDG 9), and encouraging responsible and just decision-making (SDG 16) ( ''medium evidence, high agreement'' ) (Ding et al., 2016; WWF, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r221|221]]</sup> ''.''

Emerging evidence indicates that future mitigation efforts that would be required to reach stringent climate targets, particularly those associated with carbon dioxide removal (CDR) (e.g., afforestation and reforestation and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage; BECCS), may also impose significant constraints upon poor and vulnerable communities (SDG 1) via increased food prices and competition for arable land, land appropriation and dispossession (Cavanagh and Benjaminsen, 2014; Hunsberger et al., 2014; Work, 2015; Muratori et al., 2016; Smith et al., 2016; Burns and Nicholson, 2017; Corbera et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r222|222]]</sup> with disproportionate negative impacts upon rural poor and indigenous populations (SDG 1) ( ''robust evidence, high agreement'' ) (Section 5.4.2.2, Table 5.2, Figure 5.2) (Grubert et al., 2014; Grill et al., 2015; Zhang and Chen, 2015; Fricko et al., 2016; Johansson et al., 2016; Aha and Ayitey, 2017; De Stefano et al., 2017; Shi et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r223|223]]</sup> . Crops for bioenergy may increase irrigation needs and exacerbate water stress with negative associated impacts on SDGs 6 and 10 (Boysen et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r224|224]]</sup> .

Ocean iron fertilization and enhanced weathering have two-way interactions with life under water and on land and food security (SDGs 2, 14 and 15) (Table 5.2). Development of blue carbon resources through coastal (mangrove) and marine (seaweed) vegetative ecosystems encourages: integrated water resource management (SDG 6) (Vierros, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r225|225]]</sup> ; promotes life on land (SDG 15) (Potouroglou et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r226|226]]</sup> ; poverty reduction (SDG 1) (Schirmer and Bull, 2014; Lamb et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r227|227]]</sup> ; and food security (SDG 2) (Ahmed et al., 2017a, b; Duarte et al., 2017; Sondak et al., 2017; Vierros, 2017; Zhang et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r228|228]]</sup> .

<div id="section-5-4-1-3-block-2"></div>

<span id="figure-5.2"></span>
<!-- START IMG -->
<!-- IMG TITLE -->
'''Figure 5.2'''

<span id="synergies-and-trade-offs-and-gross-sustainable-development-goal-sdg-interaction-with-individual-mitigation-options."></span>
<!-- IMG CAPTION -->
'''Synergies and trade-offs and gross Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)-interaction with individual mitigation options.'''
<!-- IMG FILE -->
[[File:dd578203a9cce30ebcc3f74fd47747f9 Figure5.2-1024x754.jpg]]

The top three wheels represent synergies and the bottom three wheels show trade-offs. The colours on the border of the wheels correspond to the SDGs listed above, starting at the 9 o’clock position, with reading guidance in the top-left corner with the quarter circle (Note 1). Mitigation (climate action, SDG 13) is at the centre of the circle. The coloured segments inside the circles can be counted to arrive at the number of synergies (green) and trade-offs (red). The length of the coloured segments shows the strength of the synergies or trade-offs (Note 3) and the shading indicates confidence (Note 2). Various mitigation options within the energy demand sector, energy supply sector, and land and ocean sector, and how to read them within a segment are shown in grey (Note 4). See also Table 5.2.

Original Creation for this Report based on a Table in the Chapter 5 – Annex

<!-- END IMG -->
<span id="sustainable-development-implications-of-1.5c-and-2c-mitigation-pathways"></span>