Editing IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-6 (section)

==== 6.4.3.2 Impacts of integrated response options on the UNSDGs ====

<div id="section-6-4-3-2-impactsofintegratedresponseoptionsontheunsdgs-block-1"></div>

Tables 6.73–6.75 summarise the impact of the integrated response options on the UN SDGs. Some of the synergies between response options and SDGs in the literature include positive poverty eradication impacts (SDG 1) from activities like improved water management or improved management of supply chains, or positive gender impacts (SDG 5) from livelihood diversification or use of local seeds. Because many land management options only produce indirect or unclear effects on SDGs, we did not include these where there was no literature. Therefore, the value chain and governance options appear to offer more direct benefits for SDG.

However, it is noted that some SDG are internally difficult to assess because they contain many targets, not all of which could be evaluated (e.g., SDG 17 is about partnerships, but has targets ranging from foreign aid to debt restructuring, technology transfer to trade openness). Additionally, it is noted that some SDG contradict one another – for example, SDG 9 to increase industrialisation and infrastructure and SDG 15 to improve life on land. More industrialisation is likely to lead to increased resource demands with negative effects on habitats. Therefore, a positive association on one SDG measure might be directly correlated with a negative measure on another, and the table needs to be read with caution for that reason. The specific caveats on each of these interactions can be found in the supplementary material tables in the Chapter 6 Appendix.

Overall, several response options have co-benefits across 10 or more SDGs with no adverse side effects on any SDG: increased food production, improved grazing land management, agroforestry, integrated water management, reduced post-harvest losses, sustainable sourcing, livelihood diversification and disaster risk management. Other response options may have strengths in some SDGs but require trade-offs with others. For example, use of local seeds brings many positive benefits for poverty and hunger reduction, but may reduce international trade (SDG 17). Other response options like enhanced urban food systems, management of urban sprawl, or management of supply chains are generally positive for many SDGs but may trade-off with one, like clean water (SDG 6) or decent work (SDG 8), as they may increase water use or slow economic growth. Several response options, including avoidance of grassland conversion, reduced deforestation and forest degradation, reforestation and afforestation, biochar, restoration and avoided conversion of peatlands and coastlands, have trade-offs across multiple SDGs, primarily as they prioritise land health over food production and poverty eradication. Several response options such as bioenergy and BECCS and some risk-sharing instruments, such as crop insurance, trade-off over multiple SDG with potentially significant adverse consequences.

Overall, across categories of SDG and NCPs; 17 of 40 options deliver co-benefits or no adverse side effects for the full range of NCPs and SDGs.This includes most agriculture- and soil-based land management options, many ecosystem-based land management options, forest management, reduced post-harvest losses, sustainable sourcing, improved energy use in food systems, and livelihood diversification. Only three options (afforestation, bioenergy and BECCS and some types of risk-sharing instruments, such as crop insurance) have potentially adverse side effects for five or more NCPs or SDGs.

<div id="section-6-4-3-2-impactsofintegratedresponseoptionsontheunsdgs-block-2"></div>

<span id="table-6.73"></span>
<!-- START IMG -->
<!-- TABLE IMG -->
<!-- IMG TITLE -->
'''Table 6.73'''

<span id="impacts-of-integrated-response-options-based-on-land-management-on-the-un-sdgs."></span>
<!-- IMG CAPTION -->
'''Impacts of integrated response options based on land management on the UN SDGs.'''
<!-- IMG FILE -->
[[File:fe61ae3ab82c708cc88f5cb96c310764 table-6.73a.png]] [[File:bc4aa72df3babd425570082cc77c305f table-6.73b.png]]

<!-- END IMG -->
<div id="section-6-4-3-2-impactsofintegratedresponseoptionsontheunsdgs-block-3"></div>

<span id="table-6.74"></span>
<!-- START IMG -->
<!-- TABLE IMG -->
<!-- IMG TITLE -->
'''Table 6.74'''

<span id="impacts-of-integrated-response-options-based-on-value-chain-interventions-on-the-un-sdgs."></span>
<!-- IMG CAPTION -->
'''Impacts of integrated response options based on value chain interventions on the UN SDGs.'''
<!-- IMG FILE -->
[[File:a539ef06414d1c73695c73e2387ac377 table-6.74.png]]

<!-- END IMG -->
<div id="section-6-4-3-2-impactsofintegratedresponseoptionsontheunsdgs-block-4"></div>

<span id="table-6.75"></span>
<!-- START IMG -->
<!-- TABLE IMG -->
<!-- IMG TITLE -->
'''Table 6.75'''

<span id="impacts-of-integrated-response-options-based-on-risk-management-on-the-un-sdgs."></span>
<!-- IMG CAPTION -->
'''Impacts of integrated response options based on risk management on the UN SDGs.'''
<!-- IMG FILE -->
[[File:b09ea636e50e3ac64e3cac5e48af88c8 table-6.75.png]]

<!-- END IMG -->
<div id="section-6-4-3-1-impacts-of-integrated-response-options-on-ncp"></div>

<span id="impacts-of-integrated-response-options-on-ncp"></span>