Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Cross-Chapter-Paper-7 (section)

=== CCP7.2.3 Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation ===

<div id="h2-3-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Deforestation and forest degradation both affect carbon stocks, biodiversity loss and the provision of ecosystem services, leading to a reduction in resilience to climate change and exacerbating forest landscape vulnerability even in the absence of direct anthropogenic action ( ''high confidence'' ) (Barlow et al., 2016; Aleixo et al., 2019; Feng et al., 2021; Saatchi et al., 2021). There is also clear evidence of deforestation influencing temperatures and the hydrological cycle at local to regional scales resulting in reduced precipitation and evaporation and increased runoff relative to unaffected areas ( ''high confidence'' ) [CCP7.3.6] (Jia et al., 2019; Douville et al., 2021). Negative trends in biodiversity and ecosystems are predicted to undermine 80% of the Sustainable Development Goals targets related to poverty, hunger, health, water, cities, climate, oceans and land (IPBES, 2019). Therefore, besides greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, reducing the driving forces leading to deforestation and forest degradation is of the utmost importance for forest resilience, biodiversity protection, avoiding regional climatic changes and the provision of critical ecosystem services, and communities whose livelihoods depend on forests ( ''high confidence'' ) (Curtis et al., 2018; IPBES, 2019; Jia et al., 2019; [[#Seymour--2019|Seymour and Harris, 2019]] ; Pörtner et al., 2021; Saatchi et al., 2021).

Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation can be distinguished between proximate (i.e., direct) and underlying (i.e., indirect). Direct drivers, such as agriculture (including crops, livestock and plantation forestry), infrastructure development (which often provides access to intact forests and catalyses deforestation) or timber extraction, are place-based and visible. They are influenced by underlying driving forces, such as demographic, economic, technological, political and institutional, or cultural factors, which typically form complex interactions and act at multiple scales, frequently without any direct connection to the areas of forest loss ( [[#Geist--2002|Geist and Lambin, 2002]] ).

Agriculture is by far the largest direct driver of tropical deforestation, with great differences between commercial and subsistence farming and large variation across regions (Figure CCP7.3). Over 80% of tropical deforestation between 2000 and 2010 was caused by agriculture, proportionally ranging from ca. 75% in Africa and Asia to ca. 95% in the Americas ( [[#FAO%20and%20UNEP--2020|FAO and UNEP, 2020]] ), but both the scale of deforestation and the relative contribution of different drivers have changed considerably over time ( ''high confidence'' ) (Hosonuma et al., 2012; Curtis et al., 2018; [[#Seymour--2019|Seymour and Harris, 2019]] ; [[#FAO%20and%20UNEP--2020|FAO and UNEP, 2020]] ).

<div id="_idContainer033" class="Figure"></div>

[[File:783954b95b38babcaeaab7da39812f04 IPCC_AR6_WGII_Figure_CCP7_003.png]]

'''Figure CCP7.3 |''' '''Primary drivers of tropical forest cover loss for the period 2001–2015.''' Darker colour intensity indicates greater total quantity of forest cover loss. While some tropical forest cover loss is temporary, a large portion is related to deforestation. Source: Curtis et al. (2018). Cropped figure reprinted with permission from AAAS.

Forest degradation is more difficult to track, but can have large negative effects on carbon storage, provision of ecosystem services, and biodiversity (Griscom et al., 2017; [[#Houghton--2017|Houghton and Nassikas, 2017]] ). A recent analysis suggests that forest degradation is increasing and is now surpassing deforestation rates in the Brazilian Amazon (Aparecido Trondoli Matricardi et al., 2020). As with deforestation, drivers of forest degradation differ by region, such that timber extraction was by far the most important degradation driver in Latin America and Asia, whereas in Africa wood fuel consumption contributed to about half of forest degradation between 2000 and 2010 (Hosonuma et al., 2012).

Though not as visible as direct drivers, indirect or underlying causes can greatly influence direct drivers, and must be addressed to reduce pressures on forests ( ''high confidence'' ) (e.g., [[#FAO--2016b|FAO, 2016b]] ; Fehlenberg et al., 2017; Pendrill et al., 2019b; Bos et al., 2020; Junquera et al., 2020; Ken et al., 2020; [[#Kissinger--2020|Kissinger, 2020]] ; Siqueira-Gay et al., 2020; [[#Hoang--2021|Hoang and Kanemoto, 2021]] ). Next to population growth, poverty and insecure land tenure (Ariti et al., 2015; [[#Arevalo--2016|Arevalo, 2016]] ; [[#FAO--2016a|FAO, 2016a]] ; Ken et al., 2020; Siqueira-Gay et al., 2020; Verma et al., 2021), many developing tropical countries identify weak forest sector governance and institutions, lack of cross-sectoral coordination, and illegal activity (related to weak enforcement) as critical underlying drivers ( [[#FAO--2016a|FAO, 2016a]] ; Ken et al., 2020; [[#Kissinger--2020|Kissinger, 2020]] ) [CCP7.6].

International and market forces, particularly commodity markets and, increasingly, large-scale land acquisitions are also key underlying drivers ( ''high confidence'' ) (Assunção et al., 2015; Henders et al., 2015; Conigliani et al., 2018; Ingalls et al., 2018; Garrett et al., 2019; Pendrill et al., 2019b; [[#Kissinger--2020|Kissinger, 2020]] ; [[#Neef--2020|Neef, 2020]] ; [[#Hoang--2021|Hoang and Kanemoto, 2021]] ) [WGII Chapter 5.13]. Deforestation related to commodity imports is increasing, illustrating the growing influence of global markets in deforestation dynamics (Henders et al., 2015). Although some of this production is consumed domestically, 29–39% of deforestation was driven by international trade, primarily from Europe, China, the Middle East and North America (Pendrill et al., 2019a). While many developed countries, as well as China and India, have achieved net domestic forest gains, their consumption patterns have increased deforestation embodied in their imports to varying degrees, frequently from biodiversity hotspots ( [[#Hoang--2021|Hoang and Kanemoto, 2021]] ). Fifty percent of the biodiversity loss associated with consumption in developed economies occurs outside their territorial boundaries (Wilting et al., 2017). The increasing prominence of medium- and large-scale clearings of forest between 2000 and 2012, particularly in Southeast Asia and South America, suggests the growing need for policy interventions targeting industrial-scale agricultural commodity producers (Austin et al., 2017). However, countries have been slow to address underlying drivers such as international demand for agricultural commodities. A review of 43 countries’ REDD+ readiness documents found that proposed policy interventions largely missed the agricultural drivers identified (Salvini et al., 2014). An assessment of policy responses to rubber and coffee production highlights the challenges governments face in identifying correlations between the direct drivers and related underlying drivers, with international drivers being the most challenging to address ( [[#Kissinger--2020|Kissinger, 2020]] ).

<div id="CCP7.3" class="h1-container"></div>

<span id="ccp7.3-current-and-projected-climate-change-impacts-on-tropical-forests-drought-temperature-extreme-events"></span>