Natural Climate Protection – But How? Opportunities and Challenges

Enlarge

Peatlands, forests and other ecosystems are important natural carbon sinks, but their capacity to mitigate climate change is increasingly under pressure. Drained peat soils release large amounts of greenhouse gases, while forests are weakened by drought, storms and pest infestations. Germany’s federal government addresses these challenges through the Action Programme for Natural Climate Protection (Aktionsprogramm Natürlicher Klimaschutz, ANK). The programme aims to improve the condition of ecosystems across Germany and strengthen their resilience and climate mitigation capacity. Around €4.5 billion has been allocated to the programme through 2029. During the thematic week, around 50 funded projects were presented, demonstrating how natural climate protection can be implemented in practice.

A key objective is to improve the greenhouse gas balance of the land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector. Under Germany’s Federal Climate Action Act, this sector is expected to achieve an average net sink of 25 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalents per year over the period from 2027 to 2030. The ANK is intended to contribute to achieving this target. Two important areas of action are the rewetting of drained peatlands and the development of species-rich, climate-resilient forests. Raising water levels, for example by blocking or regulating drainage ditches, can reduce peat decomposition and, consequently, CO₂ emissions. However, implementing such measures requires coordination with landowners and land managers, as well as solutions to competing land-use demands. Germany’s National Peatland Protection Strategy therefore aims to reduce annual emissions from peat soils by five million tonnes of CO₂ equivalents by 2030.

Forests are another focus of the programme. Drought, extreme weather events and pest infestations threaten their role as carbon sinks. The ANK therefore supports the transformation of vulnerable forests into species-rich, structurally diverse stands with tree species suited to local conditions and better able to cope with changing climatic conditions. In addition, the long-term use of wood, for example in building construction, can store carbon and replace more emissions-intensive materials. However, the climate benefits of wood depend on sustainable forest management and the long-term preservation of forest ecosystem functions. These examples illustrate that natural climate protection cannot be reduced to individual measures. Instead, it must account for ecological relationships, competing land-use demands and long-term impacts.

At the closing event of the thematic week on 14 October, Julia Pongratz examined the opportunities and challenges of natural climate protection. In addition to the potential of natural carbon sinks, the discussion addressed practical and legal barriers, as well as the broader societal question of how much priority should be given to ecosystem protection and restoration in relation to other forms of land use. Pongratz summarised the central challenge as follows:

“Natural climate protection still faces many practical and legal barriers. The question of what priority we should give to the protection and restoration of ecosystems over other forms of land use also remains unresolved politically and socially. Funding programmes such as the ANK are important steps towards strengthening natural carbon sinks. However, without ambitious emissions reductions, these sinks cannot be maintained in the long term. Nature conservation needs climate protection.”

Pongratz thus emphasised that natural carbon sinks can make an important contribution to limiting climate change, but cannot replace reductions in fossil fuel emissions. The projects presented during the thematic week demonstrate the wide range of possible approaches. The key challenge will be to determine which measures prove effective in the long term and how climate mitigation, biodiversity and other ecosystem services can be strengthened together. This requires scientific monitoring and evaluation, reliable policy frameworks, and collaboration between researchers, policymakers and local communities.