Today, IISD and the Manitoba Chambers of Commerce launched a new resource, the Climate Action Toolkit for Manitoba Business. During the research phase, we spoke with many leaders from the local business community who had already taken steps to reduce their carbon footprint; one of them was Caleigh Christie, whose family manages a resort called Falcon Trails. This is her story about taking sustainability to the next level.

At the corner of Falcon Lake in Manitoba’s Whiteshell Provincial Park, a 90-minute drive from downtown Winnipeg and just stone’s throw from the Ontario border, you’ll find a swimming dock, a small ski hill and a smattering of hand-built cabins. This is Falcon Trails Resort, one of the most climate-friendly places you can stay in the region, especially if you choose their off-grid accommodation.

The environment hasn’t always been front and centre of the Falcon Trails business model—initially, when Craig Christie and Barb Hamilton purchased the site with a few other partners in 1996, their motivation was simply to ensure the ski hill was protected. (The provincial government had owned and maintained it since 1959; there were plans to shut it down in the mid-‘90s, but at the last minute, an agreement was made to sell it privately to members of the local community.)

The husband-and-wife team ran a construction business in the area and were outdoor enthusiasts, so they set out from the beginning to build a modest resort that would have as little impact on the surrounding environment as possible, allowing guests to enjoy nature without harming it.

"We just started to recognize that our environmental efforts could be used as a competitive marketing advantage.”

“Those first 10 years were just about building the cabins, figuring out how to run a ski hill and a resort,” says Caleigh Christie, the couple’s daughter, who is now General Manager, Indoor Operations, for Falcon Trails. “But then the other partners decided to leave, giving our family full control of the business.

And this is when the real climate action began...

“Around that time, my sister brought in eco-friendly cleaning products for our staff to use and we were putting the finishing touches on our off-the-grid cabins, and we just started to recognize that our environmental efforts could be used as a competitive marketing advantage.”

Initially, says Christie, the family had promoted Falcon Trails’ off-the-grid accommodations simply as “outpost cabins,” but they decided to rebrand them as “eco cabins” after noticing a growing demand for eco-tourism in the travel sector. They also applied for—and won—numerous awards from Travel Manitoba, which gave a further boost to their public reputation.

A moral decision and a competitive marketing decision...

“In the end, our efforts became a moral decision as well as a competitive marketing decision,” says Christie. “Since then, we’ve continued to push the needle on what we can achieve.”

In terms of the infrastructure at Falcon Trails, the Christie-Hamilton family has taken advantage of rebate programs with Manitoba Hydro to install solar panels, along with various incentives to improve energy efficiency through upgrades to insulation and LED lighting retrofits.

It hasn’t all been smooth sailing. As is the case when most businesses start on their journey to take climate action, there are occasional hiccups. Christie recalls that, when they first swapped their conventional cleaning products for eco-friendly brands, there was resistance from staff who felt the new products weren’t as effective. It took some trial and error to find a solution that worked for everyone.

Now, though, the only challenge is finding new ways for Falcon Trails to step up its game. Something they’ve been trying recently, says Christie, is coming up with projects that not only reduce their footprint but simultaneously engage the local community. They’ve just launched a new Environmentalist-in-Residence program, for instance, which allows guests to stay at the resort during the offseason, at no cost, in exchange for a service that makes the resort even more eco-friendly.

“We have an experienced seamstress coming as part of this,” says Christie, “and she restores textiles, so she’s going to look at ways we can repurpose our old bedsheets and towels. She’ll also do some mending of the hockey bags we use to haul laundry from cabin to cabin and fix some uniforms.”

They’ve just launched a new Environmentalist-in-Residence program, for instance, which allows guests to stay at the resort during the off season, at no cost, in exchange for a service that makes the resort even more eco-friendly.

It goes without saying that the staff at Falcon Trails are fully on board with putting climate action at the centre of how they do business. This won’t be changing anytime soon, but Christie does have some advice for those who are looking to make similar efforts in their own operations.

“You have to go into this knowing that becoming an eco-friendly business won’t happen overnight, but it needs to start happening now—the sooner, the better.”

The year is 2045.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been achieved: poverty has been eradicated; renewable energy powers the globe; gender equality is widespread; and worldwide terrestrial and water ecosystems are thriving.

We made this happen—but how? What actions were taken in the last 25 years to bring us to an age of peace, prosperity, and progress?

On February 29, more than 150 leaders in the minerals industry—from governments, civil society, and the private sector—came together to answer these questions at the annual Sustainability Forum. The event was co-hosted by the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals, and Sustainable Development (IGF), the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada (PDAC), and the World Economic Forum (WEF) and facilitated by Watershed Partners.

Participants were asked to reflect on specific changes that need to occur in the minerals industry in order to make it more sustainable. While some changes are already underway, many others demand greater prioritization; in light of this, we set out to create a plan of action to determine what's actually needed to get us to this ideal scenario in 2045.

The following were identified as key focal points:

New technology must be implemented alongside just transition

Technology could play a role in facilitating a positive change if managed responsibly. New technologies are already being used across the sector: to digitize data collection, track big data, automate parts of the mining process, and generate sustainable energy for mines. However, the labour implications of these technologies are vast and varied.

Job categories will evolve and skills requirements will change. This will create new and better opportunities for high-skilled labour but will also lead to challenges for those whose jobs will be replaced by machines. It is important that training and skills development programs be enhanced and expanded to enable workers to embrace this technological shift.

Community involvement must happen at a deeper level

Active community engagement must be a priority at each stage of the mining cycle—from exploration to extraction and mine closure. Local communities shouldn’t be seen as obstacles to the mining process but as key partners with whom companies and governments should consult and collaborate at every stage. Their voices need to be not only heard but elevated and prioritized in the mining process—only then can the mining industry be a catalyst for socioeconomic development and stability.

Sector silos must be broken down to create holistic change

Finally, there were many who spoke of the need for systemic collaboration. Transformational change in the minerals industry cannot be tackled by the sector on its own; it will require action from multiple stakeholders, working together across silos and levels of governance. Decision-makers in the minerals industry will need to forge relationships with communities and leaders in the health, education, planning, finance, and environmental sectors, among others, to promote sustainability at large. These relationships must be cultivated now, so they can drive the next 25 years of change.  

"Transformational change in the minerals industry cannot be tackled by the sector on its own"

The world is facing interrelated and compounding crises: the climate emergency, dramatic biodiversity loss, gender inequality, infringements on Indigenous rights, and so on. Mining is at the forefront of many solutions to these converging crises: It's integral to the production of renewable energy technologies while also being a significant source of global emissions; it's often a significant employer in Indigenous communities but can also find itself in conflict with them over land and natural resource management; it can have a large impact on local biodiversity, but can also be a key partner in the protection of species and ecosystems; and it is often seen as an activity dominated by men, but opportunities for women are growing rapidly. We should remember that where there is risk, there is often opportunity.

If we want to make the world better in 2045 than it is today, the work starts now.

The two agendas of climate change adaptation and peacebuilding are rarely coordinated—it's time for this to change.

For Somalia, last year’s drought was its worst in nearly a decade.

Wells dried up, crops failed, and thousands were displaced from their land. For nomadic herders, the drought meant travelling farther distances in search of fresh pasture, bringing them into competition with neighbouring farming communities over scarce water and land resources. And with the mass exodus of many village elders—who traditionally lead local dispute resolution processes—some of this competition turned violent.

Somalia is one of the most fragile states in the world, while also being among the most vulnerable to climate change and least prepared to adapt. It is an evolving example of the compounding crises of conflict and climate change vulnerability—each reinforcing the severity of the other and driving the state and its people into a cycle of fragility.  

"When these challenges aren’t approached together, any failure to meaningfully address one issue can obstruct progress in the other."

This isn’t new: for years, policy-makers and practitioners have been drawing attention to the role that climate change can play as a “threat multiplier.” We know the link exists.

However, the two crises are still being tackled in separate silos, with peacebuilding in one corner and adaptation efforts in another. If the aim is for peaceful, sustainable development in states struggling with fragility, greater effort must be made to align the peacebuilding and climate change adaptation agendas.

When these challenges aren’t approached together, any failure to meaningfully address one issue can obstruct progress in the other.

Conflict aggravates climate change vulnerability, and vice versa

Historic or ongoing conflict, for instance, can jeopardize a country’s ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change. The conflict in Afghanistan, for example, has reinforced widespread corruption and mismanagement over water resources. As a result, many communities find their ability to cope with increasing incidences of droughts and floods severely compromised, despite the country’s wealth of rivers and glaciers.

Conversely, vulnerability to climate change (as seen in Somalia) can aggravate existing socio-political tensions. The adverse impacts of climate change—such as rainfall variability, increasing temperatures, storms, droughts and floods—can lead to shortages in arable land and water resources. This, in turn, can create competition over scarce resources between opposing groups (farmers and herders, for example), sometimes leading to violence.

Climate change vulnerability can also contribute to an increase in criminal activities, as those previously dependent on natural resources look to alternative livelihoods for income. A significant and growing portion of the population in the Sahel region, for example, is young, and for many, their livelihoods are climate-dependent. As climate change undermines these farming and herding livelihoods, many have looked to secure livelihoods elsewhere—opening them up to recruitment by terrorist organizations and criminal networks.

We need to put an end to this cycle

Frequently, these dynamics manifest in a cycle. The presence of conflict may inhibit a government’s ability to invest in climate change adaptation, as they instead invest in more urgent priorities: delivering clean water and restoring public services, for example. But the adverse impacts of climate change—and a failure to adapt to them—can also have a destabilizing effect on a government’s ability to maintain or build peace. Meaningful, concerted action on both climate change adaptation and peacebuilding is needed to put an end to this cycle.

Climate vulnerability and conflict often share root causes. A history of inequality, poverty and weak institutions can hamper a country’s ability to respond to shocks and stresses—climate-related or otherwise. Adaptation efforts aimed at the root causes of vulnerability can therefore have potential co-benefits for peacebuilding, and vice versa.

In fact, meaningful climate change adaptation shares many of its attributes with successful peacebuilding: both are country-driven, targeted at root causes, participatory and gender-responsive; they involve multiple levels of governance; and they are planned and implemented in response to medium- and long-term priorities. Given their many intersections, it’s clear that we must align these agendas and planning processes. 

"Meaningful, concerted action on both climate change adaptation and peacebuilding is needed to put an end to this cycle."

One way to accomplish this is through the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process, a mechanism that uses an integrated approach to development and adaptation planning. By integrating climate change adaptation into a country’s medium- and long-term development plans in a participatory, country-owned and holistic manner, the NAP process can be designed in a way that addresses many of a country’s core and overlapping vulnerabilities.

Some countries have already begun to use the NAP process to incorporate peace and conflict dynamics. The Palestinian NAP document, for instance, acknowledges the role that the ongoing Israeli conflict plays in exacerbating climate vulnerabilities and defines subsequent adaptation options moving forward. The Cameroon NAP document calls for improved land governance in its adaptation options in order to mitigate potential pastoralist conflicts.

The mutually reinforcing crises of climate change vulnerability and conflict present a key threat to sustainable development, one that has been well known for years. For countries struggling with climate change and conflict, bringing together the agendas of peacebuilding and adaptation is not just good practice: it is imperative.

Read more about these dual crises—and solutions for sustainable development—in a new report: The NAP Process and Peacebuilding. 

2020 has a ring to it, holding the promise of a new decade after leaving the old one behind.

Each year starts with the possibility of a new beginning, but often still carries the baggage of the previous year. As 2020 begins, so too do more climate talks. The international community faces deadlines to replace old frameworks and rules with new ones, and to conclude negotiations on new treaties and agreements.

In our new report, The State of Global Environmental Governance 2019, the Earth Negotiations Bulletin team reflects on the successes, shortcomings and overall trends of 2019. We also look ahead, with optimism 2020 will regain the momentum recently lost.

In 2019, scientists were truth-tellers.

Over the course of the year, international scientific bodies produced a range of reports on climate change, biodiversity, and the environment as a whole. Each report contains dire warnings for the future of the planet due to the impact of climate change on food production, of pollution on human health, and land incursions on species extinctions. Given historic inaction, nearly every system on the planet is in danger.

Yet, despite the thousands of pages of scientific evidence, intergovernmental political processes remain deadlocked on so many issues. Policy makers could not mount the type of response commensurate with the science.

Climate change governance had a particularly difficult year, limping to the end of the decade after the historic adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015. The demands for climate ambition are loud, and angry. Millions of children and youth, feeling their futures have been stolen, participated in climate strikes every Friday throughout the year. Hearing their calls, 67 countries pledged greater climate ambition at the UN Secretary-General’s Climate Action Summit in September, but these countries represent only a small fraction of global emissions.

As the year came to a close, governments at the UN Climate Change Conference in Madrid (COP 25) failed to issue a clear call for ambition and could not agree on rules for the market mechanism necessary to complete the Paris Agreement rulebook. The Paris Agreement officially begins in 2020 amid major questions about its ability to catalyze climate ambition and prevent global warming above 2°C.

There were a few bright spots during the year as some policymakers acted on the scientific truths. The first multilateral action to reduce global plastic waste, which amounts to millions of tons each year, was taken under the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movement of Certain Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal. In May, parties to the Basel Convention agreed to include mixed, unrecyclable, and contaminated plastic waste exports into the control regime that requires the consent of importing countries before waste exports can proceed.

The Paris Agreement officially begins in 2020 amid major questions about its ability to catalyze climate ambition and prevent global warming above 2°C.

The fourth meeting of the UN Environment Assembly sent a strong signal that production and consumption of single-use plastics should be reduced or phased out, and the plastics industry has been put on notice. In fact, over the course of the year more than 30 countries, nearly half of which are in Africa, put in place bans on single-use plastic bags.

As we outline in a chapter on linkages, 2019 was also notable for increasing recognition of the need for a more interconnected form of governance. More and more, actors drew linkages among environmental and sustainable development processes, especially biodiversity and climate change, land and climate change, oceans and climate change, human health and the environment, and economics, trade and climate change. The increased understanding about the impacts of degrading ecosystems and a warming climate on local and global economies alike, has led to a number of multinational companies and financial institutions announcing new climate-friendly policies and investments.

Of course, the links among the SDGs and multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) are many and complementary.

The 2019 Sustainable Development Goals Report was released in time for the SDG Summit in September. The report outlined progress in some critical areas, including declines in extreme poverty and the under-5 mortality rate, increases in access to electricity, and greater efforts to respond to urbanization, waste, and illegal fishing. Nonetheless, many areas need urgent collective attention, including climate change, ocean acidification, land degradation, hunger, education and gender equality. The report also stressed that the goal to end extreme poverty by 2030 is jeopardized as the world struggles to respond to entrenched deprivation, violent conflicts, and vulnerabilities to natural disasters.

It is abundantly clear the world needs an urgent, ambitious response to unleash a social and economic transformation. But, in 2019, world leaders appeared detached from the crisis at hand, reading statements that were largely devoid of meaningful pledges. This reaction was in stark contrast to the verdict of the people who rose in protest during the Summit and throughout the year: leaders are failing to address the environmental and development emergency the world faces.

It is abundantly clear the world needs an urgent, ambitious response to unleash a social and economic transformation. 

This year, we face a busy international agenda as well as waning political will, rising nationalism, and faltering support for multilateralism. 2020 is expected to conclude negotiations and establish new tools to address biodiversity, marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and a post-2020 strategic approach to international chemicals management. We are already in the fifth year of SDG implementation, and to succeed by their 2030 completion date, governments still need to increase their ambition under the Paris Agreement.

Positive, forward-looking outcomes are essential, but not guaranteed.

This article is adapted from the introduction to The State of Global Environmental Governance, released by Earth Negotiations Bulletin on 24 February 2020. Earth Negotiations Bulletin is a balanced, timely and independent reporting service that has covered United Nations environment and development negotiations for 27 years.

The State of Global Environmental Governance 2019 was edited by Jennifer Allan, PhD, with contributions from Beate Antonich, PhD, Jennifer Bansard, Rishi Bhandary, Pamela Chasek, PhD, Natalie Jones, PhD, Faye Leone, Stefan Jungcurt, PhD, Delia Paul, Asterios Tsioumani, PhD, and Elsa Tsioumani, PhD.

This article originally appeared on the World Economic Forum blog; it has been reprinted here with permission. 

Dogs, of course, possess an incredible sense of smell. They can be trained to sniff out bombs, drugs and even diseases such as cancer, malaria, diabetes and tuberculosis.

This article originally appeared on IISD's SDG Knowledge Hub.

In the building sector, all trends are pointing upwards, with dramatic consequences for the climate. By 2060, the global building floor area is expected to double. Emerging and developing economies in warm and tropical climates will experience the biggest increase.

Already today, the construction and operation of buildings is responsible for 40% of all energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The sector consumes over a third of global final energy. Energy demand from the building sector is expected to grow by another 50% by 2050. Space cooling is a key driver of this demand – energy needs for space cooling are expected to triple.

Buildings cause greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions both when they are built, and over their long lifetime of 30 to 80 years. Our modern way of constructing is mostly based on concrete, using standard blueprints regardless of the climate. This leads to high energy bills for those who can afford it, and economic and health risks for those who cannot.

Future-proofing Buildings Can Drive SDGs 1, 7, 11

Energy-efficient buildings are not rocket science. Improvements in the building’s outer structure and appliances can achieve substantial energy savings compared to standard buildings. Measures to future-proof buildings can range from “low-tech,” such as painting roofs in light colors and ensuring natural shade, to digital solutions for building design and management. Additional macro-economic benefits include energy security, job creation and health. And from a business perspective future proofed buildings have a lower lifetime cost and higher asset values.

Climate action in buildings and construction is among the most cost-effective measures. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that realizing the potential of sustainable buildings will save USD 1.1 trillion by 2050. 

Nevertheless, this transition requires a shift in investment. USD 4.5 trillion are invested into real estate every year. To channel this investment towards energy efficiency, we need to influence it from two directions: ambitious policy and regulation serving as a “stick,” and financing as a “carrot.”

The Programme for Energy Efficiency in Buildings (PEEB), a French-German initiative, works with its first five partner countries – Mexico, Morocco, Senegal, Tunisia and Vietnam – to transform the building sector. PEEB combines financing energy efficiency in large-scale projects with technical assistance through policy advice. PEEB mobilizes innovative financing solutions for large building projects. For example, in Morocco PEEB supports the government in mobilising EUR 20 million in climate financing for a residential housing programme. A green loan programme for young families is in the making in Vietnam. The programme also works with partners to make policies and standards more ambitious and effective, through better enforcement of existing green building codes or setting standards for sectors like hotels or hospitals.

All of these advancements are helping to achieve 2030 Agenda targets on energy, housing and poverty.

Climate Action in the Building Sector is Gaining Momentum

Another international agreement – the Paris Agreement on climate change – also hangs in the balance; its goals will not be achieved without a climate focus for buildings in the new decade. A rapid decarbonization needs to happen in the building sector, driven by international and national actors.

In 2019, action on buildings took center stage. Led by the Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction (GlobalABC), buildings featured prominently at the climate change conference COP25 in Madrid, with topics ranging from zero carbon buildings to circular economy approaches in the buildings sector. The Global Status Report on Buildings and Construction confirmed the urgent need for action in the building sector. At the Climate Action Summit convened by the United Nations in September 2019, the Net Zero Carbon initiative was launched to leverage the leadership of governments, industry and civil society to commit to ambitious targets and mobilize funding. The Cool Coalition and SEforALL’s Cooling for All initiative have incorporated buildings as a key element of their strategies. 

As we head into 2020, buildings are high on the agenda. The World Economic Forum has named moving towards zero carbon buildings as one of its four top priorities for tackling climate change. The report by the UK government on energy transitions features buildings as a key sector. The lead-up to the Glasgow Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC COP 26) in 2020 has an unprecedented opportunity to raise the ambition of all actors to make our buildings future-proof and wake this sleeping giant.

The author of this guest article, Christiana Hageneder, is the Head of Secretariat, Programme for Energy Efficiency in Buildings (PEEB).

This webinar, hosted by the Prairies Regional Adaptation Collaborative (PRAC), focused on how climate change could impact the biodiversity of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and how conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services can build climate resilience.

Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are currently negotiating an agreement on fisheries subsidies that will determine the future of our oceans. The need to reach this multilateral deal is embodied in Sustainable Development Goal 14.6, which calls for the prohibition of harmful subsidies that contribute to overfishing. In this three-part series, IISD looks at the impact of fisheries subsidies on the day-to-day lives of people living in different regions across the globe.

Last month we spoke with Dyhia Belhabib about Senegal and how a small fish can have a big impact on the local population. Today, we look at the Pacific coast of Latin America with Andrés Cisneros-Montemayor, a researcher and author of a new paper on this subject, who tells us how the WTO agreement will impact the everyday lives of shrimp fishers in this region.

How important are shrimp to the economy in Latin America?

Shrimps are fished almost everywhere in this region, including Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama and Peru and represent some of the most valuable fisheries. In countries such as Nicaragua, Mexico and Honduras, for example, shrimp fisheries can make up over 20 per cent of the value of all fisheries on the Pacific coast.

Are shrimp stocks already facing overfishing in this region?

Almost every country in the region shows an all-too-familiar trend of overfishing of  shrimp stocks: It starts with a rapidly expanding catch of one species, then new species start appearing in the catch as the original species declines, and finally the catch declines altogether. Out of 27 shrimp stocks assessed in the six countries of focus of our recent study (Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama and Ecuador), 15 are officially determined to be overexploited and seven maximally exploited.

But this problem does not only affect shrimp fisheries themselves. Shrimp are most often caught using bottom trawls, which are nets that rake across the ocean floor. Roughly 80 per cent of all catch on shrimp vessels are species other than shrimp; about 70 per cent of this bycatch is discarded at sea. This is obviously wasteful and worrying for marine species and ecosystems, but it also impacts artisanal fisheries that could have caught some of these fish for local consumption and to supply seafood markets.

Are fisheries subsidies the reason this happens?

Subsidies can be big contributors to overcapacity because they generate more fishing power than is actually needed to run a sustainable fishery—and subsidies that increase capacity, such as those to help cover fuel costs, are the most common in Latin America. For industrial vessels in Mexico and Nicaragua, subsidies can represent up to 50 per cent of their income.

Removing subsidies will transform the fishing industry. should coastal communities be worried about their jobs?

It’s important to understand that the way the funding is being granted now isn’t supportive for fishing communities. It’s harmful. About 78 per cent of total fisheries subsidies in Latin America are granted to industrial fleets. This contributes to power imbalances and disadvantages artisanal fisheries, which generate the vast majority of employment across the region.

Stories of success in Latin American fishing communities have nothing to do with the price of gas or getting cheap equipment. Instead, there must be a system that protects their business from illegal fishing and integrates their local expertise into management plans.

Local fishermen know perfectly well that cheaper gasoline and free nets won’t solve their problems in the long term. In fact, stories of success in Latin American fishing communities have nothing to do with the price of gas or getting cheap equipment. Instead, there must be a system that protects their business from illegal fishing and integrates their local expertise into management plans.

Are there signs of the region’s fisheries moving in a more sustainable direction?

There are clear precedents of Latin American countries taking measures to address the effects of harmful fisheries subsidies and better manage shrimp fishing. But much remains to be done.

Every country in Latin America has existing regulations in their national legislation that, if implemented, would allow them to improve the management of their fisheries and see greater benefits to local economies and fishing communities. The system is already in place—it just needs funding. But right now the money is often being directed to subsidies that not only don’t work but are actively harmful. This is why effective subsidy disciplines at the WTO could be so useful.

Is the WTO currently on the right track to reach an agreement on fisheries subsidies?

This topic has been on the agenda for the last two decades. We have more than enough information to reach a meaningful decision. WTO negotiators have been empowered by a strong mandate and tasked to reach a solution to a clear global problem. None of the Sustainable Development Goals’ targets are as within reach as this one. The new extended deadline is June 2020; hopefully, this will mark the date when this target is achieved.

Do we need new, advanced technology to reduce carbon emissions? Carlos Manuel Rodríguez, Costa Rica’s Minister of Environment and Energy, says we already have the best “machine” for the job.

Around the world, we’re losing 18.7 million acres of forest each year – or 27 soccer fields per minute. Deforestation not only causes a loss of natural habits and biodiversity, but also contributes to emissions as there are fewer trees to suck up the carbon. According to Global Forest Watch, if “tropical deforestation” were a country, it would rank #3 in carbon-equivalent emissions, behind China and the United States.

But Costa Rica shows us it’s possible to undo some of the damage.

In the 1940s, 75% of Costa Rica was covered by forest, primarily tropical rainforest. By 1983, following decades of deforestation, this dropped to 26%.

With major policy changes such as restricting logging permits, paying landowners who conserve their land, and attracting overseas investment in eco-tourism, Costa Rica has reversed the trend. Rodríguez explained that it has now doubled its forest cover, which covers more than half of the country and continues to grow as the government creates more national parks to preserve natural ecosystems, from highlands and cloud cover to mangroves and rainforests.

“Costa Rica has been very successful at understanding how we value nature and how we use nature as a driver for economic growth, particularly with eco-tourism,” he said.

And by tying the need to preserve biodiversity to the economy, Costa Rica has gotten citizens involved: “If nature becomes a driver for growth and the economy, economic development, people won't want to destroy nature. So, in a matter of a generation – over one generation – we went from people destroying the forest to produce food, particularly livestock, to protecting nature, restoring nature and using it as a way to bring tourists to the farms and the parks. And that has been tremendously successful.”

Costa Rica’s not stopping there. The country has committed to be fully decarbonized by 2050 and will present a national climate action plan to UN Climate Change by 2020. The plan will include measures for transportation, infrastructure, energy, agriculture, waste management and forest management – including increasing forest cover to 60% by 2030.

Rodríguez thinks they can get there.

“I'm a rational optimistic because I know we've got the resources. It is not lack of financial resources. And we've got the technology. We know what we need to do.”

And what we need to do, as he told his daughter, is protect and grow nature's most precious carbon-fighting machines: trees.

 

This article originally appeared on the World Economic Forum website; it has been reprinted with permission.