How Climate Change Is Changing Our Coastal Forests

January 19, 2025 / activist360

Map of change between sampling intervals in forest area for low and mid elevation (crossed) counties derived from the FIA. Vector shapefiles were retrieved from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Imagine driving along the coast and seeing rows of lifeless trees standing in pools of water—gray, leafless, and eerie. These “ghost forests” are appearing along the eastern United States, and they tell a sobering story about how climate change is reshaping our coastal landscapes. Coastal forests, which provide critical benefits to both people and wildlife, are disappearing or transforming at an alarming rate.

What Are Coastal Forests and Why Are They Important?

Coastal forests are unique woodlands found near the shorelines of oceans, bays, and estuaries. These forests thrive in areas with a mix of salty and fresh water, making them different from inland forests.

Coastal forests are essential for:

Wildlife Habitat: They provide homes for birds, fish, and other animals that rely on both land and water ecosystems.
Flood Protection: Their trees and soil act as natural barriers, absorbing water and reducing the impact of floods and storm surges.
Carbon Storage: Coastal forests capture and store large amounts of carbon dioxide, which helps slow the pace of global warming.

These vital ecosystems are under threat. Rising sea levels, stronger storms, and higher temperatures are causing widespread damage. Many trees are dying, leaving behind ghost forests where thriving woodlands once stood.

How Climate Change Is Impacting Coastal Forests

Climate change is reshaping coastal forests in profound ways, driven by rising sea levels, stronger storms, and increasing temperatures. Each of these factors contributes to the gradual transformation of these ecosystems, creating significant challenges for their survival.

Sea Level Rise: As sea levels rise, saltwater moves further inland, soaking the roots of trees that cannot survive in salty conditions. Over time, these trees die, creating ghost forests. Areas like the Chesapeake Bay have seen this transformation accelerate, as low-lying forests succumb to saltwater intrusion.
Stronger Storms: Hurricanes and tropical storms are becoming more intense due to climate change. These storms knock down trees, flood forest areas, and create conditions that make it harder for new trees to grow. While some forests recover, many do not, leading to a permanent loss of trees and wildlife habitats.
Warming Temperatures: Rising temperatures put stress on coastal forests by changing the types of trees and plants that can survive. Warmer weather can also make forests more vulnerable to pests and diseases, further accelerating tree loss.

What This Means for Us

The disappearance of coastal forests has far-reaching consequences that go beyond the trees themselves. From influencing the global climate to protecting communities and wildlife, these ecosystems play a critical role in maintaining balance.

Carbon Storage: Coastal forests are powerful carbon sinks, meaning they absorb and store carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. When these forests die, they release this stored carbon back into the air, worsening global warming.
Flood Protection: Without coastal forests, communities are more exposed to flooding and storm surges. These natural barriers are irreplaceable in their ability to protect homes, roads, and other infrastructure from water damage.
Wildlife Impact: The loss of coastal forests means many animals lose their homes. Birds, amphibians, and fish that rely on these ecosystems are forced to relocate—or they may not survive at all.

What Can Be Done?

While the challenges facing coastal forests are significant, there are practical steps we can take to protect and restore these vital ecosystems. From preserving existing forests to adapting to the realities of climate change, these actions offer hope for the future.

1. Protect Existing Forests

Taking steps to safeguard the forests we still have is crucial for their survival.

Limit construction and development near coastal areas to reduce stress on these ecosystems.
Establish protected zones where forests can thrive without human interference.

2. Plant More Trees

Replanting trees native to the land can restore damaged forests and strengthen their resilience against climate change.

Reforestation efforts can help rebuild damaged areas and increase the number of trees that store carbon.
Focus on planting salt-tolerant species, native to the land, in vulnerable areas to adapt to rising sea levels.

3. Adapt to Climate Change

Adapting to the realities of climate change can help protect coastal forests and ensure their long-term survival.

Build barriers or channels to prevent saltwater from reaching inland forests.
Use technology and research to monitor changes in forest health and plan for future challenges.

Summing Up

Coastal forests are lifelines for wildlife, shields against floods, and crucial allies in the fight against climate change. Saving these forests matters, not only for the environment but also for the well-being of communities that rely on them. Conservation efforts and innovative solutions are helping some coastal forests recover. And, with collective action, we can ensure these vital ecosystems continue to thrive for generations to come.

Source: Ardón, M., Potter, K. M., White, E., Jr., & Woodall, C. W. (2025). Coastal carbon sentinels: A decade of forest change along the eastern shore of the US signals complex climate change dynamics. PLOS Climate, 4(1), e0000444. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000444. See the data.

Our food systems are failing. Can trees and forests dish up better diets for everyone?

August 7, 2022 / activist360

*VI Agroforestry in Masaka, Uganda. September 2013. NatureDan, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.*

Scientists argue for greater inclusion of trees and forests in the race to transform global food systems.

By Monica Evans, Forests News (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Despite all of the technological and informational advancements of recent decades, we’ve so far failed to feed our global population sufficiently, safely, nutritiously and sustainably.

Over 2 billion people experience food insecurity; almost 700 million are undernourished; and 39% of all adults are classified as overweight or obese.

A significant factor in these health challenges is that there’s a serious lack of food diversity: just 15 crops provide 90% of humanity’s energy intake and not enough nutrient-rich foods are being produced to go around. For instance, just 40 countries, representing 26% of the global population, have a sufficient supply of fruits and vegetables to meet recommended daily consumption.

Meanwhile, our global food system generates more than a third of global anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions; takes around 70% of all freshwater withdrawals; and is to blame for about a quarter of ocean acidification, alongside serious soil depletion and the destruction of natural habitats and biodiversity.

“It is increasingly evident that nothing short of a radical transformation of food systems will end global hunger and malnutrition while reversing to acceptable limits the environmental damage our food systems have already caused,” state the authors of a new Viewpoint in the July 2022 edition of leading journal, Lancet Planet Health.^“A new global food system must produce greater quantities of a more diverse range of nutrient-dense foods rather than only providing more calories. It must also produce these diverse foodstuffs sustainably, reversing current trajectories of land degradation so that production acts as a net carbon sink and reservoir of biodiversity.”

So, how can we help to bring that shift into being?

As the authors highlight, trees and forests have a critical role to play.

To date, this has been largely overlooked in food-system transformation conversations “because of the absence of a comprehensive and system-wide approach to food systems, problems related to measuring and recording multiple contributions from trees and forests, and a focus on forests as sources of timber rather than food… A perspective we consider to be in danger of being mistakenly replicated in current discourses in the international development community that see trees and forests primarily as global carbon stores,” write the authors.

So, how can we help to bring that shift into being? As the Viewpoint highlights, trees and forests represent a critical, but as-yet-underacknowledged, part of the solution.

“We’ve been surprised and disappointed that despite all that we have learned and what seem to us to be the obvious important roles of forests and trees, that they still seem to be largely ignored,” said Amy Ickowitz, the study’s lead author and a senior scientist with the Center for International Forestry Research and World Agroforestry (CIFOR-ICRAF).

“Conserving forests and promoting trees for food security and nutrition are some of the obvious ways to achieve ‘win-wins’, which are quite rare in addressing the tremendous challenges of global malnutrition, dwindling biodiversity, and climate change,” she said. “Of course, there are obstacles — institutional, economic, and logistical — but these can all be addressed, once there is agreement that food systems should be nudged in this direction. In our Viewpoint we offer some suggestions of how to do this”

Silent service-providers

The authors draw attention to the multiple ways that trees and forests already contribute towards healthy diets and sustainable food systems. Tree cover, for instance, has been linked to greater dietary diversity and higher consumption of nutrient-rich foods, such as fruits and vegetables. All nuts, and over half of all human-consumed fruits, grow on trees. Forests provide particularly important sources of wild foods — including fruits, vegetables and meat — for the 1.6 billion people around the globe who live within 5 kilometres of them. Trees and forests also provide fodder for animals, supporting the production of meat and milk.

Trees and forests also provide wood fuels, which are a critical source of energy for cooking for around 2.4 billion people, thus, enabling the consumption of nutrient-rich foods such as meats and legumes. They also provide incomes that can support food security and nutrition, such as through cultivating and selling tree crops like coffee and cocoa; employment in logging or ecotourism; and collecting and selling non-timber forest products. Agriculture benefits from the ecosystem services provided by trees and forests, such as pest and disease regulation, pollinator habitat, micro-climate control, water and nutrient cycling, carbon sequestration, protection against soil erosion, and nitrogen fixation.

What’s more, trees and forests contribute to the stability and resilience of food systems, for example, through their tendency to survive extreme weather events better than annual crops; their role in supporting ‘lean-season’ diets through the provision of wild foods; their ability to fill seasonal gaps in food production; and the ‘safety net’ they provide in terms of offering wood and non-wood products that can be sold for income.

“Whether directly consumed as food or sold for food purchases, forest and tree products are, in many cases, the only resources accessible to women and other marginalized groups when hardship strikes and are therefore key resources to reduce their vulnerabilities,” state the authors.

Areas for intervention

To maximize the multiple benefits of including trees and forests more broadly and explicitly in food-system transformation, the authors list four key areas for intervention. First, they recommend building on current knowledge by increasing the scale of existing tree-based agricultural system solutions. Many of these solutions are not yet being adopted at sufficient scales to make decisive impact but could do so with appropriate support. This will in many cases require secure tree and land tenure, “which is not yet the case for many tree growers,” they write.

“To be effective, measures to increase land-tenure security should be connected with incentives for sustainable practices, including for tree maintenance on farms.”

Drivers for the adoption of agroforestry measures were also found to be highly context-specific, highlighting the importance of working with, and building on, existing local knowledge in any kind of agroforestry intervention.

Second, the authors recommend reorienting agricultural investments from staple crops to more diverse, nutrient-dense foods.

Over the past half-century, staple crops — such as wheat, maize and rice — have received billions of dollars in investment, which has enhanced their productivity and decreased their purchase prices in comparison to those of more nutritionally-important foods such as fruits, nuts and vegetables. In order to increase consumption of these, it will be critical to improve their productivity and lower their costs, alongside using education and social marketing to raise awareness of the health and environmental benefits of better food choices.

Third, there is a need to repurpose producer and consumer incentives towards nutrient-dense foods and more sustainable production practices. This will require policy shifts at both national and international levels. Currently, incentives such as direct price support and targeted fertiliser subsidies distort production towards staple crops.

“These incentives should be reduced or removed and direct and indirect price interventions by governments, which are designed to consider more closely both nutritional needs and environmental impacts, should be implemented,” write the authors.

Such subsidies could be reoriented towards producing nutrient-rich foods and integrating trees on farms.

Fourth, food and nutrition objectives ought to be explicitly integrated into forest restoration and conservation practices and policies. The global forest restoration agenda has to date been largely dominated by carbon-mitigation considerations. However, restoration initiatives that focus too narrowly on that objective — and neglect the needs of local people — often fail. Planting food trees, write the authors, could help to address multiple objectives at once, supporting local involvement and sustainable livelihoods alongside carbon sequestration.

As the authors make clear, trees and forests already contribute positively to diets and ecosystems across the globe and there is potential to scale up those contributions much further to address our multiple crises.

Biodiversity science–policy panel calls for broadening value-of-nature concepts in sustainable development

July 24, 2022 / activist360

Photo courtesy of Christian Ziegler., CC BY 2.5, via Wikimedia Commons — *Photo courtesy of Christian Ziegler, CC BY 2.5, via Wikimedia Commons*

Invaluables’ may have the highest value, according to Meine van Noordwijk

By Robert Finlayson, Forests News (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) approved the Summary for Policy Makers of the Assessment Report on the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature on 9 July 2022 in its ninth plenary meeting in Bonn, Germany.

“It is essential to understand the different ways in which people value nature, as well as the different ways in which these values can be measured,” said Ana Maria Hernández Salgar, IPBES chairperson. “The diversity of values of nature is often overlooked in policy decisions. Effective policy decisions about nature must be informed by the wide range of values and valuation methods, which makes the IPBES’ values assessment a vital scientific resource for policy and action for nature and human well-being.”

The Assessment Report comes at a critical time for life on Earth, which is fast losing its richness. The Report considers the trend to assign various values — including financial ones — to nature in an attempt to recognize the worth of natural ecosystems to human wellbeing.

“‘Invaluables’ may have the highest value,” said Meine van Noordwijk, CIFOR-ICRAF’s distinguished science fellow and one of 20 experts from around the world who functioned as ‘convening lead author’ for the Assessment. “For some types of decisions and decision-makers, it is relevant to use financial units to represent at least part of the value of nature to people but there is always a risk that such statements are misinterpreted.”

The Assessment has been a four-year journey, with many rounds of feedback, peer review and policy consultations. Detailed discussions by government delegates of the Summary Report will have increased the relevance of the key messages for discussion at global and national levels.

The word ‘value’ has many meanings, ranging from numbers through prices to non-negotiable core principles, he said. To value a tree, a forest or an agroforestry landscape means interacting with many perspectives. The more people involved, the wider the set of values that matters and which has to be taken into account.

This is of grave importance owing to the rapid and massive loss of species that is not confined to a particular group of drivers in one or two locations but is worldwide, all-embracing and under-recognized.

Consumers, for example, currently don’t pay a ‘true price’ for products sourced from nature (which is, ultimately, all products). Decisions by consumers and producers that are based on a narrow set of market values for nature are the hidden driver of the global biodiversity crisis. Bringing these values into the open can help people better understand the costs of over-exploitation and increase the likelihood of ensuring that the values — including the less tangible, non-financial ones — are honoured and preserved.

Importantly, the way the ‘conservation of nature’ is currently framed frequently ignores the values of people who live in any given ‘conservation’ area, with usually negative impact on the intended objectives for the conservation area. These people need to be recognised and respectfully included in decision processes.

Van Noordwijk noted that from examination of countries’ biodiversity reports and action plans drawn up in response to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, it’s clear that less than 25% of the world’s governments are on track to integrate values of nature that are beyond those recognized by markets. But he also noted that current valuation studies rarely report on the uptake of such in decisions related to governments’ policies and programmes.

The six chapters of the Assessment Report make the point of distinguishing between ‘instrumental’ values — which are those that can be measured by the goods and services that nature, biodiversity or well-functioning ecosystems provide to people — and ‘relational’ values: those that may be equally important to people’s well-being in immaterial ways.

The types of values that are most effectively communicated depend on the audience and the context, meaning that communication is as important as the decisions themselves that are made by governments and others in relation to the conservation of biological diversity.

“Scientists and other people interested in the issue have to help decision-makers understand so that they can frame policies and actions that will be effective,” he said. “Particularly, drawing decision-makers’ attention to the fact that humans who depend most on an area considered worthy of conservation need to be fully involved in decisions regarding it and that the intangible values — such as climate regulation, maintenance of healthy ecosystems and the water cycle — need to be fully recognised.”

Van Noordwijk stressed that from a ‘forests, trees and agroforestry’ perspective, the international acceptance of the Assessment Report can help pursuit of a dual strategy of 1) clarifying the way ecosystem structures and functions contribute instrumental values to people locally, nationally and globally and, thus, the economic values that are at stake if the current trend of biodiversity loss continues, and which can be partially recovered through ‘restoration’ of degraded landscapes; and 2) engaging with stakeholders to appreciate, and recognize, the various relational values that matter to them.

“The latter can, at the very least, help in more effective communication,” he said, “not only in a language that people can understand but also in a language that speaks to their hearts.”

Around the world, examples abound of conflicts that might be reduced or completely eradicated if these points are better understood.