Connect with us

Published

on

The degradation of trees at the edges of tropical forests is more widespread than previously thought, according to new research.

The study, published in Nature, explains that trees near deforested or degraded areas of the forest are more vulnerable to drought, as well as to human activity such as logging. These “edge effects” are measurable up to 1.5km into the forest, the authors find.

This is an “amazing result”, a study author tells Carbon Brief, because previous studies detected these effects only within the first 120 metres of the forest edge. The new figure indicates that 18% of the remaining tropical moist forests are impacted by edge effects – an area more than 200% larger than previously estimated.

Experts not involved in the study tell Carbon Brief that quantifying tropical forest degradation is “frustratingly elusive”. And while some praise the methods used in the paper, others advise caution when interpreting the conclusions.

Two Brazilian scientists also tell Carbon Brief that the study overlooks important work from institutions in the global south who are also working on this problem. They advise that scientists from local groups should be invited to contribute to research in this area.

Forest height

Tropical forests account for around 45% of forest cover globally. These forests are well-known for their high biodiversity and the crucial ecosystem services that they provide. They also hold around one-quarter of all land-based carbon. 

The new study assesses how deforestation and degradation affect “moist tropical forests” – tropical forests in the equatorial belt with a fairly consistent annual temperature and high levels of rainfall. Tropical dry forests and deciduous forests are not included in the analysis.

Research shows that around 17% of tropical moist forests disappeared over 1990-2021, largely due to human activity such as logging and fires. Of the 1,071m hectares that remained globally in 2019, around 10% were degraded, the new study says. This means that they suffered human-induced “disturbances” that led to a partial loss of their tree cover or function.

Furthermore, trees at the edges of tropical forests have higher mortality rates than trees in the centre, because they are more exposed to disturbances such as fire and drought. When intact forest landscapes become fragmented – for example, due to logging, fire, drought or the construction of roads into the forest – these “edge effects” can lead to further forest degradation.

The authors use data collected by the Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) instrument on the International Space Station to assess the forest structure – such as canopy height and aboveground biomass – over the past four years. 

To measure canopy height, the authors calculate the “RH98” value – the height of the top of the canopy or the nearest tallest vegetation in the area. This is an important measure of forest health and maturity. Aboveground biomass measures the aboveground woody biomass per unit area and is also a good measure of forest health.

They combine this with data from the Tropical Moist Forest dataset, which uses Landsat satellite imagery to show how tropical moist forests have changed over 1990-2022.

The plot below shows the canopy height for different types of moist tropical forests. The rows show intact forests at least 3km from a forest edge (top row), degraded forests (second row), the edges of forests (third row) and forest regrowth (bottom row), as shown in the maps below.

Darker blues indicate taller forest canopies. The map shows where the forests are located, and the bar charts on the right hand side show the overall distribution of different tree heights.

Canopy height for moist tropical forests for intact forests (top row) degraded forests (second row), the edges of forests (third row) and forest regrowth (bottom row), as shown in the maps below.
Canopy height for moist tropical forests for intact forests (top row) degraded forests (second row), the edges of forests (third row) and forest regrowth (bottom row), as shown in the maps below. Dark blue indicates a taller area of the forest and light blue indicates a shorter area. The map shows the distribution of trees and the bar charts on the right-hand side show the frequency. Source: Bourgoin et al (2024)

The tallest intact moist tropical forests are found in south-east Asia, where the average canopy height is 34m, the study finds. West and central Africa and Central and South America have average forest heights of 29m. This is because intact tropical forests in Asia, which are typically dominated by “hardwood wind-dispersed species”, are typically taller, the authors say.

The map also shows that degraded forests, forest edges and areas of forest growth have a greater proportion of shorter trees on average.

The forest edge

The study investigates two different types of forest edge effects, exploring how areas of deforested and degraded land impact nearby trees.

Dr Lilian Blanc is an author on the study and researcher at the French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development. He tells Carbon Brief that the effect of nearby degraded land “was not considered in previous studies”.

The graphs below show how areas of deforested land affect tree canopy height. The charts at the top show the average distribution of canopy heights of undisturbed forests in the Americas, Africa and Asia. The line colours indicate the distance of those trees from the forest edge, with yellow indicating a short distance and blue indicating a large distance.

The bottom map shows how far into the forest edge effects are present, by measuring the distance from the forest edge at which the height of the forest reaches 95% of the height of the intact, undisturbed forest. 

Average distribution of canopy heights of undisturbed forests at different distances from the forest edge (top) in the Americas, Africa and Asia, and the distance at which the forest height drops to 95% of the height of the intact forest (bottom).
Average distribution of canopy heights of undisturbed forests at different distances from the forest edge (top) in the Americas, Africa and Asia, and the distance at which the forest height drops to 95% of the height of the intact forest (bottom). Yellow indicates a short distance to the forest edge, and blue indicates a high distance. Source: Bourgoin et al (2024)

The authors find the greatest edge effects from deforestation along the “forestation fronts of the Amazon”, in Borneo and Sumatra coasts marked by high fragmentation levels, and on the borders of the Congo basin.

They also record a decrease in canopy height up to 350, 400 and 1,500 metres from the deforested edge in the Americas, Africa and Asia, respectively.

The authors find that within 120 metres of trees that have been degraded due to logging and burning, the average canopy height in undisturbed forests is 15% and 22% lower, respectively.

The authors also investigate how quickly the forest can recover from logging and fires, concluding that while there is “fast regrowth of pioneer and understory species”, there is “no significant recovery in canopy height in the 30 years following the creation of a forest edge”.

Forest degradation can also increase the likelihood of deforestation, the authors say. They warn that forest height and distance to the edge of the forest are “strong predictors of deforestation”, as forest fragmentation makes the interior of the forest more accessible to loggers.

It adds that there has been selective logging 500 metres from the forest edge in Africa and the Americas, and even deeper in Asia.

Agriculture and road expansion trigger a 20-30% reduction in canopy height and biomass at the forest edge, with “persistent effects” measurable up to 1.5km inside the forest, the authors find. Blanc tells Carbon Brief that this is “an amazing result” as previous studies only looked for edge effects up to 120 metres from the forest edge.

The authors also calculated the edge effect using total above ground woody biomass, instead of canopy height. Using this metric, the authors conclude that the total area of forest with this edge effect is 18% of total global forest area in 2022 – an area more than 200% larger than previously estimated.

Prof Simon Lewis – a professor of global change science at University College London’s department of geography – tells Carbon Brief that this is a “striking new result”. 

It implies that “the negative impacts on remaining forest from the creation of forest edges are much more extensive than has been commonly documented”. It also means that “forest protection of large blocks of forest is going to be more important than we previously thought”, he says.

Overall, the study is “an important step forward in monitoring forest disturbance, which is a very tough problem”, Lewis says. However, he adds that “care is needed” when looking at some of the observational data, saying that he “trust[s] the broad patterns of biomass loss following logging, edge creation and fires, but not the specific biomass loss values from these disturbances”.

Dr Peter Potapov – a researcher in the department of geographical sciences at the University of Maryland, whose work was cited extensively in the new study – says “the conclusion that edge effects are degrading 18% of the remaining humid tropical forest is an overstatement”.

He says that forest degradation depends on other factors, such as land-use regulations, and argues that “the assumption that all forests 1.5km away from the edges are degraded may undermine ongoing conservation efforts.

Expert response

These comments reflect the mixed response that the new study has received.

Prof Matthew Hansen – a remote sensing scientist at the University of Maryland’s department of geography – tells Carbon Brief that forest degradation is “a frustratingly elusive dynamic to quantify”. However, he praises the study for being “very clear and ambitious”. 

Potapov, who has published research with Hansen, tells Carbon Brief that the results broadly confirm existing findings, but warns that there are some “major limitations” with the study.

For example, he says the method does not include a “matching technique” to separate the effect of human management on tree height from the natural factors such as elevation, soil quality and floods. He also warns that the observations “failed to correctly map anthropogenic disturbances in humid tropical forests”, adding:

“The authors greatly underestimate selective logging in Gabon, while the natural non-fire disturbances like river meandering and windfalls in South America were probably treated as human-caused degradation.”

Dr Flávia de Souza Mendes, a programme manager in forest and land use at satellite imagery firm Planet Labs, says the study is “well written”. However, she laments that “there are several local groups from the global south that have been studying this topic and are not part of this study”. She suggests that scientists carrying out similar studies should “invite more local researchers to take part”.

She also tells Carbon Brief that this paper “did not take into account studies carried out by local researchers on the relationship between degradation and deforestation”.

For example, she highlights a report by Brazilian researchers which finds that, in some regions of the Amazon, 86% of degraded areas were not subsequently cleared in the following decades. This is not in line with the findings of the new study, where degradation “has a crucial role in predicting future deforestation”, she says.

Prof Celso Silva-Junior – a research scientist in amazon ecology and remote sensing at Brazil’s Universidade Federal do Maranhão – tells Carbon Brief that the study “reproduces the findings of our research group, which has been investigating large-scale forest edge effects, using remote sensing technologies, since 2016”.

He says that the paper’s findings concerning biomass loss beyond 120 metres from the forest edge are “critical”. However, he emphasises the importance of the “local knowledge of tropical scientists” who are “deeply involved in the establishment of the conceptual framework for treating this relevant problem”.

The post Tropical forest degradation due to ‘edge effects’ is 200% higher than thought appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Tropical forest degradation due to ‘edge effects’ is 200% higher than thought

Continue Reading

Climate Change

AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace

Published

on


SYDNEY, Thursday 30 October 2026 — In response to
reports that the Albanese government is set to introduce draft legislation this year that would seek to ban data centres in Australia’s suburbs, Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:

“These reports are a testament to the growing community opposition to these completely inappropriate AI factories that have sprung up across our suburbs, and Big Tech corporations should take heed — the data centre build-out must not happen without the endorsement of the Australian people.

“But the government can’t simply ship this problem out to regional Australia without addressing the fundamental issues with this extractive new industry.

“We’re already seeing a trend of AI data centre proposals moving to the regions, in areas that are more water-scarce, more environmentally sensitive, and next to sources of fracked and coal seam gas to support their massive BYO gas-fired power plans — a pattern we’ve seen play out in the United States.

“From the Beetaloo Basin in the NT to the Western Downs in Qld, we’re seeing a wave of AI data centre proposals that would see new gas fast-tracked to support their massive energy demand, and threaten to completely derail Australia’s energy transition.

“Just as suburban Australians are asking, “what for?”, regional communities like Berry Springs and Dalby do not want dirty data centres setting up shop with absolutely no benefit to their communities. Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on AI data centre developments until strict and enforceable safeguards are in place to protect our climate and our communities.”

-ENDS-

Media contact

Kate O’Callaghan on +61 406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines

Published

on

In the thick of the COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in 2024, the UN climate talks were rattled by what can only be described as a major PR disaster. The BBC, Reuters and The Guardian all carried headlines, attributed to leading climate policy experts, that the COPs were “no longer fit for purpose”. 

The articles outlined a series of reforms called for in an open letter signed by 22 eminent scientists and politicians, including a former UN secretary-general and previous UN climate chief, with a further 150 lending their support. The headlines shook confidence in the COP process, just as governments were wrestling over a new climate finance goal.

The Club of Rome – which handled the media relations for the letter – hurried to say that its “constructive, supportive ideas” had been “misinterpreted”. Negotiators kept calm(ish) and carried on, in the end landing the finance goal after some high-stakes drama on the final day.

    To my surprise, when I went back this week to read the letter again, I could not find the offending line about the COPs not being fit for purpose. The Club of Rome has yet to respond to my query about its disappearance.

    Whatever happened to the wording, that sentiment has been widely shared. COPs have ballooned in size while the importance of their outcomes seems to have diminished since the 2015 Paris Agreement (with the exception of the 2023 COP in Dubai where countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems).

    The same on the surface

    Two years on from those painful headlines in Baku, has anything changed for the better? You might be forgiven for thinking not. Official decisions are still made by consensus rather than the majority voting some have called for to stop blockers.

    Tens of thousands of officials, activists and business execs still scurry around the halls to an ever-growing list of side events, roundtables and dialogues, while deals still come down to rows, all-nighters and jargon-filled texts adopted to rounds of applause.

    But it would not be true to say that COPs have completely failed to respond to the very real need to translate the words of the Paris Agreement into action in the outside world.

    Global warming is projected to be around 1.3C lower this century than it would have been if the world had not committed to tackle the climate crisis under that accord. Developing countries have a valued space at COPs in which their voices have equal weight in decision-making, unlike in many other international fora. And most importantly, perhaps, there has been a subtle shift, tipping the balance away from negotiating towards doing.

    Brazil branded last year’s summit in Belém as the “COP of Implementation”, corralling the sprawling Action Agenda into six axes. This was a bid to impose some structure on the mushrooming efforts between governments, UN agencies, cities, businesses and civil society to set targets and spur faster results on their pet issues, from methane emissions to health and adaptation in conflict zones. COP30 alone saw the launch of 120 “plans to accelerate solutions”.

    COP30 roadmaps off the cuff

    Meanwhile, as the formal negotiations drew to a close, it was clear that consensus decision-making was evolving into something a little more improvised.

    With only around half of all countries on board with the idea of a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago announced his team would put one together over the coming year, along with another on how to meet a global goal to halt deforestation by 2030. Those roadmaps will be launched next week, presented and discussed at COP31, though it’s still unclear whether or how they’ll be incorporated into the formal negotiating agenda.

    Saudi Arabia raises a point of order during the closing plenary at COP30 in Belem, Brazil on November 22, 2025 (Photo: IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis)

    Saudi Arabia raises a point of order during the closing plenary at COP30 in Belem, Brazil on November 22, 2025 (Photo: IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis)

    Some leading policy-makers don’t think that matters too much. Speaking to journalists before the Antalya summit, COP30 CEO Ana Toni and Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven said “coalitions of the willing” can move ahead without needing consensus from the COPs. This, they said, was evident this year at the first global conference on TAFF, co-chaired by van Veldhoven and attended by 60 countries.

    “Consensus or no-consensus in the general COP doesn’t make a difference for the choices I have to make in my country to get my country to phase out fossil fuels,” said the Dutch minister. The Netherlands recently became one of the first to publish a national TAFF plan.

    COP31 banks on flagship voluntary initiatives

    This thinking has permeated the management and expected outcomes of this year’s COP too. Earlier this year, Türkiye, supported by international energy agencies, floated the idea of a voluntary goal to boost electrification to 35% of the world’s final energy consumption by 2035 – and this is now being touted as one of the main results to be expected from Antalya.

    Türkiye is also championing a pledge on AI and climate, while co-host Australia is pushing to ease access to climate finance for least developed countries and small island states.

    COP31 presidency announces AI pledge as UN climate chief says Big Tech ‘on thin ice’

    None of these needs consensus. But with a political cover decision already in the works, as trailed by the COP presidents, they – and perhaps the fossil fuel roadmap – may find a home in the official text if language acceptable to most can be found, giving them them additional weight.

    UNFCCC reform process in the shadows

    Formal reform is underway too, if quietly. UN climate chief Simon Stiell is leading a review informed by ongoing consultations with a group of 15 well-respected climate policy experts, three of whom signed the open letter in 2024.

    Among them is leading Swedish climate and sustainability scientist Johan Rockström who has strong ideas about how to make COPs function better, including a switch to majority voting. He told the same press briefing nothing stands in the way of this, because the rules of procedure for making decisions at COPs have never been formally agreed.

    Still, to get away from the default setting of consensus would require agreement on a new system that may be impossible to achieve given the rise in bullying tactics by fossil fuel heavyweights.

    Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation

    The deliberations with the high-level policy gurus, as reflected in a summary of June’s session in Bonn, largely echo what’s already happening organically, calling for stronger partnerships and accountability both in and between the Action Agenda and negotiations. It doesn’t mention voting.

    A general overview of the reform exercise says that “improving and optimizing the [UN climate] process over the medium to long term… will be critical to fostering trust, enhancing collaboration, and catalyzing increased ambition”.

    In the short term, don’t hold your breath for anything concrete on reform at COP31 but watch for signs in what ends up dominating the headlines from Türkiye.

    The post Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Experts: What China wants from the COP31 climate talks

    Published

    on