Global alternatives of natural vegetation cover
Jean‐François Bastin, Nicolas Latte, Jan Bogaert, Claude García, Fabio Berzaghi, Fernando T. Maestre, Jens‐Christian Svenning, Eméline Sêssi Pélagie Assèdé, Yao Sadaiou Sabas Barima, Timothée Besisa, Samuel Bouchoms, Thomas W. Crowther, Thalès de Haulleville, Hugo de Lame, Pauline Depoortere, Marc Dufrêne, Anne J. Hoek van Dijke, Simon Lhoest, Grégory Mahy, Christian Messier, Danilo Mollicone, Felana Nantenaina Ramalason, Marc Peaucelle, Antoine Plumacker, Fabien Quétier, Olivia Lovanirina Rakotondrasoa, Kouagou Raoul Sambiéni, Ben Sparrow, Yegor Tarelkin, Yannick Useni Sikuzani, Arthur Vander Linden, Philippe Lejeune
Abstract
Preserving and restoring terrestrial ecosystems is essential to preventing the decline of life on Earth. To guide global conservation efforts, we present a detailed counterfactual map showing Earth’s natural tree, short vegetation, and bare ground cover. This map accounts for environmental filtering along with realistic scenarios of fire frequency and wildlife herbivory. The most likely scenario suggests 43% (5669 ± 74 Mha) of land could support trees, 39% (5183 ± 86 Mha) shrubs and grasses, and 18% (2352 ± 59 Mha) bare ground. Adjustments in fire and herbivory could shift a minimum of 675 Mha of land, stressing the importance of considering alternative outcomes when restoring a landscape. Our findings also suggest that adjustments in fire frequency and wildlife herbivory could have a greater impact on natural vegetation than expected climate changes by 2050, highlighting decision-makers’ responsibility to guide conservation and restoration toward a sustainable and biodiverse future. Conserving and restoring ecosystems requires understanding what natural vegetation would look like without human disturbance. This study maps the most likely global cover of trees, short vegetation, and bare ground, showing that land management through fire and herbivory may influence ecosystems more than climate change alone.