ovr.news

People thriving, health, connection

Amazon study prioritizes forest protection for biodiversity and carbon

phys.org · 17 September 2026
Amazon study prioritizes forest protection for biodiversity and carbon
Photo: phys.org

Summary and headline written by AI from the source article. How we work

Researchers from the UK, Brazil, Sweden, and Australia studied land use in the Santarém and Paragominas regions of Pará, Brazil, between 2010 and 2020 to determine the most effective conservation strategies.

The international team analyzed over 3 million hectares, combining satellite imagery, field data from hundreds of surveys, and models of plant and animal life. They compared the impacts of preventing deforestation, restoring cleared land, and protecting existing forests from disturbances like logging and wildfires.

The study revealed that protecting existing forests from disturbances offered the greatest benefits for biodiversity and nearly matched preventing deforestation in terms of carbon stock protection. While forest restoration proved beneficial, especially on heavily depleted land, it was the most expensive option and less effective when used alone. The researchers found that combining strategies, avoiding both deforestation and disturbances, delivered the biggest gains in biodiversity and carbon storage.

Professor Jos Barlow of Lancaster University emphasized the urgency of these findings given the intensifying 2026 El Niño and climate change, which increase the risk of severe wildfires in the Amazon. Dr. Leonardo Miranda of Lancaster University stated the need to prioritize existing forests and expand protection beyond simply preventing deforestation. The team believes these results apply to other tropical regions and call on companies trading commodities like soy and beef to address forest degradation alongside deforestation.

Was this worth your time?
Read on phys.org
Surfaced by the Thriving lens — one of the vital signs ovr.news reads.
How we evaluated this

More in Thriving

Browse all Thriving articles

What made it worth it?

What's wrong with this article?