Doing burden-sharing right to deliver natural climate solutions for carbon dioxide removal

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) figures prominently in modelled pathways to achieve the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming 1.5-2°C compared pre-industrial levels. However, national roles and responsibilities deliver CDR have been informed with quota analyses that focus on developed economies major emitters. This study extends discussion implications for developing countries. For purpose, we employ a diverse set allocation methods wide range emissions scenarios address equitability uncertainty sharing burden climate change mitigation. We further tropical countries due their large potential natural solutions (NCS) CDR. Our analysis indicates stringent quotas top seven contribute ∼60% pantropical cost-effective NCS potential, median across ranging from 0.1-29 GtCO2. results reveal strong heterogeneity inherent bias making agreement an ‘equitable’ unlikely. Competition among non-NCS options may arise when ambitious are implemented vast forest areas or expansion tree cover. Therefore, it is important not use evaluate actions inform targets could exacerbate trade-offs between reduction, biodiversity ecosystem services these NCS-rich Instead, burden-sharing exercises foster higher ambition if used voluntary cooperation mechanisms. Discrepancy perceived fairness should be critically transparently embraced encourage acknowledgment socio-ecological co-benefits as compensation. Such approach will allow prioritise protection restoration nature mitigation pathways.