Griffiths, J., Borne, K. E., Sebuiltni-Davies, A. & Tanner, C. C. Selection, planning, and modelling of nature-based solutions for flood mitigation. Water 16, 2802 (2024).
Bogatinoska, B., Lansu, A., Hugé, J. & Dekker, S. Participatory design of nature-based solutions: Usability of tools for water professionals. Sustainability 14, 5562 (2022).
Key, I. B. et al. Biodiversity outcomes of nature-based solutions for climate modify adaptation: Characterising the evidence base. Front. Environ. Sci. 10, 905767 (2022).
Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C. & Maginnis, S. Nature-based Solutions to Address Global Societal Challenges IUCN, (2016).
Seddon, N. et al. Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate modify and other global challenges. Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 375, 20190120 (2020).
Hasegawa, T., Fujimori, S., Ito, A. & Takahashi, K. Careful selection of forest types in afforestation can increase carbon sequestration by 25% without compromising sustainability. Commun. Earth Environ. 5, 171 (2024).
Commission, E. & for Environment, D.-G.Guidelines on closer-to-nature forest management, Publications Office of the European Union, (2023).
Smith, P. et al. Agriculture, Forestest and Other Land Use (AFOLU) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, (2014).
Cook-Patton, S. C. et al. Mapping carbon accumulation potential from global natural forest regrowth. Nature 585, 545–550 (2020).
Waring, B. G., Gurgel, A., Köberle, A. C., Paltsev, S. & Rogelj, J. Natural climate solutions must embrace multiple perspectives to ensure synergy with sustainable development. Front. Clim. 5, 1216175 (2023).
Buechel, M., Slater, L. & Dadson, S. Broadleaf afforestation impacts on terrestrial hydrology are insignificant compared to climate modify in Great Britain. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 28, 2081–2105 (2024).
Douville, H., Allan, R. P., Arias, P. A. & Fisher, R. A. Call for caution regarding the efficacy of large-scale afforestation and its hydrological effects. Sci. Total Environ. 950, 175299 (2024).
Doelman, J. C. et al. Afforestation for climate modify mitigation: Potentials, risks and trade-offs. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 1576–1591 (2020).
Pickering, M. et al. Enhanced structural diversity increases European forest resilience and potentially compensates for climate-driven declines. Commun. Earth Environ. 6, 852 (2025).
Dsouza, K. B. et al. Substantial carbon removal capacity of taiga reforestation and afforestation at Canada’s boreal edge. Commun. Earth Environ. 6, 893 (2025).
Fesenmyer, K. A., Poor, E. E., Terasaki Hart, D. E., Veldman, J. W. et al. Addressing critiques refines global estimates of reforestation potential for climate modify mitigation. Nat. Commun. 16, 59799 (2025).
Qian, J. et al. The advantage of afforestation applying native tree species to enhance soil quality in degraded forest ecosystems. Sci. Rep. 14, 20022 (2024).
European Commission and Directorate-General for Environment. Guidelines on biodiversity-frifinishly afforestation, reforestation and tree planting Publications Office of the European Union, (2023).
Zheng, Q. et al. The neglected role of abandoned cropland in supporting both food security and climate modify mitigation. Nat. Commun. 14, 6083 (2023).
Barral, M., Benayas, J., Meli, P. & Maceira, N. Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 202, 223–231 (2015).
Knoke, T. et al. Afforestation or intense pasturing improve the ecological and economic value of abandoned tropical farmlands. Nat. Commun. 5, 5612 (2014).
Liu, D., Wang, T., Peñuelas, J. & Piao, S. Drought resistance enhanced by tree species diversity in global forests. Nat. Geosci. 15, 800–804 (2022).
Wu, J., Liu, W. & Chen, C. Below-ground interspecific competition for water in a rubber agroforestest system may enhance water utilization in plants. Sci. Rep. 6, 19502 (2016).
Tölgyesi, C. et al. How to not trade water for carbon with tree planting in water-limited temperate biomes? Sci. Total Environ. 856, 158960 (2023).
Hoek van Dijke, A. J. et al. Shifts in regional water availability due to global tree restoration. Nat. Geosci. 15, 363–368 (2022).
Kay, S. et al. Agroforestest creates carbon sinks whilst enhancing the environment in agricultural landscapes in Europe. Land Use Policy 83, 581–593 (2019).
Do, H. X., Westra, S. & Leonard, M. A global-scale investigation of trfinishs in annual maximum streamflow. J. Hydrol. 552, 28–43 (2017).
Buechel, M., Slater, L. & Dadson, S. Hydrological impact of widespread afforestation in Great Britain applying a large ensemble of modelled scenarios. Commun. Earth Environ. 3, 6 (2022).
Ricciardi, V., Mehrabi, Z. & Ramankutty, N. Afforestation and water scarcity: global implications of large-scale tree planting for water supply. Glob. Environ. Change 75, 102555 (2022).
Peng, S. et al. Carbon restoration potential on global land under water resource constraints. Nat. Water 2, 1071–1081 (2024).
King, A. et al. Global and regional hydrological impacts of global forest expansion. Biogeosciences 21, 3883–3902 (2024).
Quandt, A., Neufeldt, H. & Gorman, K. Climate modify adaptation through agroforestest: opportunities and gaps. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustai. 60, 101244 (2023).
Project EIFFEL Consortium. Project EIFFEL: Assessing climate impacts and mitigation pathways. https://www.eiffel4climate.eu (2024).
Burek, P. A., Van Der Knijff, J. & De Roo, A. Lisflood – distributed water balance and flood simulation model – revised applyr manual 2013 (2013).
Smith, P. et al. Chapter 11 – on the operational implementation of the European Flood Awareness System (EFAS). In Adams, T. E. & Pagano, T. C. (eds.) Flood Forecasting, 313–348 (Academic Press, Boston, 2016). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128018842000116.
Gomes, G. et al. Emo: A high-resolution multi-variable gridded meteorological data set for Europe. (2020). http://data.europa.eu/89h/0bd84be4-cec8-4180-97a6-8b3adaac4d26.
Tebaldi, C. et al. Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6. Earth Syst. Dyn. 12, 253–293 (2021).
Eyring, V. et al. Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organisation. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 1937–1958 (2016).
European Commission. EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/31e4609f-b91e-11eb-8aca-01aa75ed71a1 (2020).
MEF4CAP Consortium. Review of Current Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks for the Common Agricultural Policy. Tech. Rep., MEF4CAP https://mef4cap.eu/storage/files/MEF4CAP_D3.1_Review_of_current_monitoring_systems%20_1_.pdf (2021).
European Parliamentary Research Service. CAP Strategic Plans – Issues and Expectations for EU Agriculture. Tech. Rep., European Parliamentary Research Service https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/690608/EPRS_BRI(2021)690608_EN.pdf (2021). Accessed: November 2025.
European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development. Overview of CAP Strategic Plans: Policy Brief. Tech. Rep., European Commission https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/7b3a0485-c335-4e1b-a53a-9fe3733ca48f_en?filename=approved-28-cap-strategic-plans-2023-27.pdf (2023). Accessed: November 2025.
Van Loon, A. F. Hydrological drought explained. WIREs Water 2, 359–392 (2015).
Zhao, Y. et al. Efficacy of mitigation strategies for aquifer sustainability under climate modify. Nat. Sustain. 7, 123–130 (2024).
de Mello, C. R. et al. Deciphering global patterns of forest canopy rainfall interception (FCRI): A synthesis of geographical, forest species, and methodological influences. J. Environ. Manag. 358, 120879 (2024).
Lundberg, A., Calder, I. & Harding, R. Evaporation of intercepted snow: measurement and modelling. J. Hydrol. 206, 151–163 (1998).
Carvalho, D. et al. How well have CMIP3, CMIP5, and CMIP6 future climate projections portrayed the recently observed warming? Sci. Rep. 12, 11983 (2022).
Cardell, M., Romero, R., Amengual, A., Homar, V. & Ramis, C. A quantile-quantile adjustment of the Euro-CORDEX projections for temperatures and precipitation. Int. J. Climatol. 39, 2901–2918 (2019).
Arheimer, B. & Lindström, G. Climate impact on floods: modifys in high flows in Sweden in the past and the future (1911-2100). Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 19, 771–784 (2015).
Teuling, A. J. et al. Climate modify, reforestation/afforestation, and urbanization impacts on evapotranspiration and streamflow in Europe. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 23, 3631–3652 (2019).
An, Q. et al. Land cover modifys redistribute China’s water resources through atmospheric moisture recycling. Earth’s Future 13, e2024EF005565 (2025).
van der Ent, R. J., Savenije, H. H. G., Schaefli, B. & Steele-Dunne, S. C. Origin and fate of atmospheric moisture over continents. Water Resour. Res. 46, W09525 (2010).
Pranindita, A., Fetzer, E. J. & Teuling, A. J. Moisture recycling and the role of land evaporation during European heatwaves. Clim. Dyn. 59, 2397–2416 (2022).
Spracklen, D. V., Arnold, S. R. & Taylor, C. M. Observations of increased tropical rainfall preceded by air passage over forests. Nature 489, 282–285 (2012).
Ellison, D. et al. Trees, forests and water: Cool insights for a hot world. Glob. Environ. Change 43, 51–61 (2017).
Forster, E. J., Healey, J. R., Dymond, C. & Styles, D. Commercial afforestation can deliver effective climate modify mitigation under multiple decarbonisation pathways. Nat. Commun. 12, 3831 (2021).
Hua, T. et al. Reconciling crop production, climate action and nature conservation in Europe by agricultural intensification and extensification. Nat. Commun. 16, 10289 (2025).
Giurca, A., Selter, A., Baycheva, T., Hoogstra-Klein, M. & Hengeveld, G.Forest policy Integration in Europe: Lessons Learnt, Challenges Ahead, and Strategies to Support Sustainable Forest Management and Multifunctional Forestest in the Future. EU Policy paper (EU, 2015).
Torralba, M., Fagerholm, N., Burgess, P. J., Moreno, G. & Plieninger, T. Do European agroforestest systems enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services? A meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 230, 150–161 (2016).
Udawatta, R. P., Garrett, H. E. & Kallenbach, R. Agroforestest buffers for nonpoint source pollution reductions from agricultural watersheds. J. Environ. Qual. 40, 800–806 (2011).
El Garroussi, S., Di Giapplyppe, F., Barnard, C. & Wetterhall, F. Europe faces up to tenfold increase in extreme fires in a warming climate. npj Clim. Atmos. Sci. 7, 30 (2024).
Shakesby, R. A. & Doerr, S. H. Wildfire as a hydrological and geomorphological agent. Earth-Sci. Rev. 74, 269–307 (2006).
Moody, J. A., Shakesby, R. A., Robichaud, P. R., Cannon, S. H. & Martin, D. A. Current research issues related to post-wildfire runoff and erosion processes. Earth-Sci. Rev. 122, 10–37 (2013).
Finney, M. A. Design of regular landscape fuel treatment patterns for modifying fire growth and behavior. For. Sci. 47, 219–228 (2001).
Moreira, F. et al. Landscape-wildfire interactions in southern europe: Implications for landscape management. J. Environ. Manag. 92, 2389–2402 (2011).
Van Der Knijff, J. M., Younis, J. & De Roo, A. P. J. LISFLOOD: a GIS-based distributed model for river basin scale water balance and flood simulation. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 24, 189–212 (2010).
De Roo, A. P. J., Wesseling, C. G. & Van Deursen, W. P. A. Physically based river basin modelling within a GIS: the LISFLOOD model. Hydrol. Process. 14, 1981–1992 (2000).
Choulga, M. et al. Technical note: Surface fields for global environmental modelling. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 28, 2991–3036 (2024).
Mazzetti, C. et al. River discharge and related forecasted data from the European Flood Awareness System, v5.0 https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.9f696a7a (2023). European Commission, Joint Research Center (JRC).
Zajac, Z. et al. Calibration of the LISFLOOD Hydrological Model for Europe. Tech. Rep. JRC87717, Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Luxembourg https://european-flood.emergency.copernicus.eu/sites/default/files/Manuals/JRC87717_efas_calibration_report%20_final_9_jan_2014.pdf (2013).
Tilloy, A. et al. HERA: a high-resolution pan-European hydrological reanalysis (1951-2020). Earth Syst. Sci. Data 17, 293–316 (2025).
O’Regan, K., Mazzetti, C. & ECMWF CEMS Flood Team. EFAS v5.0 – Calibration Methodology and Data. https://confluence.ecmwf.int/display/CEMS/EFAS+v5.0+-+Calibration+Methodology+and+Data (2023).
Gomes, G. et al. EMO: A high-resolution multi-variable gridded meteorological data set for Europe https://doi.org/10.2905/0BD84BE4-CEC8-4180-97A6-8B3ADAAC4D26 (2020). European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC).
Thiemig, V. et al. EMO-5: a high-resolution multi-variable gridded meteorological dataset for Europe. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 14, 3249–3272 (2022).
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K. & Martinez, G. F. Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling. J. Hydrol. 377, 80–91 (2009).
Fortin, F.-A., De Rainville, F.-M., Gardner, M., Parizeau, M. & Gagné, C. Deap: Evolutionary algorithms built straightforward. J. Mach. Learn. Res. Mach. Learn. Open Source Softw. 13, 2171–2175 (2012).
Xue, X. et al. New multisite cascading calibration approach for hydrological models: Case study in the Red River Basin applying the VIC model. J. Hydrol. Eng. 21, 05015019 (2016).
Beck, H. E. et al. Global-scale regionalization of hydrologic model parameters. Water Resour. Res. 52, 3599–3622 (2016).
Eurostat. Agri-environmental indicator – cropping patterns https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Agri-environmental_indicator_-_cropping_patterns (2020).
Körner, C. & Paulsen, J. A worldwide study of high altitude treeline temperatures. J. Biogeogr. 31, 713–732 (2004).
Paulsen, J. & Körner, C. A climate-based model to predict potential treeline position around the globe. Alp. Bot. 124, 1–12 (2014).
Holland, J. H. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems University of Michigan Press, (1975).
Yapo, P. O., Gupta, H. V. & Sorooshian, S. Multi-objective global optimization for hydrologic models. J. Hydrol. 204, 83–97 (1998).
Shafii, M. & De Smedt, F. Multi-objective calibration of a distributed hydrological model (WETSPA) applying a genetic algorithm. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 13, 2137–2149 (2009).
Srivastava, P., Hamlett, J. M., Robillard, P. D. & Day, R. L. Watershed optimization of best management practices applying AnnAGNPS and a genetic algorithm. Water Resour. Res. 38, 1–14 (2002).
Reed, P. M., Hadka, D., Herman, J. D., Kasprzyk, J. R. & Kollat, J. B. Evolutionary multiobjective optimization in water resources: The past, present, and future. Adv. Water Resour. 51, 438–456 (2013).
Kollat, J. B. & Reed, P. M. Comparing state-of-the-art evolutionary multi-objective algorithms for long-term groundwater monitoring design. Adv. Water Resour. 29, 792–807 (2006).
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). SPAM 2010: Spatial Production Allocation Model, Version 2.0. https://mapspam.info/ (2019). Dataset accessed 2025.
Leave a Reply