Protecting forests has long been considered a cornerstone of climate action. While primary forests and large-scale reforestation projects often dominate the discussion, a groundbreaking study published in Nature Climate Change (Robinson et al., 2025) reveals that young secondary forests — particularly those aged between 20 and 40 years — play a disproportionately powerful role in removing carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere.
These “adolescent” forests, growing back naturally after deforestation or land abandonment, are emerging as some of the most cost-effective and scalable solutions for climate mitigation. By recognizing and safeguarding their potential, policymakers, investors, and local communities could unlock an overlooked pathway for accelerating carbon removal.
Natural forest regeneration is increasingly promoted as an affordable and scalable way to sequester carbon. Yet, not all secondary forests capture CO₂ at the same rate. Their effectiveness depends on age, location, soil conditions, and land-use history. This variability has raised a critical question: At what ages and in which regions do secondary forests absorb the most carbon, and how can this knowledge guide global conservation investments?
The new study addresses this by producing global maps and criteria that highlight where secondary forest protection can deliver the largest climate benefits.
To answer these questions, researchers combined:
This approach allowed the team to estimate carbon removal potential across different regions and forest ages. While they acknowledged uncertainties — such as inconsistent biomass data, spatial variation, and future risks like fire or drought — the study provides the most comprehensive global assessment of young secondary forests to date.
The study’s most striking conclusion is that secondary forests aged 20–40 years capture carbon at the fastest rates worldwide. During this stage, growth and biomass accumulation significantly outpace losses from natural mortality, making them “carbon removal engines.”
By mapping these “carbon hotspots,” the researchers demonstrate how targeted protection of forests in this growth phase could maximize climate gains.
Quoting the authors: “Young secondary forests represent one of the most effective and underutilized strategies for natural carbon removal, especially when protected in their most productive phase.”
In Latin America, particularly in the Amazon, vast areas of land are already undergoing natural regeneration. Safeguarding these forests in their high-uptake phase could provide both climate benefits and sustainable livelihood opportunities through fair carbon compensation schemes.
Young secondary forests are not just recovering ecosystems; they are among the most powerful natural tools we have to slow climate change. Protecting them in their most active stage of carbon capture — their “adolescence” — is a strategic, cost-efficient, and socially beneficial action.
The challenge now lies in integrating this evidence into climate policy, financing, and local governance. By prioritizing secondary forests between 20 and 40 years old, the global community can accelerate carbon removal, strengthen biodiversity, and empower local communities.
Call to action: Governments, financial institutions, and civil society must recognize the unique value of young secondary forests and ensure their protection before this critical window of opportunity is lost.
secondary forests, carbon removal, young forests, forest regeneration, carbon capture hotspots, natural climate solutions, forest conservation, carbon offset markets, protect young forests, secondary forest carbon
Young secondary forests capture CO₂ fastest at 20–40 years. Protecting them offers a cost-effective, powerful natural climate solution.
Topics of interest
ClimateReference: Robinson N, Drever CR, Gibbs DA, Lister K, Esquivel-Muelbert A, Heinrich V, Ciais P, Silva-Junior CHL, Liu Z, Pugh TAM, Saatchi S, Xu Y, Cook-Patton SC, et al. Protect young secondary forests for optimum carbon removal. Nature Climate Change [Internet]. 2025;15(7):1–12. Available on: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02355-5