‘Silvopasture’ May Not Be the Major Climate Solution Some Say It Is

“Silvopasture”— the practice of integrating trees, forage and livestock on the same land, rather than using that land exclusively for pasture — has been gaining interest as a major natural climate solution in the U.S.

Silvopasture is not a new concept; it’s already used in some parts of Latin America, where there’s evidence that it can boost carbon storage and livestock productivity simultaneously. But it is now starting to be promoted as a potential “win–win” for agriculture and climate in the United States.

One analysis suggests that anywhere from 14 to over 60 million acres of pastureland in the eastern U.S. could, in principle, be converted to silvopasture. It estimates this would capture between 4.9 and 25.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) annually. For reference, 25 million tonnes of CO2e is roughly comparable to what 6 million gas-powered cars emit in a year.

These analyses are appealing to farmers and policymakers looking for viable, sustainable climate solutions. But does the evidence support the claims?

Our new working paper seeks to answer this question. We reviewed research and key field studies on how converting temperate pastures to silvopasture affects both livestock productivity and carbon storage. Our conclusion is that in the U.S. — even in the eastern region most targeted for silvopasture potential — this should not yet be treated as a large, reliable solution for mitigating climate change. The evidence base is too thin and inconsistent.

This isn’t just an exercise in theory: Which climate solutions are promoted and prioritized has real implications for where we direct policy and funding — and, ultimately, how successful we are in tackling the climate crisis.

Silvopasture may still play a role in climate resilience and emissions reductions in the U.S. But at this time, the focus should be on well-designed pilots to determine where it will generate real benefits and provide an economical solution.