Drawdown® Roadmap

9:15

Unit 1: Introducing the Drawdown Roadmap

21:31

Unit 2: The Science Behind the Roadmap

21:17

Unit 3: The Five Parts of the Drawdown Roadmap

10:22

Unit 4: How to Use the Drawdown Roadmap

17:39

The Drawdown Roadmap for Business

1:01

The Drawdown Roadmap Trailer

TEDxBoston: The Drawdown Roadmap
Jonathan Foley presents Project Drawdown’s plan for halting climate change
To Stop Climate Change, Time Is as Important as Tech
When it comes to deploying climate solutions, think “now” as well as “new”
Hitting the “Emergency Brake” on Climate
Why and how time matters in prioritizing climate solutions
We Need Four Waves of Climate Action
Different climate solutions unfold at different speeds
We Need to “See the Whole Board” to Stop Climate Change
Solving climate change requires employing multiple strategies
Drawdown Solutions Across Sources, Sinks, and Society
Sources of Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Greenhouse Gas Sources by Sector
Early Action is Key to Addressing Climate Change
Direct / Indirect Emissions Cuts plus Carbon Removal
Emissions Cuts Needed Compared to Investments
Emergency Brake Climate Solutions
Waves of Climate Action
The Drawdown-Aligned Business Framework
Eight Key Areas for Business Climate Action
Building an Ecosystem of Climate Action

The Drawdown® Roadmap is a science-based strategy for accelerating climate solutions. It points to which climate actions governments, businesses, investors, philanthropists, community organizations, and others should prioritize to make the most of our efforts to stop climate change.

By showing how to strategically mobilize solutions across sectors, time, and place, engage the power of co-benefits, and recognize and remove obstacles, the Drawdown Roadmap charts a path to accelerate climate solutions before it’s too late.

Drawdown Roadmap Summary

roadmap_key_graphics_0.zip

You are welcome to use the following key graphics from The Drawdown Roadmap for non-commercial purposes in presentations, reports, etc., with proper attribution. The Project Drawdown logo and copyright information on each graphic must be retained under all circumstances.

Discover Hero image media
High speed train at night
Audiences

Business

Learn what my company can do

Invest

Decide where to invest

Page Description for Social
The Drawdown® Roadmap is a science-based strategy for accelerating climate solutions. It points to which climate actions governments, businesses, investors, philanthropists, community organizations, and others should prioritize to make the most of our efforts to stop climate change.

Climate Solutions 101

Your climate solutions journey begins now. Filled with the latest need-to-know science and fascinating insights from global leaders in climate policy, research, investment, and beyond, this video series is a brain-shift toward a brighter climate reality.

Climate Solutions 101 is the world’s first major educational effort focused solely on solutions. Rather than rehashing well-known climate challenges, Project Drawdown centers game-changing climate action based on its own rigorous scientific research and analysis. This course, presented in video units and in-depth conversations, combines Project Drawdown’s trusted resources with the expertise of several inspiring voices from around the world. Climate solutions become attainable with increased access to free, science-based educational resources, elevated public discourse, and tangible examples of real-world action. Continue your climate solutions journey, today.

Climate Solutions 101 Presented by Project Drawdown was generously supported by Trane Technologies, Chris Kohlhardt, and Intuit.

These materials are copyright © 2021 Project Drawdown. All rights reserved.

Project Drawdown welcomes you to use and share unaltered information and materials created by Project Drawdown with proper attribution or citation. By using these materials, you signify your agreement to these terms of use. These materials are intended for educational purposes only.

Ryan Allard, PhD Marcos Heil Costa, PhD Jonathan Foley, Ph.D. Lisa Graumlich, PhD Jessica Hellmann, PhD Tracey Holloway, PhD Ramez Naam Navin Ramankutty, PhD Marshall Shepherd, PhD Leah Stokes, PhD

Share Your Experience

Sign up to receive updates, provide ideas, and share how you will use Climate Solutions 101 in your classroom or community.

Sign Up
Discover Hero image media
Earth from space
Page Description for Social
Presented in six video units and in-depth expert conversations, this free online course centers on game-changing climate action.

Economic growth in low-income countries can reduce pressure on natural ecosystems

Submitted by Drawdown Admin on
Farm fields
Credit: Shutterstock | Radka Stankova
Off

Key Takeaways

  • New research suggests that economic development and environmental protection can coexist.
  • Based on global trends, the study authors predict that faster economic development in lower-income countries could reduce pressure to turn natural ecosystems into farmland.
  • Combining accelerated development in lower-income countries with an improved food system in higher-income countries could dramatically reduce habitat loss by 2100.

For decades, environmental debates have been framed around a stark trade-off: economic growth lifts people out of poverty but comes at the expense of forests, wildlife, and climate stability. More people and richer diets mean more farmland and less nature. 

However, a new study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by researchers from the University of Minnesota, Project Drawdown, Bowdoin College, and Purdue University suggests that this long-assumed conflict between development and conservation may not be inevitable.

Analyzing global trends in population growth, food demand, crop yields, and agricultural trade, the research team found that faster economic development in lower-income countries could reduce pressure to convert the world’s natural ecosystems into farmland. 

“Our results show that working to help nations develop economically, while providing benefits to people, also can lead to positive outcomes for biodiversity and climate,” says James Gerber, Ph.D., Senior Scientist at Project Drawdown and a study coauthor. “In other words, doing the right thing for people – which is where we should always start – is also doing the right thing for the planet.” 

Agriculture already dominates the planet’s landscape. Croplands cover about 12%, and grazing lands cover about 25% of Earth’s ice-free land surface, making agriculture a major contributor to climate change as well as the leading driver of habitat loss for terrestrial species. 

The study estimates that maintaining current trends would lead to a dramatic expansion of global croplands during the 21st century. These projections suggest that farmland could grow by more than 1 billion hectares by 2100 – an increase that would threaten vast areas of remaining natural habitat.

Much of that expansion would occur in lower-income countries where populations are growing rapidly, and crop yields remain relatively low. But more rapid economic development in lower-income countries could change that trajectory. As incomes rise, countries typically undergo a “demographic transition” in which birth rates decline and population growth slows. Economic development also tends to bring improvements in agricultural productivity through better technology, infrastructure, and research investment.

The study found:

  • Continuing current trends in agricultural production and food consumption could result in a near doubling of cropland area in lower-income countries to the detriment of biodiversity and the climate.
  • Economic development in lower-income countries could reduce future global cropland requirements due to slower population growth, improved crop yield, and higher volumes of global crop trade, which could more than offset rising per capita crop demand.
  • Decreasing per capita crop demand in higher-income countries by eating healthier diets, reducing food waste, and reducing biofuel production could reduce cropland requirements, especially if combined with expanded agricultural trade.
  • Combining accelerated economic development in lower-income countries with reduced crop demand in higher-income countries could dramatically shrink global cropland area by the year 2100.

Taken together, the findings suggest that policies promoting agricultural innovation, economic opportunity, and more efficient food systems could produce an unusual combination of outcomes: less poverty, less habitat destruction, and lower climate emissions.

“Accelerating economic development in lower-income countries can reduce poverty and, more surprisingly, also be good for nature,” says Stephen Polasky, Ph.D., coauthor of the study, Regents Professor and co-founder of NatCap TEEMs at the University of Minnesota College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences. “Higher incomes are associated with lower population growth and increased crop yields, which can more than offset growth in per capita consumption.”

“Economic growth is often viewed as working against conservation,” says Craig Packer, Ph.D., coauthor of the study and Distinguished McKnight University Professor in the University of Minnesota College of Biological Sciences. “Faster development in poorer countries would not only improve the lives of millions of people but could substantially reduce the pressure to clear new land for agriculture.”

The authors added that achieving accelerated economic development, increasing agricultural research and development spending, reducing crop demand in higher-income countries, and reducing trade barriers all require overcoming substantial obstacles.

About Project Drawdown

Project Drawdown is the world’s leading resource for climate solutions. By advancing science-based climate solutions, fostering bold climate leadership, and promoting new narratives and voices, the 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization is helping the world stop climate change as quickly, safely, and equitably as possible. Learn more at drawdown.org.

About NatCap TEEMs

NatCap TEEMs (Natural Capital Alliance: The Earth-Economy Modelers) at the University of Minnesota aims to improve understanding of the integrated earth-economy system and to inform decision-making for sustainable development on a livable planet. Learn more at natcapteems.umn.edu

About the College of Food, Agricultural, and Natural Resource Sciences 

The University of Minnesota’s College of Food, Agricultural, and Natural Resource Sciences strives to inspire minds, nourish people, and sustainably enhance the natural environment. Learn more at cfans.umn.edu.

About the College of Biological Sciences

The University of Minnesota’s College of Biological Sciences at the University of Minnesota covers the spectrum of life from molecules to ecosystems. Learn more at cbs.umn.edu.

Description for Social and Search
New research: Speedy economic growth can benefit biodiversity while enhancing food security and reducing climate impacts.
Include in Home Insights and News Feed
On

Project Drawdown awarded US$150,000 from the Mighty Arrow Family Foundation

Submitted by Drawdown Admin on
Funding will provide Project Drawdown with general operating funds to support efforts to expand climate solutions research and action
An image of Earth with the text Project Drawdown Funding Announcement overlaid
Off

Project Drawdown is honored to be awarded US$150,000 over the next three years from the Mighty Arrow Family Foundation.

This grant from the Mighty Arrow Family Foundation – a longtime partner and supporter – will bolster Project Drawdown’s ongoing work to drive bold, science-based climate action in the world. The funding will help expand a variety of Project Drawdown activities, from identifying and analyzing climate solutions to deep dives into critical issue areas such as food and agriculture and biodiversity.

“The Mighty Arrow Family Foundation fosters the kind of trust, ambition, and collaborative spirit that climate action demands,” says Project Drawdown Managing Director Elizabeth Bagley, Ph.D. “We are honored to partner with their team and energized by what we will accomplish with their support.”

The Mighty Arrow Family Foundation grant will support the ongoing build-out of Drawdown Explorer, a free, game-changing platform that uses the best available data to lay out pathbreaking new strategies for accelerating climate action. Project Drawdown will also use the funds for new programming related to climate education and leadership training.

“Project Drawdown’s library of climate solutions has been a key resource for Mighty Arrow as our board prioritizes what investments we need to make today to have the greatest impact for the future of the communities and ecosystems we call home,” says Mighty Arrow Family Foundation Executive Director Jordana Barrack. “The solutions are out there, and thanks to Project Drawdown, we know what to focus on. We hope more foundations like us will find this helpful too.”

About Project Drawdown

Project Drawdown is the world’s leading resource for climate solutions. By advancing science-based climate solutions, fostering bold climate leadership, and promoting new narratives and voices, the 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization is helping the world stop climate change as quickly, safely, and equitably as possible. For more information about Project Drawdown, please visit drawdown.org.


About Mighty Arrow Family Foundation

Founded by the cofounder of New Belgium Brewing, Kim Jordan, and her family, the Mighty Arrow Family Foundation aims to invest in solutions that take action on climate change, amplify our human power, protect the ecosystems we call home, and build a more vibrant future - for everyone. The foundation is committed to donating the entirety of its fund by 2040. To learn more about the Mighty Arrow Family Foundation, please visit mightyarrow.org. 
 

Description for Social and Search
Project Drawdown awarded US$150,000 from the Mighty Arrow Family Foundation
Include in Home Insights and News Feed
On

The human heart as a climate solution

At Project Drawdown, we have spent years proving that if humanity implements the climate solutions we already have, at the scale we’re capable of, we can and will bend the curve on climate change. The science is clear. We know what needs to happen, and we know we can do it if we choose to. 

So why does it still feel so hard?

Part of the answer, I’ve come to believe, is that we’ve underinvested in something that no spreadsheet or tech tool can capture: the human heart.

Expand Livestock Grazing

Submitted by Drawdown Admin on
Sector
Nature-Based Carbon Removal
Mode
Remove Carbon
Cluster
Shift Agriculture Practices
Image
Cow grazing near cliff
Coming Soon
On
Summary

Expanding grazing increases land used for livestock by converting cropland, degraded land, or native ecosystems into pasture. The goal is often boosting soil organic carbon (SOC) or increasing beef production, and to a lesser extent dairy, to meet rising global demand. However, beef is an inefficient way to meet food needs, and any SOC gains are slow and limited, with potential sequestration benefits unable to offset corresponding increases in enteric methane emissions within climate-relevant time frames. Increasing beef production is therefore counterproductive from a climate perspective as it is among the most emissions- and land-intensive protein sources and risks displacing more effective restoration pathways. Around 42% of pasture occupies land that could support forests, where restoration would deliver greater carbon sequestration and biodiversity, making grazing expansion “Not Recommended” as a climate solution.

Description for Social and Search
Expand Livestock Grazing is Not Recommended as a climate solution.
Overview

What is our assessment?

Based on our analysis, expanding grazing increases methane emissions and often displaces land uses that would deliver greater carbon sequestration and biodiversity outcomes. It is therefore “Not Recommended” as a climate solution. 

Plausible Could it work? No
Ready Is it ready? Yes
Evidence Are there data to evaluate it? Yes
Effective Does it consistently work? No
Impact Is it big enough to matter? No
Risk Is it risky or harmful? No
Cost Is it cheap? No

What is it?

Expanding grazing includes converting cropland, degraded land, or native landscapes (e.g. forests, savannas) to pasture to increase beef production. As a climate solution, it assumes that soil organic carbon (SOC) can be increased sufficiently to offset methane emissions, resulting in net climate mitigation.

Does it work?

Expanding grazing does not generate net carbon removal because SOC gains are insufficient to offset associated enteric methane emissions. Claims that alternative grazing systems can generate net carbon removal or that grass-finished beef offers climate advantages are not supported by independent scientific evidence, with any gains limited to narrow, context-specific cases that exclude full-scope emissions. SOC gains, where they occur, are slow, saturating, and reversible, while ruminants emit methane continuously. Offsetting global current ruminant emissions would require sequestering 135 Gt of carbon (≈495 Gt CO₂ ) over 100 years, nearly twice the carbon stock in all the world’s managed grasslands. Because sequestration potential is uneven and many regions are degraded or constrained by soil and climate conditions, the required gains, to offset enteric methane emissions, would be concentrated on a subset of lands. This translates into required increases in soil carbon of roughly 25–2,000% locally over 61–225 years. This not only is unlikely, but also overlooks evidence that removing grazing livestock can increase plant growth, biomass, and SOC across grasslands, meaning that expanding grazing would compete with more effective forest or grassland carbon sequestration restoration pathways on degraded lands.

Why are we excited?

Expanding grazing can involve converting intensive cropland, such as land used for biofuels, to perennial pastures, which may increase SOC under low ruminant stocking rates and favorable environmental conditions (see Reduce Grazing Intensity). However, these benefits are driven by perennial vegetation and can be achieved more effectively through restoration approaches that do not introduce ongoing methane emissions.

Why are we concerned?

The core climate concern with expanding grazing is that it introduces cattle, a continuous methane source, on land that could capture carbon below and above ground more rapidly in the absence of cattle grazing. SOC gains under grazing, if they occur, are slow, reversible, and limited by saturation, while emissions from ruminants are immediate and ongoing.

Grazing is already the largest human use of land, and many grazing lands are affected by degradation and overstocking. Approximately 42% of global pastureland could support forests. Restoring these areas could sequester 445 Gt CO₂ by 2100, equivalent to more than a decade of global fossil fuel emissions. In addition, 50% of all global natural nonforest ecosystem conversion between 2005 and 2020 was driven directly by pasture expansion.

Demand for food is rising, while climate change is already reducing agricultural productivity and increasing crop losses. Some projections show a 36 to 50% decline in climatically viable areas for grazing by 2100 due to rising heat and shifting water conditions, alongside risks of broader yield declines. Expanding grazing, which would increase cattle herds and their feed demands, is an inefficient way to increase food supply, converting large amounts of land and feed into relatively small amounts of food. The global food system loses 7.22 quadrillion calories annually through the conversion of crops into animal products and other nonfood uses rather than direct human consumption, enough to feed 7.2 billion people. Cattle are the most inefficient of these pathways, with a 91% caloric loss when crops are converted into beef. Beef production uses 40% of global cropland yet provides only 9% of animal-source calories.

Improving diets and other demand-side changes are critical to avoid expanding grazing. The impacts of beef production exist along a spectrum: more extensive pasture-based systems require more land and typically produce more methane per unit of output, while more intensive, feedlot-based systems use less land per unit of beef but rely more heavily on cropland for feed, antibiotics, and concentrated waste management. Whether expansion occurs through more extensive or intensive systems, beef remains among the most emissions- and land-intensive ways to produce food.

In addition, animal-sourced foods are a major driver of biodiversity and habitat loss globally, with grazing cattle bearing disproportionate responsibility. Beef is the largest single contributor to the loss of biodiversity in Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), at around 31% of total biodiversity loss; 60% of KBAs are used for livestock ranching. Expanding grazing therefore reinforces the leading driver of biodiversity loss.

Solution in Action

Feigin, S. V., Wiebers, D. O., Blumstein, D. T., Knight, A., Eshel, G., Lueddeke, G., Kopnina, H., Feigin, V. L., Morand, S., Lee, K., Brainin, M., Shackelford, T. K., Alexander, S. M., Marcum, J., Merskin, D., Skerratt, L. F., Van Kleef, G. A., Whitfort, A., Freeman, C. P., … Winkler, A. S. (2025). Solving climate change requires changing our food systems. Oxford Open Climate Change, 5(1), kgae024. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfclm/kgae024

Hayek, M. N., Piipponen, J., Kummu, M., Resare Sahlin, K., McClelland, S. C., & Carlson, K. (2024). Opportunities for carbon sequestration from removing or intensifying pasture-based beef production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(41), e2405758121. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2405758121

Kan, S., Levy, S. A., Mazur, E., Samberg, L., Persson, U. M., Sloat, L., Segovia, A. L., Parente, L., & Kastner, T. (2026). Overlooked and overexploited: Extensive conversion of grasslands and wetlands driven by global food, feed, and bioenergy demand. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 123(9), e2521183123. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2521183123

Li, C., Kotz, M., Pradhan, P., Wu, X., Hu, Y., Li, Z., & Chen, G. (2026). Climate change drives a decline in global grazing systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 123(7), e2534015123. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2534015123

Machovina, B., Feeley, K. J., & Ripple, W. J. (2015). Biodiversity conservation: The key is reducing meat consumption. Science of the Total Environment, 536, 419–431. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.022

Mogollón, J. M., Hadjikakou, M., Taherzadeh, O., Ngumbi, E. N., van Zanten, H. H. E., Basu, N. B., Kortleve, A. J., & Behrens, P. (2026). Broad bidirectional effects of global food production on the environment. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-026-00778-y

Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392), 987–992. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216

Sanderman, J., Partida, C., Xia, Y., Lavallee, J. M., & Bradford, M. A. (2025). Low quality evidence dominates discussion of carbon benefits of alternative grazing strategies. bioRxiv. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.64898/2025.12.09.693242

Searchinger, T. D., Wirsenius, S., Beringer, T., & Dumas, P. (2018). Assessing the efficiency of changes in land use for mitigating climate change. Nature, 564(7735), 249–253. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0757-z

Shu, X., Ye, Q., Huang, H., Xia, L., Tang, H., Liu, X., Wu, J., Li, Y., Zhang, Y., Deng, L., & Liu, W. (2024). Effects of grazing exclusion on soil microbial diversity and its functionality in grasslands: a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Plant Science, 15, 1366821. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1366821

Su, J., & Xu, F. (2021). Root, not aboveground litter, controls soil carbon storage under grazing exclusion across grasslands worldwide. Land Degradation & Development, 32(11), 3326–3337. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.4008

Sun, Z., Behrens, P., Tukker, A., Bruckner, M., & Scherer, L. (2022). Global human consumption threatens key biodiversity areas. Environmental Science & Technology, 56(12), 9003–9014. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c00506

Wang, Y., de Boer, I. J. M., Persson, U. M., Ripoll-Bosch, R., Cederberg, C., Gerber, P. J., Smith, P., & van Middelaar, C. E. (2023). Risk to rely on soil carbon sequestration to offset global ruminant emissions. Nature Communications, 14(1), 7625. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43452-3

West, P. C., Gerber, J. S., Cassidy, E. S., & Stiffman, S. (2026). Only half of the calories produced on croplands are available as food for human consumption. Environmental Research: Food Systems, 3(2), 021001. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1088/2976-601X/ae4f6b

Credits

Lead Fellow

  • Nicholas Carter

Internal Reviewers

  • Christina Swanson, Ph.D.
  • Emily Cassidy
Speed of Action
Caveats
Risks
Consensus
Trade-offs
Action Word
Expand
Solution Title
Livestock Grazing
Classification
Not Recommended
Lawmakers and Policymakers
Practitioners
Business Leaders
Nonprofit Leaders
Investors
Philanthropists and International Aid Agencies
Thought Leaders
Technologists and Researchers
Communities, Households, and Individuals
Updated Date

Mobilize Electric Buses

Submitted by Drawdown Admin on
Sector
Transportation
Mode
Cut Emissions
Cluster
Fuel Switching
Image
Peatland
Coming Soon
On
Description for Social and Search
Mobilize Electric Buses is a Highly Recommended climate solution.
Solution in Action
Speed of Action
Caveats
Risks
Consensus
Trade-offs
Action Word
Mobilize
Solution Title
Electric Buses
Classification
Highly Recommended
Lawmakers and Policymakers
Practitioners
Business Leaders
Nonprofit Leaders
Investors
Philanthropists and International Aid Agencies
Thought Leaders
Technologists and Researchers
Communities, Households, and Individuals
Subscribe to
back to top