The host of this year’s United Nations climate summit has called for a major acceleration in the electrification of transport, buildings and industry, arguing that a larger share of global energy consumption should come from electricity within the next decade to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Turkey’s environment minister Murat Kurum, who will preside over the COP31 climate conference in November alongside Australia, said the world should aim for electricity to provide 35% of final energy demand by 2035. Electricity currently accounts for about 20% of final energy use worldwide.

The proposal was presented as part of discussions among governments preparing priorities for the COP31 summit, which will be held in Antalya, Turkey.Electricity already represents a significant share of global power generation, with around one-third of electricity produced from renewable sources.

However, major energy-consuming sectors including transport, heating and heavy industry remain heavily reliant on fossil fuels.Nearly four-fifths of final energy consumption still comes from fossil fuels, according to current global energy patterns, leaving many economies dependent on coal, oil and gas for everyday activities and industrial production.

Kurum said expanding electrification across the economy would help accelerate the transition toward a lower-carbon energy system.He argued that replacing fossil fuel use with electricity in areas such as vehicles, buildings and manufacturing could reduce exposure to unstable energy markets while supporting climate goals.

The call came as governments gathered in Bonn for climate negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The meetings are focused on shaping the agenda and priorities for COP31.Australia’s climate change minister Chris Bowen, speaking alongside Kurum and UN climate chief Simon Stiell, said electrification and investment in clean energy had become central themes in early discussions.

Bowen said reducing fossil fuel dependence could help address both climate-related disasters and concerns over energy security.He pointed to examples ranging from industrial electrification in major manufacturing economies to clean cooking initiatives in African communities and renewable energy projects replacing diesel power in Pacific island nations.Renewable energy, he said, had become increasingly competitive as technology costs declined.

The push for electrification comes as countries face renewed concerns over energy prices and supply security. Recent geopolitical tensions, including the Iran war, have contributed to volatility in fossil fuel markets and pushed oil prices above $100 a barrel.Electric vehicles and heat pumps are among the technologies already available to support electrification.

However, adoption rates vary widely between countries due to differences in infrastructure, investment levels and government policy.Supporters of electrification argue that replacing direct fossil fuel use with electricity generated from renewable sources can significantly reduce emissions. However, the climate benefits depend on the carbon intensity of electricity systems and the pace at which renewable capacity expands.

The COP31 discussions are expected to focus on practical measures for increasing clean energy deployment, strengthening energy resilience and supporting countries as they transition away from fossil fuels.Kurum said the proposed 35% electricity target would be a central priority of Turkey’s COP31 presidency.

The summit will bring together governments seeking to balance emissions reductions with economic development, energy security and the need to adapt to increasingly severe climate impacts.

The administration of President Lee Jae Myung plans to establish more than 500 “Sunshine Income Villages” by the end of 2026 and increase the number to 2,500 by 2030, according to government officials.

The program allows farmers to secure loans covering up to 90 percent of the cost of installing solar power facilities on their land. During the first five years, participants pay only interest on the loans, with principal repayments beginning afterward. Revenue generated from selling surplus electricity is distributed directly to local residents.

Officials cite the villages of Guyang-ri in Gyeonggi Province and Songam-ri in Gangwon Province as early examples of the scheme’s impact. In Guyang-ri, six solar-generation sites with a combined capacity of one megawatt currently generate more than 100 million won ($66,000) annually for approximately 130 residents, most of them elderly. Plans are underway to expand capacity to five megawatts.

Resident Kim Choonok said the project had already transformed local life, attracting attention from visitors across South Korea and abroad. She said villagers had begun to experience tangible financial benefits only a year and a half after the system became operational.

Village chief Ju Young Jeon said the initiative could also help reverse demographic decline by creating employment opportunities for younger generations who have traditionally migrated to urban centers in search of work.

Income from the solar installations has funded community services including daily meals for residents, transportation to healthcare facilities, recreational amenities and other welfare programs.

In Songam-ri, solar power has emerged as one of the village’s primary sources of revenue alongside its rice-processing industry. The facility, built on converted farmland, generates 657 megawatt-hours of electricity annually and earns more than 100 million won each year.

Village chief Seong-su Hong said the additional revenue has helped offset years of stagnant agricultural earnings and rising living costs. According to Hong, the project has created 21 jobs and financed community support programs, including meal services, milk deliveries for elderly residents and contributions to senior welfare organizations.

The initiative reflects broader efforts by South Korea to address challenges posed by an aging rural population, economic pressures on farmers and the country’s long-term renewable energy objectives. Local leaders involved in the program say the model could be replicated across other rural regions seeking sustainable sources of income and development.

Australia’s One Nation party has proposed a resource policy modeled in part on Norway’s approach to oil and gas wealth, arguing that greater public participation in energy projects could deliver stronger returns for taxpayers and create a sovereign wealth fund for future generations.

The proposal has attracted attention for its ambition but also prompted questions from energy analysts about investment risks, expected timelines for returns, and its compatibility with Australia’s climate objectives.One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has pointed to Norway’s success in capturing value from its petroleum resources through close cooperation between government and industry.

Under the party’s proposal, the Australian government would be able to acquire ownership stakes in new offshore oil and gas developments through a dedicated investment vehicle.Unlike Norway’s system, however, participation would not be mandatory. Companies would retain the option of whether to accept government investment and public ownership in their projects.

Supporters argue that the approach would allow Australians to benefit more directly from the development of national resources. Critics counter that the voluntary structure could significantly limit the policy’s effectiveness.

According to David Hanson, who has advocated for a Norway-style model, the Scandinavian country’s experience demonstrates the benefits of partnership between governments and energy companies supported by strong fiscal incentives.However, the opt-in nature of One Nation’s proposal creates important differences from Norway’s framework.

Because companies would be free to decline government participation, analysts suggest that projects most likely to seek public investment could be those facing the highest levels of commercial uncertainty.Josh Runciman, lead gas analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said the proposal raises questions about whether taxpayers should be exposed to exploration and appraisal risks in an industry where governments typically do not possess the same technical expertise as private-sector operators.

The concern reflects a broader challenge in resource investment. Early-stage exploration projects carry significant uncertainty, with many failing to reach commercial production despite substantial investment.Under One Nation’s proposal, the government would reportedly act as a passive commercial partner, operating at arm’s length from day-to-day project decisions.

At the same time, Hanson has suggested that the government would have greater influence over how its share of production is used once projects begin generating oil or gas.According to the policy outline, the government’s share of production could be directed toward domestic priorities, including fertilizer manufacturing, energy generation and fuel refining.

Surplus production could then be exported, with proceeds used to reduce public debt and build sovereign wealth.The proposal is designed to increase domestic benefits from Australia’s natural resources without imposing higher taxes on energy companies. However, analysts note that this feature may also limit the scale and speed of any financial returns.

Because the plan applies only to future offshore exploration projects and relies on voluntary participation, the timeline for generating revenue is expected to be lengthy.Runciman estimates that many of the projects likely to fall under the policy remain at very early stages of development.

As a result, substantial production and associated government returns may not materialize for at least a decade.That means even if the policy were enacted in the near future, significant additional public revenue would probably not begin flowing until the late 2030s.The delayed timetable also raises questions about how quickly a sovereign wealth fund could accumulate assets sufficient to influence Australia’s long-term fiscal position.

The debate has inevitably drawn comparisons with alternative proposals that seek to increase public returns from resource extraction through taxation rather than direct ownership.One frequently cited model comes from the Superpower Institute, chaired by former competition regulator Allan Fels and supported by businessman and climate advocate Ross Garnaut.

The institute has proposed a 40% two-way cashflow tax, described as a “fair share levy,” that would apply to oil and gas projects.Under that framework, the effective marginal tax rate on oil and gas production would rise to 58%, while companies would also receive a 40% refund on losses.

Advocates argue that the structure mirrors key features of Norway’s resource taxation system by sharing both risks and rewards between government and industry.Unlike One Nation’s proposal, the tax would apply to existing projects as well as future developments.

The institute estimates that it could generate approximately A$9.5 billion annually during an initial transition period, with revenues potentially exceeding A$18 billion in 2031 before gradually declining as global demand for fossil fuels falls over time.Supporters of the levy argue that it would deliver more immediate and substantial public returns than ownership-based approaches limited to future projects.

The debate extends beyond fiscal policy into broader questions surrounding Australia’s energy future.One Nation’s proposal is part of a wider policy agenda that supports continued oil and gas exploration and opposes Australia’s existing net-zero emissions commitment.

Hanson has repeatedly called for the country’s climate targets to be abandoned.That position places the proposal at the center of an increasingly contentious national discussion about balancing energy security, economic growth and emissions reduction.Runciman said aspects of Norway’s resource taxation system have merit because they are designed to preserve investment incentives while ensuring governments receive a larger share of resource profits.

However, he questioned whether expanding support for new gas developments is politically sustainable at a time when many voters expect stronger action on climate change.The policy therefore faces two distinct tests. The first is whether voluntary public participation in future resource projects can generate meaningful financial returns for taxpayers.

The second is whether expanding support for new fossil fuel developments aligns with Australia’s evolving climate and energy priorities.

As debate continues, the proposal highlights a broader challenge confronting resource-rich economies: how to maximize public benefit from natural resources while managing financial risk and navigating the transition toward lower-emissions energy systems.

Eva Lighthiser, a 20-year-old college student from Montana, has emerged as the lead plaintiff in a youth-led constitutional lawsuit challenging executive actions by U.S. President Donald Trump that support expanded fossil fuel development.

The case, Lighthiser v Trump, was filed by 23 young Americans who argue that federal policies promoting fossil fuel extraction and production violate constitutional protections by worsening climate-related harms affecting younger generations. The lawsuit was dismissed by a federal court last year, but the plaintiffs appeared before the ninth circuit court of appeals in Portland, Oregon, in April seeking reinstatement.

Lighthiser, who studies in Colorado and is considering a major in environmental studies, said balancing university life with high-profile litigation has altered the course of her early adulthood.“I said, ‘Hey, I’ve got to go to bed, I’m flying out to Portland tomorrow,’” she recalled while describing a recent college gathering. “Then follow-up questions get raised. I’m like, ‘Well, it’s a lot to explain.

”Outside the appeals court, Lighthiser accused the federal government of prioritizing fossil fuel development despite growing evidence of climate-related damage.“We are challenging this administration for sacrificing the lives of myself and my fellow plaintiffs by expanding fossil fuels for the sake of power,” she said during remarks delivered outside the courthouse.

The case reflects the growing prominence of youth-led climate litigation in the United States, where environmental groups increasingly seek constitutional arguments to challenge government policies tied to fossil fuel production. Legal advocates argue that climate change threatens rights relating to health, safety and environmental protections, while critics say courts are not equipped to direct national energy policy.

Lighthiser grew up in Livingston, Montana, a town surrounded by mountain ranges and river systems that have become central to her environmental activism. Her parents met while hiking, and she spent much of her childhood camping, climbing and traveling through national parks. During her first year of high school, she was homeschooled while traveling with her family across the western United States.

Her involvement in climate litigation began in 2020 after learning about Our Children’s Trust, a nonprofit legal organization focused on youth climate cases. She later joined Held v Montana, a constitutional challenge alleging that state policies favoring fossil fuels violated protections in Montana’s constitution guaranteeing a “clean and healthful environment.”Filed on Lighthiser’s 14th birthday, the Montana lawsuit became one of the first youth climate cases in the United States to proceed to trial.

During testimony, she described growing fears about climate-related environmental instability affecting the state she called home.“My future feels uncertain,” she said during the proceedings.In 2023, the court ruled in favor of the youth plaintiffs in what was widely regarded as a landmark climate decision.

The plaintiffs later argued that Montana lawmakers enacted additional legislation conflicting with the court’s findings, prompting continued legal disputes over implementation and enforcement.Lighthiser said discussions about a federal challenge accelerated after the start of Trump’s second administration in 2025.

According to Julia Olson, the organization quickly identified the possibility of a broader constitutional case focused on federal executive actions supporting fossil fuel expansion.“It became clear early in the second Trump administration that a federal case was something to pursue,” Olson said.

Lighthiser said she was contacted while preparing for an overnight cycling trip near Montana’s Paradise Valley and asked whether she would consider becoming the lead plaintiff.“The lawsuit also would be called Lighthiser v Trump,” she said. “That was really a moment when it clicked.

My name against his name.”Montana occupies a complex position in the U.S. environmental debate. The state’s economy has long depended on natural resource extraction industries, including mining and coal production, while simultaneously cultivating a strong outdoor conservation culture. Critics have described the state as a “resource colony” whose raw materials historically benefited outside commercial interests.

Lighthiser said environmental concerns often transcend political divisions in Montana, where many residents identify closely with local ecosystems regardless of party affiliation. She pointed to polling conducted in April indicating that a large majority of residents considered conservation issues important when evaluating elected officials.

“There’s a lot of people who may not believe in climate change or be resistant to conversion to renewables,” she said. “But there’s also a sense that everyone knows how special this place is.”Livingston, located near the Yellowstone River and framed by the Gallatin and Absaroka mountain ranges, has experienced multiple environmental disruptions in recent years.

Coal trains regularly pass through the area, dispersing coal dust, while warming river conditions contributed to a parasite outbreak that killed large numbers of fish in 2016.Flooding has had an especially direct impact on Lighthiser’s family. In 2018, the Shields River overflowed near the family’s former home, damaging infrastructure and forcing major transportation detours.

Four years later, severe flooding along the Yellowstone River caused widespread destruction across southern Montana, resulting in an estimated $128 million in damages.Lighthiser said those events deepened her sense of urgency while also reinforcing the importance of community response efforts.“In the following weeks, I remember there were a lot of efforts to clean up homes and help each other out,” she said.

“I thought that was a really special thing.”Other plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit said Lighthiser’s public role has encouraged younger activists to participate. Jorja McCormick, a 17-year-old co-plaintiff from Livingston, said hearing Lighthiser speak publicly made the legal process appear more accessible.“I definitely look up to the older plaintiffs like Eva,” McCormick said.Lighthiser’s parents have expressed both pride and concern over the case’s visibility.

Her mother, Erica, said the family understood the political sensitivity attached to directly challenging a sitting president in federal court.“Look, it’s our last name next to the president’s last name,” she said.Legal scholars remain divided over the long-term implications of such cases.

Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert at Vermont Law School who has supported youth climate litigation efforts, warned that broad constitutional challenges may face substantial resistance from federal courts.“The courts are not able to reform the energy system of the United States,” Parenteau said.

“They’re not going to entertain requests for them to do that.”When dismissing the case last year, Montana district judge Dana Christensen described the plaintiffs’ requests as “unworkable” and beyond the jurisdiction of the court, though he said the dismissal came “reluctantly.”Parenteau said an unfavorable ruling from higher courts, particularly the U.S. Supreme Court, could establish precedents limiting future environmental litigation.

“You’re playing with fire with courts nowadays,” he said. “I believe in their cause, because what they’re arguing is what the law ought to be, but it’s not what the law is.”Olson rejected suggestions that ambitious constitutional climate arguments should be avoided because of potential legal setbacks.

She compared the strategy to earlier civil rights litigation efforts that initially faced skepticism before reshaping U.S. law.“The answer has never been to step back from the courthouse door,” Olson said. “Children are being harmed right now.”

Lighthiser said she believes the legal risks are outweighed by the need to challenge policies that contribute to climate-related damage affecting younger generations.

“There are risks,” she said. “But if you never take risks, nothing good happens.”

The resolution, scheduled for debate on Wednesday, was spearheaded by the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu, which led a successful 2024 campaign urging the ICJ to clarify states’ duties under international law regarding climate action.

Last year, the Hague-based court concluded that governments are legally obligated to take measures against climate change and warned that failure to meet those obligations could expose states to claims for reparations from countries most vulnerable to climate impacts.

The latest draft resolution describes the ICJ opinion as “an authoritative contribution to the clarification of existing international law” and calls on countries to comply with obligations aimed at protecting the global climate system.

The text also reiterates support for limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and references the international commitment adopted at the 2023 climate summit in Dubai to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems.

Negotiations over the resolution, however, resulted in significant revisions after opposition from several major greenhouse gas emitters and industrial economies, according to diplomatic sources.

An earlier proposal to establish an “International Register of Damage” documenting climate-related losses and injuries was removed from the current version after objections from countries including the United States, China, Japan, members of the European Union and oil-producing states.

Those governments argued the mechanism extended beyond the scope of the ICJ opinion and raised concerns about potential pathways toward compensation claims or reparations linked to historical emissions.

Vanuatu Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu defended the revised text, saying the resolution does not create new legal obligations or assign liability to individual states.

“For Vanuatu and for many climate-vulnerable states, this is ultimately about survival,” Regenvanu said, adding that the measure was intended to strengthen multilateral cooperation on climate governance.

Despite the dilution of several provisions, climate advocates said the resolution remains politically significant because it reinforces the growing role of international law in shaping climate accountability.

Joie Chowdhury, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, described the current draft as “still a strong text” despite intense diplomatic pressure during negotiations.

Diplomatic sources said the resolution may not secure the broad consensus achieved during the General Assembly’s original request for the ICJ opinion in 2024, with at least one member state expected to call for a formal vote.

The draft also requests that United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres prepare a report outlining options to advance compliance with obligations identified in the ICJ ruling.

Millions of people living in forest-dependent communities continue to face extreme poverty despite the global forest sector generating an estimated US$1.5 trillion annually, according to a new United Nations assessment that warns progress toward eliminating poverty among forest populations is falling behind international targets.

The findings were published in the Global Forest Goals Report 2026, released during the 21st session of the United Nations Forum on Forests on May 11. The report evaluates progress toward the United Nations General Assembly Strategic Plan for Forests 2017–2030, adopted in 2017 to strengthen the environmental, social and economic contribution of forests worldwide.

Under the framework’s second Global Forest Goal, member states committed to eradicating extreme poverty among forest-dependent people by 2030. However, the report concluded that the target is “off track,” citing persistent structural barriers that continue to prevent forest communities from benefiting fully from forest-based economies.

The global forest sector currently accounts for roughly 1% of worldwide employment, according to the assessment, yet many of the world’s poorest populations continue to reside in heavily forested regions. Large sections of these communities survive on incomes near or below US$3 per day despite forests serving as a primary source of food, fuel, income and subsistence.

The report said forestry has not significantly contributed to long-term poverty reduction among vulnerable populations because communities remain concentrated at the lowest end of supply chains with limited access to markets, processing infrastructure and commercial opportunities.

According to the UN assessment, weak market connectivity and insufficient value-added processing particularly affect producers of non-wood forest products, commonly referred to as NWFPs, which include goods such as medicinal plants, resins, nuts, fibres and wild foods. The report estimated the global value of NWFPs at approximately US$9.4 billion in 2020.

The document stated that nearly three-quarters of the global population uses some form of non-wood forest product, underlining forests’ continued importance to livelihoods and household economies, especially in rural areas across developing countries.However, the report identified major obstacles preventing forest producers from capturing greater economic returns.

These include inadequate transport infrastructure, limited access to business services, weak product standards, insufficient commercialization mechanisms and logistical bottlenecks that isolate producers from national and international markets.“Forest producers and communities remain at the low-value end of supply chains,” the assessment said, adding that infrastructure deficiencies continue to increase operational costs and reduce competitiveness for remote communities.

The report also noted a decline in forest-sector employment over the past decade. According to UN data cited in the assessment, the share of employment linked to the forest sector fell by approximately 3.1% between 2011 and 2022, further limiting income opportunities in forest-dependent regions.

The findings carry broader implications for global development targets beyond forestry itself. The UN assessment said progress in the forest sector directly affects multiple United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, including poverty reduction, food security, access to clean water, affordable energy, economic growth and sustainable consumption.

The report linked forest-based livelihoods particularly to SDG 1 on ending poverty and SDG 2 on eliminating hunger, while also identifying connections to sanitation, energy access and rural employment generation.

Sub-Saharan Africa emerged as the region facing the greatest challenge. The report said extreme poverty rates in the region remain close to 46%, with little measurable improvement despite global declines in poverty levels over recent decades. Many of the world’s forest-dependent poor reside in Sub-Saharan Africa, where rural economies remain heavily reliant on forests for daily survival.

By comparison, several countries in Asia and Latin America showed what the report described as “partial recovery” following increases in poverty triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Global extreme poverty rose sharply during the pandemic period before gradually declining from 11.4% in 2020 to approximately 10.3% in 2024, according to figures cited in the assessment. The report stated that forests played only a modest role in this recovery process.

It pointed to localized income gains generated through community forestry, agroforestry systems and payment-for-ecosystem-services programs, often referred to as PES schemes. These initiatives provided limited support for participating households but did not produce significant global reductions in poverty among forest communities.

“Data suggest that while forests continue to buffer rural livelihoods and contribute modestly to poverty reduction, there is no substantial global evidence of a significant post-2020 increase in the contribution of the forest sector to poverty eradication,” the report said.

The findings underscore a growing debate among policymakers and development agencies over how to integrate forest conservation with economic inclusion. International organizations have increasingly promoted community-led forest management and sustainable commercialization of forest resources as mechanisms for both protecting biodiversity and supporting local economies.

Environmental economists have argued that forests provide substantial indirect economic benefits through water regulation, climate stabilization and ecosystem services that are often not reflected in conventional income measurements. However, the UN assessment focused primarily on direct livelihood and poverty indicators tied to measurable household income and employment.

The report warned that without stronger investment in infrastructure, market integration and value-added forest industries, the benefits generated by the global forest economy are likely to remain concentrated away from the communities most dependent on forest resources for survival.

Ministers are set to gather in Santa Marta against the backdrop of fuel shortages and rising prices following what the International Energy Agency has described as the largest oil supply shock on record, driven in part by constraints around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical transit route for global energy supplies.

The conference, co-hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands, was initiated amid frustration with the pace of negotiations under United Nations climate frameworks, where consensus-based processes have struggled to produce a clear pathway for reducing fossil fuel dependence.

Organisers say the current energy crisis has reinforced the strategic need for a managed transition, even as some governments increase coal use in the short term to stabilise domestic supply.Energy security considerations are expected to weigh as heavily as climate commitments during the discussions, reflecting the policy dilemma facing both advanced and developing economies.

Countries including Australia, Canada and Norway are expected to attend alongside emerging producers such as Angola, Mexico and Brazil, as well as coal-reliant economies like Turkiye and Vietnam. European nations including Germany, France and the United Kingdom are also set to participate.

However, several of the world’s largest fossil fuel producers and consumers, including the United States, China, Saudi Arabia and Russia, will not be represented, limiting the scope of any immediate global alignment.Colombia’s environment minister Irene Vélez Torres said the meeting has gained increased relevance in light of recent geopolitical developments, describing it as an opportunity to foster more direct engagement between producers and consumers on an issue often constrained in multilateral forums.

Analysts say the smaller, focused format may allow for more candid discussions but could also dilute outcomes given the diversity of national interests. Climate scientist Bill Hare of Climate Analytics noted that broader participation can make it harder to reach specific commitments, while supporters argue the inclusion of fossil fuel-producing nations marks a necessary step in advancing negotiations.

Participants from climate-vulnerable states, including Tuvalu and Vanuatu, are expected to push for accelerated timelines, citing the disproportionate impact of climate change and their reliance on imported energy. Officials from these countries have framed the current crisis as further evidence of the need to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Global investment in clean energy now outpaces spending on fossil fuels by roughly a factor of two, yet emissions from coal, oil and gas reached a record high in 2025, underscoring the gap between policy commitments and implementation.

The Santa Marta meeting is not expected to yield binding agreements but will contribute to a voluntary roadmap on fossil fuel transition being developed under Brazil’s leadership, as countries continue to grapple with balancing climate goals and energy security.

In the high-altitude grasslands of Colorado, known for their dense summer blooms of corn lilies, aspen sunflowers and sub-alpine larkspur, a decades-long ecological experiment is providing new evidence of how climate change is altering fragile mountain ecosystems.

Established in January 1991, the study is among the earliest and longest-running efforts to examine how rising temperatures influence plant and soil systems in alpine environments.Scientists initially expected that warmer conditions would extend the growing season and increase vegetation density.

Instead, the experimental plots showed a steady decline in grasses and wildflowers. Over time, these species were replaced by sagebrush, transforming sections of the meadow into landscapes resembling arid scrubland. Researchers also observed significant changes below ground, where fungal communities in the soil shifted in response to sustained warming.

The findings, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, indicate that such ecosystems may not respond to warming in ways previously anticipated. The study concludes that these meadows could largely disappear in the coming decades if global temperatures rise by 2°C above preindustrial levels.

The transformation observed in Colorado is part of a broader ecological process increasingly documented in cold regions worldwide, commonly referred to as “shrubification.” This process involves the gradual replacement of grasses and low-lying vegetation with woody shrubs and, in some cases, trees.

According to Sarah Dalrymple, a conservation ecologist at Liverpool John Moores University who studies similar changes in Iceland, warming temperatures are reducing environmental constraints that historically limited plant growth in cold climates.

She said that as conditions become less severe, plant communities shift from grasslands or heath ecosystems toward shrub-dominated landscapes, with potential progression to forested environments.

Dalrymple noted that grasses and alpine plants are adapted to short growing seasons and harsh climatic conditions. As these constraints ease, shrubs and trees, which require longer periods to establish leaf and stem structures, gain a competitive advantage.

This transition represents a fundamental reorganization of ecosystems that have remained relatively stable for thousands of years.

While the expansion of shrubs and trees can provide benefits such as increased shelter for wildlife, livestock and human activity, researchers say the broader implications are more complex. Dalrymple said that the spread of woody vegetation in cold regions is associated with processes that can accelerate climate change, particularly through the thawing of permafrost.

Permafrost contains large quantities of stored carbon, and its melting can release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Dalrymple said that afforestation in these environments can intensify this process, contributing to increased carbon emissions. She emphasized that the rapid pace of ecological change is a key concern, particularly given its potential effects on the global carbon cycle.

Researchers stress that shrubification itself is not inherently negative but is indicative of broader systemic changes driven by rising global temperatures. Dalrymple said the primary issue lies in the inability to control carbon emissions, with vegetation shifts representing a downstream consequence rather than a direct cause.

Scientists involved in the Colorado study and related research warn that the rate of change appears to be faster than earlier projections suggested. The assumption that ecosystems would respond gradually to warming is being challenged by evidence from long-term observations, which show rapid and sometimes irreversible transitions.

Dalrymple said these changes are not confined to a single region but are occurring across multiple high-altitude and high-latitude environments. This suggests that similar transformations could take place in mountain systems globally, affecting biodiversity, water cycles and land use patterns.

Despite these trends, parts of the Colorado meadows continue to display the dense, insect-rich floral landscapes that have drawn visitors for decades. Souza, who has been visiting the research area since 2012, described the environment as unusually vibrant, noting the intensity and abundance of flowers during peak bloom periods.

She said the visual richness of the landscape remains striking but acknowledged concerns about its long-term stability under continued warming.

The contrast between present-day conditions and projected future changes underscores the uncertainty facing ecosystems that have historically depended on stable climatic conditions.