Extended Data Fig. 9: Sensitivity analysis with future land-use change.
![Extended Data Fig. 9](https://cdn.statically.io/img/media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-020-2784-9/MediaObjects/41586_2020_2784_Fig13_ESM.jpg)
a, b, In the pessimistic regional rivalries SSP3 scenario83, substantial conversion would happen until 2050 (a), and—as a consequence—some priority areas would shift towards newly converted areas of high endemic and threatened biodiversity that are also rich in carbon, in particular in Africa (b). c–f, Despite this, the restored fraction in each planning unit would be very similar to those based on 2015 land-use (c) (r.m.s.e. = 13%), and 2050 outcomes for biodiversity (d), climate (e) and costs (f) would be within the uncertainty range of 2015 estimates. Although the reduction in extinction debt would be slightly lower in 2050 (55% versus 60%), the extinction debt itself would be 25% higher (10% versus 8% in 2015), so absolute extinctions avoided would be higher.