It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Thursday, August 14, 2025
Most low carbon taxes are not designed to lower carbon emissions
Cell Press
Carbon taxes are widely seen as one of the most effective policy options for reducing emissions. However, the main rationale behind initially low carbon taxes is often not to reduce emissions but to generate tax revenues or meet international expectations, according to a study published in the Cell Press journal One Earth on August 13. As noted by the authors, the observations cast doubt on whether carbon taxes should always be viewed as climate policies.
“Reducing emissions is often not the primary rationale of carbon taxes in the real world,” says lead study author Johan Lilliestam of Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany. “A country having a carbon tax is not in itself an indication of climate policy progress, and the increasing number of carbon pricing schemes is not in itself evidence of carbon pricing being a successful climate policy instrument.”
In many countries, carbon taxes are set and kept too low to strongly reduce emissions, which the authors say indicates that climate change mitigation may not be their primary rationale. In 2023, there were 25 national carbon taxes, of which 19 were initially implemented at a level below minimum benchmarks for expected emissions reduction impacts.
“Understanding the explanatory factors of such low carbon taxes is a fundamental topic in climate policy research,” Lilliestam says. “Yet, to date, no multi-case study has investigated the rationales of low carbon taxes beyond binary assessments of whether or not such a tax exists.”
To help fill this knowledge gap, Lilliestam’s team analyzed the policy design, tax evolution, and expressed justification of all 19 national carbon taxes from countries across the world that were initially implemented below the relevant climate-effectiveness benchmark from 1990 to 2023. They found that in the first years after implementation, most initially low, national carbon taxes primarily followed non-climate rationales. For example, some policies were put in place to generate revenue to fund a general tax system reform or for non-climate spending.
Within the first 5 years after adopting policies, only Switzerland, France, and Canada showed strong evidence of within-policy sequencing, starting with a low but politically feasible tax and increasing it later once supportive coalitions became stronger and reforms became more feasible. Although several countries later increased carbon taxes—sometimes strongly—showing that within-policy sequencing does happen, such processes have been slow in the past, taking up to three decades.
The findings also revealed that 12 of the 19 countries with an initially low carbon tax still had carbon taxes below the benchmark levels in 2023, and many maintained substantial exemptions from tax eligibility. “This indicates that many carbon taxes—the way they were implemented—were not primarily or at all designed to reduce emissions,” Lilliestam says. “Of the 25 national carbon tax systems that exist, almost half of the taxes remained below the threshold for significantly affecting emissions, even after several initially low carbon taxes had been ratcheted up.”
One limitation of the study was that they focused on the 19 initially low, national carbon taxes, meaning that the results do not explicitly relate to emissions trading, to subnational carbon taxes, or to the 4 countries that implemented high carbon taxes above the benchmark, including Sweden and Germany. Further studies are needed to investigate the rationales behind emissions trading systems, including the rationale for the choice against a carbon tax, but also continued work to contrast the rationales of low and high carbon taxes.
“The increasing number of countries implementing carbon pricing systems is, in principle, good news, indicating that climate protection exists on political agendas across the world,” Lilliestam says. “However, the mere existence of these instruments reveals little about their potential for facilitating a rapid transition to net-zero emissions, as they may be designed for other purposes. If the primary rationale of a carbon tax is not directly related to climate action, these taxes may remain low for many years still, and countries may hide behind ‘we have a carbon tax’ and further postpone more ambitious, urgently needed transformative climate policies.”
###
This work was supported by the European Research Council and Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg.
One Earth (@OneEarth_CP), published by Cell Press, is a monthly journal that features papers from the fields of natural, social, and applied sciences. One Earth is the home for high-quality research that seeks to understand and address today’s environmental Grand Challenges, publishing across the spectrum of environmental change and sustainability science. A sister journal to Cell, Chem,and Joule, One Earth aspires to break down barriers between disciplines and stimulate the cross-pollination of ideas with a platform that unites communities, fosters dialogue, and encourages transformative research. Visit http://www.cell.com/one-earth. To receive Cell Press media alerts, contact press@cell.com.
Adults who smoke cigarettes and are addicted to alcohol or other drugs were more likely to achieve sustained remission of their substance use disorder symptoms if they also quit smoking, according to scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Based on their analysis of data from a large U.S. study of smoking and health, researchers believe the results clearly show the benefit of pairing smoking cessation with addiction recovery efforts.
“We now have strong evidence from a national sample that quitting cigarette smoking predicts improved recovery from other substance use disorders,” explained Nora Volkow, M.D., director of NIH’s National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), which partly funds the study, known as the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study. “It underscores the importance of addressing different addictions together, rather than in isolation.”
Scientists analyzed data from 2,652 people 18 and older who had a history of substance use disorder and who experienced a change in their recovery status over the next four years.
Participants in the PATH Study are asked annually about their smoking status and other substance use. In this analysis, a change in smoking status from “current” to “former” use of cigarettes was associated with 42% greater odds of the individual being in recovery from their non-tobacco substance use disorder.
People with addiction to alcohol or other substances have a higher likelihood of being addicted to nicotine as well. Previous research has suggested an association between smoking cessation and improved outcomes from other substance use disorders. However, the authors note that most prior studies used data from treatment centers focusing on addiction to a single substance or from smoking cessation trials, and those that used nationally representative samples could not adequately test for an association with recovery. Researchers believe the new finding is generalizable to the millions of adults with substance use disorder and accounts for numerous confounding factors, thus increasing confidence in the results.
“Although the health benefits of quitting smoking are well-known, smoking cessation has not been seen as a high priority in drug addiction treatment programs,” said Wilson Compton, M.D., deputy director of NIDA and senior author of the study. “This finding bolsters support for including smoking cessation as part of addiction treatment.”
Although this was a longitudinal analysis that was strongly suggestive that quitting smoking plays a role in improved recovery outcomes from other substance use disorders, further research will be needed to definitively establish a causal connection. Also needed is more research on the best ways to support smoking cessation among people in treatment or recovery for substance use disorders.
The PATH Study is an ongoing, nationally representative longitudinal cohort study of youth and adults who may or may not use tobacco products that is funded by NIH and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat at 988lifeline.org. To learn how to get support for mental health, drug or alcohol conditions, visit FindSupport.gov. If you are ready to locate a treatment facility or provider, you can go directly to FindTreatment.gov or call 800-662-HELP (4357).
Reference: MJ Parks, et al. Cigarette Smoking During Recovery from Substance Use Disorders [linked]. JAMA Psychiatry. DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.1976.
###
About the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA): NIDA is a component of the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIDA supports most of the world’s research on the health aspects of drug use and addiction. The Institute carries out a large variety of programs to inform policy, improve practice, and advance addiction science. For more information about NIDA and its programs, visit www.nida.nih.gov.
About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation’s medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.
Cigarette Smoking During Recovery from Substance Use Disorders
Article Publication Date
13-Aug-2025
Overhaul global food systems to avert worsening land crisis: Scientists
Imperative to ‘bend the curve’ of land degradation by reducing food waste, unlocking sustainable ocean-based food potential and restoring half of degraded lands by 2050
LONG READ
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)
Ongoing rates of land degradation contribute to a cascade of mounting global challenges, including food and water insecurity, forced relocation and population migration, social unrest, and economic inequality.
In Nature, 21 leading scientists today prescribe ways to use food systems to halt and reverse land degradation, underlining that doing so must become a top global priority to mitigate climate change and stop biodiversity loss.
The article breaks new ground by quantifying the impact by 2050 of reducing food waste by 75% and maximising sustainable ocean-based food production, measures that alone could spare an area larger than Africa.
According to the paper: “Food systems have not yet been fully incorporated into intergovernmental agreements, nor do they receive sufficient focus in current strategies to address land degradation. Rapid, integrated reforms focused on global food systems, however, can move land health from crisis to recovery and secure a healthier, more stable planet for all.”
The authors underline especially the importance of halting food waste and sustainably managing lands , and suggest an ambitious but achievable target of 50% land restoration for 2050 (currently 30% by 2030).
And, they emphasize, the measures outlined would enormously co-benefit the climate, biodiversity, and global health.
Says lead author Fernando T. Maestre of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Saudi Arabia: “This paper presents a bold, integrated set of actions to tackle land degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change together, as well as a clear pathway for implementing them by 2050.”
“By transforming food systems, restoring degraded land, harnessing the potential of sustainable seafood, and fostering cooperation across nations and sectors, we can ‘bend the curve’ and reverse land degradation while advancing towards goals of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and other global agreements.”
Adds co-author Barron J. Orr, UNCCD’s Chief Scientist: “Once soils lose fertility, water tables deplete, and biodiversity is lost, restoring the land becomes exponentially more expensive. Ongoing rates of land degradation contribute to a cascade of mounting global challenges, including food and water insecurity, forced relocation and population migration, social unrest, and economic inequality.”
“Land degradation isn’t just a rural issue, it affects the food on all our plates, the air we breathe, and the stability of the world we live in. This isn’t about saving the environment, it’s about securing our shared future.”
Key recommendations:
1. Restoring 50% of degraded land through sustainable land management practices would correspond to the restoration of 3 Mkm² of cropland and 10 Mkm² of non-cropland, a total of 13 Mkm².
Land restoration must involve the people who live on and manage the land — especially Indigenous Peoples, smallholder farmers, women, and other vulnerable people and communities, the article says.
To support them, the authors recommend:
Support for small farmers: Most of the world’s food is grown by small and family farms. The paper calls for shifting agricultural subsidies from large-scale industrial farms toward sustainable smallholders, incentivizing good land stewardship among the world’s 608 million farms, and fostering their access to technology, secure land rights, and fair markets
Land-based taxes or tariffs: To reward sustainable low-impact farming and penalize polluters
Environmental labeling: So consumers can make informed, planet-friendly food choices
Better data and reporting: To track emissions and land use impacts
2. Reduce food waste by 75%: An estimated 56.5 Mkm² of agricultural land (cropland and rangelands) are used to produce food, and roughly 33% of all food produced is wasted (14% lost post harvest at farms; 19% at the retail, food service and household stages).
Reducing food waste by 75%, therefore, could spare roughly 13.4 Mkm² of land.
The authors highlight key measures to remedy this, including:
Policies to prevent overproduction and spoilage
Ban food industry rules that reject “ugly” produce
Encourage food donations and discounted sales of near-expiry products
Education campaigns to reduce household waste
Support small farmers in developing countries to improve storage and transport
They note new legislation in Spain requiring stores to donate or sell surplus food, restaurants to offer take-home containers, and all actors across the food supply chain to implement formal food waste reduction plans.
3. Integrate land and marine food systems: Red meat produced in unsustainable ways consumes large amounts of land, water, and feed, and emits significant greenhouse gases. Seafood and seaweed are sustainable, nutritious alternatives. Seaweed, for example, needs no freshwater and absorbs atmospheric carbon. Responsible aquaculture—focusing on low-impact species like mussels and seaweed-derived products—can reduce pressure on land. The authors recommend:
Replacing 70% of unsustainably produced red meat to sustainably sourced seafood, such as wild or farmed fish and mollusks. Doing so would spare 17.1 Mkm² of land currently used for pasture and livestock feed
Using sustainably sourced seaweed-derived products as a vegetable substitute—replacing just 10% of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up over 0.4 Mkm² of cropland.
These changes are especially relevant for wealthier countries with high meat consumption. In some poorer regions, animal products remain crucial for nutrition.
Total land spared by food system-related measures 2 and 3: ~30.9 Mkm², an area roughly equal to Africa.
The combination of land restoration, food waste reduction,, and dietary shifts, therefore, would spare or restore roughly 43.8 Mkm² in 30 years (2020-2050).
The proposed measures combined would also
Contribute to emission reduction efforts by mitigating roughly 13 Gt of CO2-equivalent per year through 2050.
Co-benefit biodiversity by improving habitat quality and ecosystem functioning, and avoiding the conversion of remaining natural ecosystems to cropland, and
Help the world community achieve its commitments in several international agreements, including the three Rio Conventions (climate, biodiversity and desertification), the Sustainable Development Goals and others
Coordinated action among the Rio Conventions
The authors call for the UN’s three Rio conventions–CBD, UNCCD and UNFCCC–to unite around shared land and food system goals and encourage the exchange of state-of-the-art knowledge, track progress and streamline science into more effective policies, all to accelerate action on the ground.
Land and food systems play a key role in advancing towards the goals and targets of the three conventions and the Sustainable Development Goals, they say.
The authors call on Parties to all three Rio conventions to promote multilateral actions on land and food systems in a coordinated and collaborative manner. UNCCD’s 197 Parties, at their most recent Conference of Parties (COP16) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, have already adopted a decision on avoiding, reducing and reversing land and soil degradation of agricultural lands.
Additional comments
“Land is more than soil and space. It harbors biodiversity, cycles water, stores carbon, and regulates climate. It gives us food, sustains life, and holds deep roots of ancestry and knowledge. Today, over one-third of Earth’s land is used to grow food - feeding a global population of more than 8 billion people. Yet today, modern farming practices, deforestation, and overuse are degrading soil, polluting water, and destroying vital ecosystems. Food production alone drives nearly 20% of global emissions of greenhouse gases. We need to act. To secure a thriving future - and protect land - we must reimagine how we farm, how we live, and how we relate to nature - and to each other. It’s time for land stewardship: to care for the land as a living ally, no longer as a resource to exploit.”
- Co-author Elisabeth Huber-Sannwald, Professor, Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológiva, San Luis Potosí, Mexico
“Land degradation is a key factor in forced migration and conflict over resources. Regions that rely heavily on agriculture for livelihoods, especially smallholder farmers, who feed much of the world, are particularly vulnerable. These pressures could destabilize entire regions and amplify global risks. .”
Co-author Dolors Armenteras, Professor of Landscape Ecology – Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá
“Integrating land and marine food systems is fundamental to achieve food security, enable the restoration of degraded land and maintain healthy populations”
- Co-author Carlos M. Duarte, Professor of Marine Science, KAUST
******
By the Numbers
56%: Projected increase in food production needed by 2050 if we stay on our current path
34%: Portion of Earth’s ice-free land already used for food production, headed to 42% by 2050
21%: Share of global greenhouse gas emissions produced by food systems
80%: Proportion of deforestation driven by food production
70%: Amount of freshwater consumption that goes to agriculture
33%: Fraction of global food that currently goes to waste
US$1 trillion: Estimated annual value of food lost or wasted globally
75%: Ambitious target for global food waste reduction by 2050
50%: Proposed portion of degraded land to be restored by 2050 using sustainable land management
US $278 billion: Annual funding gap to achieve UNCCD land restoration goals
608 million: Number of farms on the planet
90%: Percentage of all farms under 2 hectares
35%: Share of the world’s food produced by small farms
6.5 billion tons: Potential biomass yield using 650 million hectares of ocean for seaweed farming
17.5 million km²: Estimated cropland area saved if humanity adopts the proposed Rio+ diet (less unsustainably produced red meat, more sustainably sourced seafood and seaweed-derived food products)
166 million: Number of people who could avoid micronutrient deficiencies with more aquatic foods in their diet
*******
Bending the curve of land degradation to achieve global environmental goals,
Fernando T. Maestre – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia (Lead author)
Emilio Guirado – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
Dolors Armenteras – Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia
Hylke E. Beck – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
Mashael bint Saud AlShalan – Aeon Collective, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Noura bint Turki Al-Saud – Aeon Collective, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Ralph Chami – Blue Green Future LLC, Washington D.C., USA
Bojie Fu – Key Laboratory of Regional and Urban Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences & University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Helene Gichenje – Independent Consultant, Nairobi, Kenya
Elisabeth Huber-Sannwald – Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, San Luis Potosí, Mexico
Chinwe Ifejika Speranza – Institute of Geography, University of Bern, Switzerland
Jaime Martínez-Valderrama – Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas, CSIC, Almería, Spain
Matthew F. McCabe – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
Barron J. Orr – United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, Bonn, Germany
Ting Tang – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
Graciela Metternicht – Western Sydney University, Australia
Michael Miess – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
James F. Reynolds – Nicholas School of the Environment and Department of Biology, Duke University, USA
Lindsay C. Stringer – University of York, UK
Yoshihide Wada – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
Carlos M. Duarte – King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
*******
About KAUST
Established in 2009, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) is a graduate research university devoted to finding solutions for some of the most pressing scientific and technological challenges in the world as well as Saudi Arabia in the areas of food and health, water, energy, environment and the digital domain. KAUST is a curiosity-driven, interdisciplinary
KAUST brings together the best minds from around the world to advance research. More than 120 different nationalities live, work and study on campus. KAUST is also a catalyst for innovation, economic development and social prosperity, with research resulting in novel patents and products, enterprising startups, regional and global initiatives, and collaboration with other academic institutions, industries and Saudi agencies.
The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) is an international agreement on good land stewardship. It helps create wealth, grow economies and secure food, clean water and energy by enabling sustainable land management. The Convention’s 197 parties establish partnerships and robust systems to manage drought promptly and effectively. Good land stewardship based on sound policy and science helps integrate and accelerate achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, builds resilience to climate change and prevents biodiversity loss.
The 16th session of UNCCD’s Conference of the Parties (COP16) was held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in December 2024. Mongolia will host UNCCD COP17 in Ulaanbaatar from 17-28 August 2026, a major event coinciding with the UN’s International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists. Delegates from UNCCD Parties, heads of state, ministers, representatives from international organizations, scientific communities, civil society, and the private sector will convene to accelerate action against desertification, land degradation and drought.
Women in counties with repeatedly lower cervical cancer screening rates suffer nearly double the rate of cervical cancer diagnoses, particularly of late-stage disease, and death from cervical cancer, according to a new analysis from researchers at MUSC Hollings Cancer Center.
Trisha Amboree, Ph.D., is part of a team of researchers that has previously shown that cervical cancer incidence and death rates are higher in low-income and rural U.S. counties. Those papers analyzed the numbers but couldn’t explore the reasons why incidence and death were higher.
“We know that higher screening uptake prevents disease and subsequent mortality,” she said.
In the absence of a national screening registry in the U.S., there has been no way to tie individual screening histories to cancer outcomes nationally, so researchers look at county-level metrics to assess this with measurable outcomes.
“In the previous papers, we didn't have any individual-level screening data. This paper helps to contextualize our previous findings to say what we're seeing is at least probably partially a result of repeatedly low screening.”
Timely screening can identify precancerous lesions for removal before they develop into cancer and also allows medical providers to diagnose cancer at an early stage, when it is far more likely that someone can be treated successfully. The current paper published in JAMA Network Open looked at county-level screening data from 2004 through 2016, broken into three time periods. The researchers labeled counties as repeatedly low-screening if in at least two of the three time periods fewer than 70% of eligible women in that county were screened. They were labeled as repeatedly high-screening if at least 80% were screened. Nationally, the cervical cancer screening goal is 79.2%.
Most counties fell into the in-between category. But when comparing the repeatedly low-screening counties with the repeatedly high-screening counties, the researchers found that diagnosis of distant-stage cervical cancer was 84% higher in low-screening counties, and deaths were 96% higher in low-screening counties.
The researchers also showed that nearly all the low-screening counties were rural, and all of them had an annual median household income of less than $75,000.
This latest analysis reinforces the need for improved access to screening and treatment, particularly in rural and low-income counties, the researchers said.
Cervical cancer screening in South Carolina
The current paper looks at data from a national database that covers about a third of the U.S. population, including states as varied as California, New York, Texas, Georgia and Idaho.
South Carolina data isn’t part of this national database, but it’s likely that the trends that the researchers uncovered are observed here as well, Amboree said.
Gynecologists or family physicians generally perform cervical cancer screenings. But the South Carolina Area Health Education Consortium reports that 14 counties in South Carolina have no obstetrician-gynecologists. Several counties have only a handful – or as few as one – family practice physicians.
Hollings supplements this lack of screening options through its Mobile Health Unit, which offers cervical cancer screening and travels to medically underserved areas of the state.
Current screening recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force for average-risk women are that those ages 21 to 65 should receive a Pap smear every three years, or those ages 30 to 65 years should receive HPV testing (alone or with a Pap) every five years.
###
About MUSC Hollings Cancer Center
MUSC Hollings Cancer Center is South Carolina’s only National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center with the largest academic-based cancer research program in the state. With more than 230 faculty cancer scientists from 20 academic departments, it has an annual research funding portfolio of more than $50 million and sponsors more than 200 clinical trials across the state. Hollings specialists include surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, radiologists, pathologists, psychologists and other clinical providers equipped to provide the full range of cancer care from diagnosis to survivorship. Hollings offers state-of-the-art cancer screenings, diagnostics, therapies and surgical techniques within its multidisciplinary clinics. Dedicated to preventing and reducing the cancer burden statewide, the Hollings Office of Community Outreach and Engagement works with community organizations to bring cancer education and prevention information to affected populations throughout the state. For more information, visit hollingscancercenter.musc.edu
This study found a nearly two-fold higher cervical cancer incidence, late-stage diagnosis, and mortality in counties with repeatedly low vs high cervical cancer screening coverage. Most counties with repeat low coverage were rural and lower income.
Corresponding Author: To contact the corresponding author, Trisha L. Amboree, PhD, MPH, email amboree@musc.edu.
Editor’s Note: Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, conflict of interest and financial disclosures, and funding and support.
Embed this link to provide your readers free access to the full-text article
Gauging the magnitude of missed opportunity for ovarian cancer prevention
JAMA Surgery
About The Study:
In this study, a considerable proportion of patients with high-grade serous cancer missed opportunities for risk assessment with genetic testing and for surgical prevention. Given the lack of effective screening and limited treatment options for high-grade serous cancer, eradicating it requires addressing the full spectrum of missed opportunities.
Corresponding Author: To contact the corresponding author, Rebecca L. Stone, MD, email rstone15@jhmi.edu.
Editor’s Note: Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, conflict of interest and financial disclosures, and funding and support.
Embed this link to provide your readers free access to the full-text article
