Datastream
Visualizing the Forest Funding Gap Relative to Emissions
The following content is sponsored by The LEAF Coalition
The Briefing
- Deforestation accounts for 10% of global carbon emissions
- Deforestation receives just 2.2% of climate funding
The Forest Funding Gap
Climate change has been referred to as modern day civilization’s greatest challenge. And stopping deforestation is an important step in the battle to stop rising global temperatures. Yet, when you look at the amount of climate funding earmarked for deforestation, something doesn’t add up.
This graphic from The LEAF Coalition looks at the state of global deforestation and compares how much climate funding it receives relative to its global CO2 emissions.
Deforestation’s Role in Global Emissions
Protecting our forests and protecting the climate are one in the same. In fact, the data reveals that tropical deforestation accounts for 10% of global CO2 emissions.
What’s more, these levels of emissions exceed that of all individual countries except for the U.S. and China. Despite this, climate funding towards deforestation only accounts for $14 billion of the over $618 billion available, representing a small 2.2% slice of the total.
This is especially problematic when considering a forest’s carbon stock and carbon sequestration capabilities. Here’s how different forests across the globe compare when looking at gigatonnes of carbon stock.
Ecosystem | Estimated Carbon Stock (Gt) | Annual Loss Rate |
---|---|---|
Tropical moist forests | 295 Gt | 0.45% |
Boreal forests | 283 Gt | 0.18% |
Temperate broadleaf forests | 133 Gt | 0.35% |
Temperate conifer forests | 66 Gt | 0.28% |
Tropical dry forests | 14 Gt | 0.58% |
Mangroves | 7.3Gt | 0.13% |
A carbon stock or carbon pool refers to a system that can store carbon and take it out of the atmosphere. Forests are used to offset plenty of carbon emissions, and by some estimates, it would cost $25 billion for additional carbon offsets to match and compensate for unabated emissions.
This is crucial because unabated emissions are those who’s harm are not reduced from carbon reduction methods. While this may sound like a lot, it’s equivalent to just 1.5% of the profits from Fortune Global 500 companies.
Altogether, approximately 30% of global emissions are absorbed by forests each year. Despite this, 3.75 million hectares of tropical primary rainforest were lost in 2021, equivalent to 600 football pitches per hour.
Turning The Page
It’s practically impossible to effectively tackle climate change without addressing deforestation. The broader agriculture, forestry and other land use category (which includes deforestation) accounts for 21% of all global CO2 emissions.
Swift action is required in order to slow deforestation and decelerate rising average temperatures. See how The LEAF Coalition, a public-private initiative, is accelerating climate action by providing results-based finance to countries committed to protecting tropical forests.
Central Banks
Charted: Public Trust in the Federal Reserve
Public trust in the Federal Reserve chair has hit its lowest point in 20 years. Get the details in this infographic.

The Briefing
- Gallup conducts an annual poll to gauge the U.S. public’s trust in the Federal Reserve
- After rising during the COVID-19 pandemic, public trust has fallen to a 20-year low
Charted: Public Trust in the Federal Reserve
Each year, Gallup conducts a survey of American adults on various economic topics, including the country’s central bank, the Federal Reserve.
More specifically, respondents are asked how much confidence they have in the current Fed chairman to do or recommend the right thing for the U.S. economy. We’ve visualized these results from 2001 to 2023 to see how confidence levels have changed over time.
Methodology and Results
The data used in this infographic is also listed in the table below. Percentages reflect the share of respondents that have either a “great deal” or “fair amount” of confidence.
Year | Fed chair | % Great deal or Fair amount |
---|---|---|
2023 | Jerome Powell | 36% |
2022 | Jerome Powell | 43% |
2021 | Jerome Powell | 55% |
2020 | Jerome Powell | 58% |
2019 | Jerome Powell | 50% |
2018 | Jerome Powell | 45% |
2017 | Janet Yellen | 45% |
2016 | Janet Yellen | 38% |
2015 | Janet Yellen | 42% |
2014 | Janet Yellen | 37% |
2013 | Ben Bernanke | 42% |
2012 | Ben Bernanke | 39% |
2011 | Ben Bernanke | 41% |
2010 | Ben Bernanke | 44% |
2009 | Ben Bernanke | 49% |
2008 | Ben Bernanke | 47% |
2007 | Ben Bernanke | 50% |
2006 | Ben Bernanke | 41% |
2005 | Alan Greenspan | 56% |
2004 | Alan Greenspan | 61% |
2003 | Alan Greenspan | 65% |
2002 | Alan Greenspan | 69% |
2001 | Alan Greenspan | 74% |
Data for 2023 collected April 3-25, with this statement put to respondents: “Please tell me how much confidence you have [in the Fed chair] to recommend the right thing for the economy.”
We can see that trust in the Federal Reserve has fluctuated significantly in recent years.
For example, under Alan Greenspan, trust was initially high due to the relative stability of the economy. The burst of the dotcom bubble—which some attribute to Greenspan’s easy credit policies—resulted in a sharp decline.
On the flip side, public confidence spiked during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was likely due to Jerome Powell’s decisive actions to provide support to the U.S. economy throughout the crisis.
Measures implemented by the Fed include bringing interest rates to near zero, quantitative easing (buying government bonds with newly-printed money), and emergency lending programs to businesses.
Confidence Now on the Decline
After peaking at 58%, those with a “great deal” or “fair amount” of trust in the Fed chair have tumbled to 36%, the lowest number in 20 years.
This is likely due to Powell’s hard stance on fighting post-pandemic inflation, which has involved raising interest rates at an incredible speed. While these rate hikes may be necessary, they also have many adverse effects:
- Negative impact on the stock market
- Increases the burden for those with variable-rate debts
- Makes mortgages and home buying less affordable
Higher rates have also prompted many U.S. tech companies to shrink their workforces, and have been a factor in the regional banking crisis, including the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank.
Where does this data come from?
Source: Gallup (2023)
Data Notes: Results are based on telephone interviews conducted April 3-25, 2023, with a random sample of –1,013—adults, ages 18+, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on this sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. See source for details.
-
Travel3 weeks ago
Visualized: The World’s Busiest Airports, by Passenger Count
-
Announcement6 days ago
Join Us For Data Creator Con 2023
-
AI3 weeks ago
Visualizing Global Attitudes Towards AI
-
Central Banks6 days ago
Charted: Public Trust in the Federal Reserve
-
Visual Capitalist3 weeks ago
Calling All Data Storytellers to Enter our Creator Program Challenge
-
Technology5 days ago
Ranked: The World’s Top 25 Websites in 2023
-
Misc3 weeks ago
Ranked: Top 10 Cities Where International Travelers Spend the Most
-
AI4 days ago
Visualizing the Top U.S. States for AI Jobs