[inapis]

These kind of article raises more questions than answers. Leaving aside politics on this, I need to know more.

How does this "greening" help? Is it more due to agriculture or forests? If it's due to agriculture, what are the unintended consequences?

While this article is positive in its tone (which I appreciate) I can't help but feel that it's shallow. It's green so yayy! But what comes next? Increased greenery due to agriculture can probably never have the same positive effects as a forest, at least for the surrounding ecology and biome.

[Aunche]

China has a lot of reforestation projects, the most notable of which is the "Green Great Wall," which is intended to hinder the growth of the Gobi dessert. The benefits of this project are questionable because the trees soak up a lot of groundwater in an already very arid area. Also, the forests rely on a few species of trees, so it's very vulnerable to disease.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-North_Shelter_Forest_Pro...

[ksaj]

I had seen a video somewhere that the Green Great Wall was failing and in constant threat of collapse because of the arid wind and pretty much non-existent water table causing the trees to die off faster than they can be planted.

The footage had interviews with a group that tries to keep it watered.

EDIT: It might have been the initiative in Africa (Sahara). I tried finding the video and am met with similar initiatives on both continents.

[neves]

How much of these "reforested" areas are of eucalyptus plantations, used to fabricate paper? I don't think that we can point a big exogenous monoculture can be considered "greener".