> So, yes, greening is complicated. It’s not inherently good. Sometimes it’s very bad. Context, it turns out, matters a lot.
The tone suggests they're afraid of the change, but the article can't articulate why since the reason for the change and result are both possibly good and bad, but we don't really know yet.
The NASA MODIS project is ongoing and produces data that people are using to measure "greenness" (which the article indirectly cites) and has been going for 20 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate_Resolution_Imaging_Sp... - it's definitely an interesting dataset.
> So, yes, greening is complicated. It’s not inherently good. Sometimes it’s very bad. Context, it turns out, matters a lot.
The tone suggests they're afraid of the change, but the article can't articulate why since the reason for the change and result are both possibly good and bad, but we don't really know yet.
The NASA MODIS project is ongoing and produces data that people are using to measure "greenness" (which the article indirectly cites) and has been going for 20 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate_Resolution_Imaging_Sp... - it's definitely an interesting dataset.
Didan seems to be leading the vegetation research for MODIS and the data set has been cited thousands of times (https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=TxQK6U8AAAAJ&hl=en...)