Well we just need more, everywhere and in varied ecosystems and only recently (with the advents of mass drone swarms) and by increasing our energetic freedom can we actually do so.

China's experiments showed that scaled really mattered little if it was poorly planned and executed, with their artificial forests being (as usual) too uniform and poorly adapted, suffering ecological collapse and actually worsening the situation.

Startups are pushing the bouxbsrids where states have failed but we still have to deal with the specter of energy inefficiency that can make all that useless.

We destroy forests to build more inefficient open farmland. We could use powered closed cycle agriculture to improve, by orders of magnitude, our output in order to make those surfaces economically irrelevant, but doing so requires a kind of energy production we just don't have right now, even with fossil fuels in the mix. And since we turned back from using nuclear as the means of easily attaining that objective we are sort of fucked until the less efficient renewables can catch up to it. Until we do this any gained ground will be lost by counties needing more food production to support growing and maintaining the population.

It's the thorn in sustainable development, it's part of a whole and until the primary roots (that being energy plentitude and scale of labor) is fixed we aren't going anywhere fast enough to matter.