Climatic Change

, Volume 83, Issue 4, pp 477–493 | Cite as

An incentive mechanism for reducing emissions from conversion of intact and non-intact forests

  • Danilo Mollicone
  • Frédéric Achard
  • Sandro Federici
  • Hugh D. Eva
  • Giacomo Grassi
  • Alan Belward
  • Frank Raes
  • Günther Seufert
  • Hans-Jürgen Stibig
  • Giorgio Matteucci
  • Ernst-Detlef Schulze
Article

Abstract

This paper presents a new accounting mechanism in the context of the UNFCCC issue on reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries, including technical options for determining baselines of forest conversions. This proposal builds on the recent scientific achievements related to the estimation of tropical deforestation rates and to the assessment of ‘intact’ forest areas. The distinction between ‘intact’ and ‘non intact’ forests used here arises from experience with satellite-based deforestation measurements and allows accounting for carbon losses from forest degradation. The proposed accounting system would use forest area conversion rates as input data. An optimal technical solution to set baselines would be to use historical average figures during the time period from 1990 to 2005. The system introduces two different schemes to account for preserved carbon: one for countries with high forest conversion rates where the desired outcome would be a reduction in their rates, and another for countries with low rates. A ‘global’ baseline rate would be used to discriminate between these two country categories (high and low rates). For the hypothetical accounting period 2013–2017 and considering 72% of the total tropical forest domain for which data are available, the scenario of a 10% reduction of the high rates and of the preservation of low rates would result in approximately 1.6 billion tCO2 of avoided emissions. The resulting benefits of this reduction would be shared between those high-rate countries which reduced deforestation and those low-rate countries which did not increase their deforestation over an agreed threshold (e.g., half of “global” baseline rate).

Keywords

Carbon Stock Forest Degradation Deforestation Rate Forest Conversion Accounting Mechanism 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Achard F, Eva HD, Stibig HJ, Mayaux P, Gallego J, Richards T, Malingreau JP (2002) Determination of deforestation rates of the world’s humid tropical forests. Science 297:999–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Achard F, Eva H, Mayaux P, Stibig HJ, Belward A (2004) Improved estimates of net carbon emissions from land cover change in the tropics for the 1990’s. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 18:GB2008, doi: 10.1029/2003GB002142
  3. Aksenov D, Dobrynin D, Dubinin M, Egorov A, Isaev A, Karpachevskiy M, Laestadius L, Potapov P, Purekhovskiy A, Turubanova S, Yaroshenko A (2002) Atlas of Russia’s intact forest landscapes. Global Forest Watch Russia, Moscow, p 184. Available at http://forest.ru/eng/publications/intact/
  4. Asner GP, Knapp DE, Broadbent EN, Oliveiri PJC, Keller M, Silva JN (2005) Selective logging in the Brazilian amazon. Science 310:480–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. DeFries R, Asner G, Achard F, Justice C, Laporte N, Price K, Small C, Townshend J (2005) Monitoring tropical deforestation for emerging carbon markets. In: Mountinho P, Schwartzman S (eds) Tropical deforestation and climate change. IPAM, Belem, Brazil, pp 35–44Google Scholar
  6. FAO (2001) Global forest resources assessment 2000. FAO, Rome, Italy, p 479Google Scholar
  7. FAO (2004) Summary of world food and agricultural statistics. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  8. FAO (2005) FAOSTAT database, available at http://faostat.fao.org/
  9. Geist H, Lambin E (2002) Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. BioScience 52:143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. GFW (2006) World map of intact forest landscapes. Global Forest Watch Russia, Moscow, RussiaGoogle Scholar
  11. Houghton RA (2005) Aboveground forest biomass and the global carbon balance. Glob Chang Biol 11:945–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. INPE (2005) Monitoramento da Floresta Amazônica Brasileira por Satelite, Projeto PRODES, available at http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes/index.html
  13. Lepers E, Lambin EF, Janetos AC, DeFries R, Achard F, Ramankutty N, Scholes RJ (2005) A synthesis of rapid land-cover change information for the 1981–2000 period. BioScience 55:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mayaux P, Holmgren P, Achard F, Eva H, Stibig H-J, Branthomme A (2005) Tropical forest cover change in the 1990s and options for future monitoring. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 360:373–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mollicone D, Achard F, Eva H, Belward AS, Federici S, Lumicisi A, Rizzo VC, Stibig H-J, Valentini R (2003) Land use change monitoring in the framework of the UNFCCCC and its Kyoto protocol: report on current capabilities of satellite remote sensing technology. European Communities, Luxembourg, p 48. Available at http://www-gem.jrc.it/tem/PDF_publis/publications.htm
  16. Penman J, Gytarsky M, Hiraishi T, Krug T, Kruger D, Pipatti R, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K, Wagner F (eds) (2003) Definitions and methodological options to inventory emissions from direct human-induced degradation of forests and devegatation of other vegetation types. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Kanagawa, JapanGoogle Scholar
  17. Prentice IC, Farquhar GD, Fasham MJR, Goulden ML, Heimann M, Jaramillo VJ, Kheshgi HS, Le Quéré C, Scholes RJ, Wallace DWR (2001) The carbon cycle and atmospheric carbon dioxide. In: Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, van der Linden PJ, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson CA (eds) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis: contribution of working group i to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 183–237Google Scholar
  18. Santilli M, Moutinho P, Schwartzman S, Nepstad DC, Curran LM, Nobre CA (2005) Tropical deforestation and the Kyoto protocol: an editorial essay. Clim Change 71:267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ramankutty N, Gibbs HK, Foley J, Houghton RA, Achard F, DeFries R (2006) Carbon emissions from tropical deforestation: setting the terms of the debate. Glob Chang Biol 12:1–16, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01272.x Google Scholar
  20. Schulze E-D, Mollicone D, Achard F, Matteucci G, Federici S, Eva HD, Valentini R (2003) Making deforestation pay under the Kyoto protocol? Science 299:1669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stiglitz JE (2005) Cleaning up economic growth. Project Syndicate Print Commentary. Available at http:///www.project-syndicate.org/print_commentary/stiglitz59/English 7/8/2005
  22. Townshend JRG, Justice CO (1988) Selecting the spatial resolution of satellite sensors required for global monitoring of land transformations. Int J Remote Sens 9:187–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. UN (2005) World population prospects: the 2004 revision. Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  24. UNFCCC (1997) Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change: annex to decision 1/CP.3. UNFCCC Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, available at http://www.unfccc.int
  25. UNFCCC (2001) Seventh conference of parties: the marrakech accords. UNFCCC Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, available at http://www.unfccc.int
  26. UNFCCC (2005) Reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries: approaches to stimulate action – draft conclusions proposed by the president. UNFCCC Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, available at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2005/cop11/eng/l02.pdf
  27. Williams M (2003) Deforesting the earth. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, p 689Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Danilo Mollicone
    • 1
    • 2
  • Frédéric Achard
    • 1
  • Sandro Federici
    • 1
  • Hugh D. Eva
    • 1
  • Giacomo Grassi
    • 1
  • Alan Belward
    • 1
  • Frank Raes
    • 1
  • Günther Seufert
    • 1
  • Hans-Jürgen Stibig
    • 1
  • Giorgio Matteucci
    • 3
  • Ernst-Detlef Schulze
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Environment and SustainabilityJoint Research Centre of the European CommissionIspra (VA)Italy
  2. 2.Max-Planck-Institute for BiogeochemistryJenaGermany
  3. 3.Institute for Mediterranean Agriculture and Forest SystemsNational Research CouncilRende (CS)Italy

Personalised recommendations