Advertisement

Forest biomass carbon dynamics (1980–2009) in western Himalaya in the context of REDD+ policy

  • Akhlaq Amin Wani
  • P. K. Joshi
  • Ombir Singh
  • Rajesh Kumar
  • V. R. S. Rawat
  • Bilal A. Khaki
Original Article

Abstract

Carbon emissions from forests have decreased in the past decade due to conservation efforts, however majority of carbon losses suffered in the past went unnoticed until the role of forests in mitigating climate change was realized. Forestry sector in developing countries is recognized as one of the largest and low cost mitigation options to address climate change. The present study was conducted to assess the multi-temporal biomass carbon mitigation in the temperate forests of western Himalaya using satellite (Landsat MSS, TM, ETM+) and forest inventory data. Forest type density mapping was done through on-screen visual interpretation of satellite data. After conducting preliminary survey in 2009, 45 quadrats (0.1 ha) were laid in six forest types for collecting field inventory data viz., diameter at breast height, tree height, slope and aspect. Biomass carbon (t ha−1) was estimated for different forest types with different crown densities (open with 10–40% crown density and closed with >40%) using recommended regression equations, ratios and factors. A decreasing trend of carbon (145.13–134.87 mt) was observed over the period of time. Temporal biomass carbon dynamics was analyzed for REDD+ opportunities. The temporal variation of carbon observed was found to be more useful for claiming benefits under negative options (deforestation and forest degradation) of REDD+. The study doesn’t take actual conversions to CO2 into account. However, the findings are useful in establishing baseline emissions through temporal carbon losses. Further, the study helps in identification of location specific socio-economic drivers of losses that can be used for appropriate mitigation interventions.

Keywords

Biomass carbon Mitigation Temperate coniferous forests Himalaya REDD+ Satellite data 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the Government of Jammu & Kashmir and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, State Forest Department Jammu & Kashmir for permission to conduct this study. We are also grateful to Divisional Forest Officers of Anantnag Forest Division and Lidder Forest Division for their coordination in collecting field data across different forest ranges. We are also highly grateful to the anonymous reviewers for helping us raise quality of the manuscript through their critical comments.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have not competing interests.

References

  1. Alder D (1999) Some issues in the yield regulation of moist tropical forests. In: a workshop on Humid and semi-humid tropical forest yield regulation with minimal data, CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica 5–9th JulyGoogle Scholar
  2. Anonymous (2013) REDD methodology modules (REDD-MF), Approved VCS methodology VM0007, version 1.4 Sectoral Scop14, TerraCarbon and Winrock InternationalGoogle Scholar
  3. Baccini A et al (2012) Estimated carbon dioxide emissions from tropical deforestation improved by carbon-density maps. Nat. Clim. Change 2:182–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bhattarai T, Skutsch M, Midmore D, Shrestha HL (2015) Carbon measurement: an overview of forest carbon estimation methods and the role of geographical information system and remote sensing techniques for REDD+ implementation. Journal of Forest and Livelihood 13(1):69–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brasnett NV (1953) Planned management of forests. George, Allen & Unwin Ltd., London, pp 128–135Google Scholar
  6. Brown S, Lugo AE (1982) The storage and production of organic matter in tropical forests and their role in the global carbon cycle. Biotropica 14:161–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown S, Lugo AE (1992) Aboveground biomass estimates for tropical moist forests of Brazilian Amazon. Interciencia 17:8–18Google Scholar
  8. Brown SL, Schroeder PE (1999) Spatial patterns of aboveground production and mortality of woody biomass for eastern U.S. forests. Ecol Appl 9:968–980Google Scholar
  9. Brown S, Sathaye J, Cannel M, Kauppi PE (1996) Mitigation of carbon emission to the atomosphere by forest management. Commonwealth For Rev 75(1):80–91Google Scholar
  10. Brown S, Schroeder P, Kern JS (1999) Spatial distribution of biomass in forests of the eastern USA. For Ecol Manage 123(1):81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cairns MA, Brown S, Helmer EH, Baumgardner GA (1997) Root biomass allocation in the world’s upland forests. Oecologia 111(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cannell MGR (1982) World forest biomass and primary production data. Academic Press, New York, p 391Google Scholar
  13. CEOS (2014) CEOS Strategy for Carbon Observations from Space. The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) Response to the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) Carbon Strategy. JAXA and I&A Corporation, JapanGoogle Scholar
  14. Chako VJ (1965) A manual on sampling techniques for forest surveys. The manager of publications, DelhiGoogle Scholar
  15. Champion HG, Seth SK (1968) A revised survey of forest types of India, New Delhi Government publication, pp 404Google Scholar
  16. Chhabra A, Palria S, Dadhwal VK (2002) Growing stock based forest biomass estimate for India. Biomass Bioenergy 22:187–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dabas M, Bhatia S (1996) Carbon sequestration through afforestation: role of tropical industrial plantations. Ambio 25(5):327–330Google Scholar
  18. Dixon RK, Brown S, Houghton RA, Solomon AM, Trexler MC, Wisniewski J (1994) Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science 263(5144):185–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fang JY, Wang ZM (2001) Forest biomass estimation at regional and global levels, with special reference to China’s forest biomass. Ecol Res 16:587–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fang JY, Wang GG, Liu GH, Xu SL (1998) Forest biomass of China: an estimation based on the biomass–volume relationship. Ecol Appl 8:1084–1091Google Scholar
  21. Fang JY, Chen AP, Peng CH, Zhao SQ, Ci LJ (2001) Changes in forest biomass carbon storage in China between 1949 and 1998. Science 292:2320–2322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fang JY, Brown S, Tang YH, Naruurs GJ, Wang XP (2006) Overestimated biomass carbon pools of the northern mid- and high latitude forests. Clim Change 74:355–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. FAO (1997) Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: a primer. (FAO forestry paper-134), pp 55Google Scholar
  24. FSI (1996) Volume equations for forests of India, Nepal and Bhutan, Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India, pp 249Google Scholar
  25. FSI (2005) India State of Forest Report, Forest Survey of India, Dehradun, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  26. FSI (2011) India State of Forest Report, Forest Survey of India, Dehradun, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  27. Fuller RM, Smith GM, Devereux BJ (2003) The characterisation and measurement of land cover change through remote sensing: problems in operational applications? Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 3:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gairola S, Sharma CM, Ghildiyal SK, Suyal S (2011) Live tree biomass and carbon variation along an altitudinal gradient in moist temperate valley slopes of the Garhwal Himalaya India. Curr Sci 100(12):1–9Google Scholar
  29. GFOI (2013) Integrating remote-sensing and ground-based observations for estimation of emissions and removals of greenhouse gases in forests: methods and guidance from the global forest observations initiative. Group on Earth Observations, Geneva, p 2014Google Scholar
  30. GOFC-GOLD (2012) A sourcebook of methods and procedures for monitoring and reporting anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and removals associated with deforestation, gains and losses of carbon stocks in forests remaining forests, and forestation. GOFC-GOLD Report version COP18-1, (GOFC-GOLD Land Cover Project Office, Wageningen University, The Netherlands)Google Scholar
  31. Guo Z, Fang J, Pan Y, Birdsey R (2010) Inventory-based estimates of forest biomass carbon stocks in China: a comparison of three methods. For Ecol Manage 259(2010):1225–1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Herold M, Román-Cuesta RM, Mollicone D et al (2011) Options for monitoring and estimating historical carbon emissions from forest degradation in the context of REDD+. Carbon Balance Manage 6(13):1–7Google Scholar
  33. Houghton RA (2005) Aboveground forest biomass and the global carbon balance. Glob Change Biol 11:945–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Houghton RA, Lawrence KT, Hackler JL, Brown S (2001) The spatial distribution of forest biomass in the Brazilian Amazon: a comparison of estimates. Glob Change Biol 7(7):731–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Houghton RA, Hall F, Goetz SJ (2009) Importance of biomass in the global carbon cycle. J Geophys Res 114:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hummel FC (2012) Forest policy: a contribution to resource development. Martinus Nijhoff/Dr. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague/Boston/Lancaster, p 310Google Scholar
  37. IMD (2013) Monthly mean maximum and minimum temperature and total rainfall based upon 1901–2000 data. Indian Meteorological Department, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India. http://www.imd.gov.in
  38. IPCC (1996) Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for national greenhouse inventories. In: Houghton JT, Meira Filho LG, Lim B, Treanton K, Mamaty I, Bonduki Y, Griggs DJ, Callander BA (eds) IPCC/OECD/IEA, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  39. IPCC (2003) Good practice guidance for land use, land use change and forestry. In: Penman J, Gytarsky M, Hiraishi T, Krug T, Kruger D, Pipatti R, Buendia L., Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K, Wagner F (eds) Institute for global environmental strategies (IGES), Japan for the IPCCGoogle Scholar
  40. IPCC (2006) Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Volume 4, Agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFLOLU). In: Eggleston S, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K (eds) Published by the institute for global environmental strategies for the IPCC, Hayama, JapanGoogle Scholar
  41. Joshi PK, Singh S, Agarwal S, Roy PS (2001) Land cover assessment in Jammu and Kashmir using phenology as discriminant—An approach using wide swath satellite (IRS–WiFS). Curr Sci 81(4):392–398Google Scholar
  42. Kale MP, Singh S, Roy PS (2004) Biomass equations of dominant species of dry deciduous forest in Shivpuri district M.P. Curr Sci 87(5):683–687Google Scholar
  43. Kaul M, Mohren GMJ, Dadhwal VK (2010) Carbon storage and sequestration potential of selected tree species in India. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 15(5):489–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kira T (1976) Terrestrial ecosystem: a general introduction. Kyoritus-shuppan, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  45. Kirilenko A, Sedjo RA (2007) Climate change impacts on forestry. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(5):19697–19702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kishwan J, Pandey R, Dadhwal VK (2009) India’s forest and tree cover: Contribution as a carbon sink, vol 130. Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education, Dehradun, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  47. Knuchel H (1953) Planning and control in the managed forest. Oliver & BoydGoogle Scholar
  48. Kohl M, Baldauf T, Plugge D, Krug J (2009) Reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD): a climate change mitigation strategy on a critical track. Carbon Balanc Manage. doi: 10.1186/1750-0680-4-10 Google Scholar
  49. Kohl M, Lasco R, Cifuentes M, Jonsson O, Korhonen KT, Mundhenk P, de Jesus Navar J, Stinson G (2015) Changes in forest production, biomass and carbon—results from the 2015 UN FAO global forest resource assessment. For Ecol Manage 352:21–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lamlom SH, Savidge RA (2003) A reassessment of carbon content in wood: variation within and between 41 North American species. Biomass Bioenerg 25:381–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Liu Z et al (2015) Reduced carbon emission estimates from fossil fuel combustion and cement production in China. Nature 524:335–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Manhas RK, Negi JDS, Kumar R, Chauhan PS (2006) Temporal assessment of growing stock, biomass and carbon stock of Indian forests. Clim Change 74(1–3):191–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. MoEF&CC (2014) Reference document for REDD+ for India. Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Government of India, New Delhi, http://envfor.nic.in/. Accessed 07 May 2017
  54. Mokany K, Raison R, Prokushkin AS (2006) Critical analysis of root: shoot ratios in terrestrial biomes. Glob Change Biol 12:84–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mollicone D, Freibauer A, Schulze ED, Braatz S, Grassi G (2007) Elements for the expected mechanisms on ‘reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation, REDD’ under UNFCCC. Environ Res Lett 2:045024. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/2/4/045024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Olson J, Watts J, Allison L (1983) Carbon in live vegetation of major world ecosystems. Publication No. 1997. ORNL-5862. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USAGoogle Scholar
  57. Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA et al (2011) A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333(6045):988–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Petrescu AMR, Abad-Vinas R, Janssens-Maenhout G, Blujdea VNB, Grassi G (2012) Global estimates of carbon stock changes in living forest biomass: EDGARv4.3 – time series from 1990 to 2010. Biogeosciences 9:3437–3447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Petrokofsky G, Kanamaru H, Achard F, Goetz SJ, Joosten H, Holmgren P, Lehtonen A, Menton MCS, Pullin AS, Wattenbach M (2012) Comparison of methods for measuring and assessing carbon stocks and carbon stock changes in terrestrial carbon pools. How do the accuracy and precision of current methods compare? A systematic review protocol. Environ Evid 1:6. doi: 10.1186/2047-2382-1-6
  60. Prentice KC, Fung IY (1990) The sensitivity of terrestrial carbon storage to climate change. Nature 346:48–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rajput SS, Shukla NK, Gupta VM, Jain JD (1996) Timber mechanics: strength classification and grading of timber. Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education Publication, DehradunGoogle Scholar
  62. Ravindranath NH, Srivastava N, Murthy IK, Malaviya S (2012) Deforestation and forest degradation in India-implications for REDD+. Curr Sci 102(8):1117–1125Google Scholar
  63. Ruesch A, Gibbs HK (2008) New IPCC Tier-1 Global Biomass Carbon Map for the Year 2000. Available online from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center http://cdiac.ornl.gov, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
  64. Saatchi SS, Harris NL, Brown S, Lefsky M, Mitchard ETA, Salas W, Zutta BR, Buermann W, Lewis SL, Hagen S, Petrova S, White L, Silman M, Morel A (2011) Benchmark map of forest carbon stocks in tropical regions across three continents. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 108:9899–9904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sathaye J, Ravindranath NH (1998) Climate change mitigation in the energy and forestry sectors of developing countries. Annual Review of Energy and Environment 23(1):387–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Saugier B, Roy J (2001) Estimations of global terrestrial productivity; converging towards a single number? In: Roy J, Saugier B, Mooney HA (eds) Global terrestrial productivity: past, present and future. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  67. Schroeder P, Brown S, Mo J, Birdsey R, Cieszewski C (1997) Biomass estimation for temperate broadleaf forests of the United States using inventory data. Forest. Science. 43:424–434Google Scholar
  68. Sharma CM, Gairola S, Baduni NP, Ghildiyal SK, Suyal S (2011) Variation in carbon stocks on different slope aspects in seven major forest types of temperate region of Garhwal Himalaya. India. Journal of Bioscience 36(4):701–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Shoch D, Eaton J, Settelmyer S (2011) Project developer’s guidebook to VCS REDD methodologies, version/1.0, Conservation International, TerraCarbon LLCGoogle Scholar
  70. Simula M (2009) Towards defining forest degradation: comparative analysis of existing definitions. FAO FRA Working Paper 154 Rome, Italy: FAOGoogle Scholar
  71. Singh JS, Tiwari AK, Saxena AK (1985) Himalayan Forests: a net source of carbon for atmosphere. Environ Conserv 12:67–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Somogyi Z, Cienciala E, Mäkipää R, Muukkonen P, Lehtonen A, Weiss P (2007) Indirect methods of large-scale forest biomass estimation. Eur J Forest Res 126:197–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Stihl G, Bostrom B, Lindkvist H, Lindroth A, Nilsson J, Olsson M (2004) Methodological options for quantifying changes in carbon pools in Swedish forests. Studia Forestalia Suecicu 214. 46 ppGoogle Scholar
  74. Top N, Mizoue N, Kai S (2004) Estimating forest biomass increment based on permanent sample plots in relation to woodfuel consumption: a case study in Kampong Thom Province, Cambodia. J For Res 9:117–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Turner DP, Koepper GJ, Harmon ME, Lee JJ (1995) A carbon budget for forests of the conterminous United States. Ecol Appl 5:421–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. UNFCCC (2004) Estimation of emissions and removals in land-use change and forestry and issues relating to projections. Note by the secretariat. http://www.unfccc.int
  77. Wani AA, Joshi PK, Singh O, Pandey R (2012) Carbon inventory methods in Indian forests—a review. Int J Agric For 2(6):315–323Google Scholar
  78. Wani AA, Joshi PK, Singh O (2015) Estimating biomass and carbon mitigation of temperate coniferous forests in the Western Himalayan region using spectral modeling and field inventory data. Ecol Inform 25:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wani AA, Joshi PK, Singh O (2016) Multi-temporal (1980–2030) forest cover dynamics in Kashmir Himalayan region for assessing deforestation and forest degradation in the context of REDD+ policy. J Mt Sci 13(8):1431–1441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Whittaker RH, Likens GE (1973) Carbon in the biota. In: Woodwell GM, Pecan EV (eds) Carbon and the biosphere. Technical Information Center, Office of Information Services, US Atomic Energy Commission, Springfield, VA, pp 281–302Google Scholar
  81. Woodwell GM, Whittaker RH, Reiners WA, Likens GE, Delwiche CC, Botkin D (1978) The biota and the world carbon budget. Science 199:141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akhlaq Amin Wani
    • 1
  • P. K. Joshi
    • 2
  • Ombir Singh
    • 3
  • Rajesh Kumar
    • 4
  • V. R. S. Rawat
    • 5
  • Bilal A. Khaki
    • 6
  1. 1.Faculty of ForestrySher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of KashmirBenhama-Watlar, GanderbalIndia
  2. 2.School of Environmental SciencesJawaharlal Nehru UniversityNew DelhiIndia
  3. 3.Silviculture DivisionForest Research Institute (FRI)DehradunIndia
  4. 4.Forest Survey of IndiaDehradunIndia
  5. 5.Biodiversity and Climate Change DivisionIndian Council of Forestry Research and EducationDehradunIndia
  6. 6.Department of Ecology, Environment and Remote SensingGovernment of J&KBemina, SrinagarIndia

Personalised recommendations