Employing Measurers of Spatial Distribution of Carbon Storage in Periyar Tiger Reserve, Southern Western Ghats, India

  • Shiju ChackoEmail author
  • C. Ravichandran
  • S. M. Vairavel
  • John Mathew


Carbon stock distribution in the protected areas (PAs) of India is rarely studied, although they constitute 21.34% of the geographical area under forest cover. A quantitative assessment of ecosystem service is used here to evaluate the PAs of India in terms of storage and spatial distribution of carbon stocks. The area selected for the study was Periyar Tiger Reserve (PTR), in the Southern Western Ghats, a UNESCO World Natural Heritage Site. Carbon storage on a land parcel largely depends on the amount of five carbon pools: aboveground biomass, belowground biomass, dead wood, litter, and soil organic matter. The Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model uses land cover types and data on the stocks in the five carbon pools to estimate the amount of carbon stored in a landscape. The InVEST model is multiservice and has a modular design that provides an effective tool for exploring the likely outcomes of alternative management and climate scenarios and for evaluating trade-offs among sectors and services. The results showed that the average carbon (C) stock in the study area was 76 t/ha, and a sum of 15.43 million tons were stored in PTR. The multiservice, modular design of the ecosystem service analysis provides decision-makers an effective tool for evaluating and managing natural resources.


Protected area Carbon stock Ecosystem service Western Ghats Periyar Tiger Reserve India 



The authors sincerely thank officers and staff of Periyar Tiger Reserve, Periyar Tiger Conservation Foundation, Kerala Forests and Wildlife Department for their encouragement and support.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The research paper complied with all the ethical standards prescribed by the Journal of Geovisualization and Spatial Analysis.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This work is original and has not been published elsewhere nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Informed Consent

The authors confirm the consent to submit the research paper in the Journal of Geovisualization and Spatial Analysis


  1. Adamowicz WL, Naidoo R, Nelson E, Polasky S, Zhang J (2011) Nature-based tourism and recreation. In: Kareiva P, Daily G, Ricketts T, Tallis H, Polasky S (eds) Natural capital: theory and practice of mapping ecosystem services. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown S (1997) Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: a primer. UN FAO Forestry paper 134. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  3. Canadell JG, Raupach MR (2008) Managing forests for climate change mitigation. Science 320:1456–1457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Capoor K, Ambrosi P (2008) State and trends of the carbon market 2008. World Bank Institute, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  5. Champion HG, Seth SK (1968) The forest types of India – a revised survey. Manager of Publication, DelhiGoogle Scholar
  6. Chandrasekharan C (1962) Forest types of Kerala state (3). Indian For 88:837–847Google Scholar
  7. Chhabra A, Palria S, Dadhwal (2004) Growing stock based forest biomass estimate for Indian forests. Biomass Bioenergy 22(3):187–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dadhwal VK, Nayak SR (1993) A preliminary estimate of biogeochemical cycle of carbon for India. Sci Cult 59(1–2):9–13Google Scholar
  9. Dadhwal VK, Shukla N, Vora AB (1997) Forest litterfall in India: a review and an estimation of litterfall carbon flux. Indian Forester 123(1):45–52Google Scholar
  10. Forest Survey of India (FSI) (2011) India state of forest report, ministry of environment, forests and climate change. FSI, DehradunGoogle Scholar
  11. Forest Survey of India (FSI) (2013) India state of forest report, ministry of environment, forests and climate change. FSI, DehradunGoogle Scholar
  12. Forest Survey of India (FSI) (2017) Carbon stocks of India’s forests, ministry of environment, forests and climate change. FSI, DehradunGoogle Scholar
  13. French Institute of Pondicherry (FIP) (1997) In: Ramesh BR, de Franceschi D, Pascal JP (eds) Vegetation map of South India - Map 6: Thiruvananthapuram – Tirunelveli. 1 sheet. FIP, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodale CL, Apps MJ, Birdse y RA, Field CB, Heath LS, Houghton RA, Jenkins JC, Kohlmaier GH, Kurz W, Liu S et al (2002) Forest carbon sinks in the northern hemisphere. Ecol Appl 12:891–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Government of India (GoI) (2014) India’s progress in combating climate change, ministry of environment, forests and climate change. GoI, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  16. Hamilton K, Sjardin M, Marcello T, Xu G (2008) Forging a frontier: state of the voluntary carbon markets 2008. Ecosystem marketplace and new carbon finance, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  17. IPCC (2000) In: Nakicenovic N, Swart R (eds) Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Lal R (2004) Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and food security. Science 304:1623–1627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lal R, Vagen TG, Singh BR (2005) Soil carbon sequestration in sub-Saharan Africa: a review. Land Degrad Dev 16:53–71Google Scholar
  20. Madhu V, Dhaval N, Chandan K, Advait E, Ashish D (2015) Economic valuation of tiger reserves in India: a value+ approach. Ministry of environment, forests and climate change. IIFM, Bhopal, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  21. Myers N, Mittermeier R, Mittermeier C, Da Fonseca G, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hot-spots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H, Cameron D, Chan K, Daily G, Goldstein J, Kareiva P, Lonsdorf E, Naidoo R, Ricketts TH, Shaw R (2008) Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at landscape scales. In: Front Ecol EnvironGoogle Scholar
  23. Pagiola S (2008) Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecol Econ 65(4):712–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ravindranath NH, Somashekhar BS, Gadgil M (1997) Carbon flows in Indian forests. Climate Change 1997(35):297–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ruesch A, Gibbs HK (2008) New IPCC tier-1 global biomass carbon map for the year 2000. Accessed 8 March 2018
  26. Satis CN (1991) The Southern Western Ghats – a biodiversity conservation plan, INTACHGoogle Scholar
  27. Shan M, Duggan JM, Eichelberger BA, McNally BW, Foster JR, Pepi E, Conte MN, Daily GC, Ziv G (2016) Valuation of ecosystem services to inform management of multiple-use landscapes. Ecosyst Serv 19(June 2016):6–18Google Scholar
  28. Sharp R, Tallis H, Ricketts T, Guerry A, Wood S, Chaplin-Kramer R, Nelson E, Ennaanay D, Wolny S, Olwero N (2014) InVEST user’s guide. The natural capital project, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  29. Shijo J, Ch Sudhakar R, Thomas AP, Srivastava SK, Srivastava VK (2010) Spatial interpolation of carbon stock: a case study from the Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot, India. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 17(6):481–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tallis HT, Ricketts T, Nelson E, Ennaanay D, Wolny S, Olwero N, Vigerstol K, Pennington D, Mendoza G, Aukema J, Foster J, Forrest J, Cameron D, Arkema K, Lonsdorf E, Kennedy C (2010) InVEST 1.004 beta User’s guide. The natural capital project, Stanford University, USAGoogle Scholar
  32. Tallis HT, Ricketts T, Guerry A, Wood S, Sharp R, Authors C (2011) InVEST 2.0.0 user’s guide. The natural capital project, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  33. Tallis HT, Ricketts T, Guerry A, Wood S, Sharp R, Chaplin-Kramer R (2013) InVEST 3.0.1 user’s guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  34. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2006) In: Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston HS, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K (eds) 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, volume 4: agriculture, forestry and other land use. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Hayama, JapanGoogle Scholar
  35. UNFCCC (2015) Climate action now. Summary for policymakers. United Nations climate change secretariat, BonnGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Periyar Tiger Conservation FoundationPeriyar Tiger ReserveThekkadyIndia
  2. 2.Department of Environmental SciencesBishop Heber CollegeThiruchirappalliIndia
  3. 3.Dept. of Forests & Wildlife, Government of KeralaState Forest Training InstituteArippaIndia

Personalised recommendations