Abstract
Carbon forestry mitigation potential estimates at the global-level are limited by the absence or simplicity of national-level estimates, and similarly national-level estimates are limited by absence of regional-level estimates. The present study aims to estimate the mitigation potential for a large diverse country such as India, based on the GTAP global land classification system of agro-ecological zones (AEZs), as well the Indian AEZ system. The study also estimates the implications of carbon price incentive (US$50 and $100) on mitigation potential in the short-, medium- and long-term, since afforestation and reforestation (A & R) is constrained by lack of investment and financial incentives. The mitigation potential for short and long rotation plantations and natural regeneration was estimated using the GCOMAP global forest model for two land area scenarios. One scenario included only wastelands (29 Mha), and the second enhanced area scenario, included wastelands plus long fallow and marginal croplands (54 Mha). Under the $100 carbon price case, significant additional area (3.6 Mha under the wasteland scenario and 6.4 Mha under the enhanced area scenario) and carbon mitigation is gained in the short-term (2025) compared to the baseline when using the GTAP land classification system. The area brought under A & R increases by 85–100% for the $100 carbon price compared to $50 carbon price in the short-term, indicating the effectiveness of higher carbon price incentives, especially in the short-term.
A comparison of estimates of mitigation potential using GTAP and Indian AEZ land classification systems showed that in the short-term, 35% additional C-stock gain is achieved in the $100 carbon price case in the enhanced area scenario of the Indian AEZ system. This difference highlights the role of the land classification system adopted in estimation of aggregate mitigation potential estimates, particularly in the short-term. Uncertainty involved in the estimates of national-level mitigation potential needs to be reduced, by generating reliable estimates of carbon stock gain and losses, and cost and benefit data, for land use sector mitigation options at a scale disaggregated enough to be relevant for national mitigation planning.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brown S, Omar M, Jayant S (2000) Project based activities. In: Land use, land use change and forestry, IPCC Special Report, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations/International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (FAO/IIASA) (1993) Agro-ecological assessments for national planning: the examples of Kenya. FAO Soils Bull 67
FSI (1999) State of forest report 1999. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Dehra Dun
IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: mitigation, contribution of working group III to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, USA
Land Use Statistics at a Glance (2001) http://agricoop.nic.in/statistics2003/chap14.htm
Lee H-L, Hertel TW et al (2005) Towards and integrated land use data base for assessing the potential for greenhouse gas mitigation. GTAP Technical Paper No. 25, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University http://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/res_display.asp?RecordID=1900
MoEF (2004) India’s initial national communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change (UNFCCC). NATCOM, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, New Delhi, http://www.natcomindia.org/
National Remote Sensing Agency NRSA (2005) Wastelands atlas of India, 2005, Government of India, Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Land Resources, New Delhi and National Remote Sensing Agency, Dept. of Space, Government of India, Balanagar, India
Ravindranath NH, Murthy IK et al (2006) Methodological issues in forestry mitigation projects: a case study of Kolar district. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change (this issue)
Ravindranath NH, Sathaye J (2002) Climate change and developing countries. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands
Ravindranath NH, Somashekhar BS (1995) Potential and economics of forestry options for carbon sequestration in India. Biomass and Bioenergy 8(5):323–336
Ravindranath NH, Sudha P et al (2001) Forestry for sustainable biomass production and carbon sequestration in India. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 6:233–256
Sathaye J, Makundi W, Dale L, Chan P, Andrasko K (2005) GHG mitigation potential, costs and benefits in global forests: a dynamic partial equilibrium approach. Energy J (in press)
Sehgal JL, Mandal DK et al (1992) Agro-ecological region of India. NBSS & LUP (ICAR) Publication 24, Nagpur
Sohngen B, Sedjo R (2005) Carbon sequestration costs in global forests. Energy J (in press)
Sudha P, Shubhashree D et al (2006) Estimating land suitability and development of regional baseline for a dominant agro-ecological zone of Karnataka, India. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change
UNEP (1997) Global environment outlook, United Nations Environment Program
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Atmospheric Programs through the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions of the authors herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or the Environmental Protection Agency. The authors would also like to thank the Ministry of Environment and Forests for supporting and encouraging the research activities on climate change at the Indian Institute of Science. We also thank Prity Sagar for her assistance in the analysis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Input data – Mean annual biomass increment data for Global GTAP and Indian AEZs
Zones | Mean annual increment (t biomass/ha/year) | |
---|---|---|
Short rotation | Long rotation | |
Global GTAP AEZ | ||
1, 7, 8 | 3.9 | 3.94 |
2 | 3.9 | 3.94 |
3 | 6.5 | 4.4 |
4 | 5.94 | 5.05 |
5 + 6 | 7.13 | 7.7 |
9 | 4.9 | 3.96 |
10–16 | 7.9 | 7.7 |
Indian AEZ | ||
1 & 14 | 3.63 | 7.37 |
2 | 4.56 | 4.82 |
3, 6, 7 | 3.35 | 4.07 |
4, 9, 13 | 5.41 | 6.63 |
5 | 3.38 | 4.93 |
8 & 19 | 3.38 | 2.01 |
10 | 4.01 | 5.07 |
11 & 12 | 3.67 | 5.02 |
15, 16, 17 | 8.74 | 5.09 |
18 | 4.66 | 5.09 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ravindranath, N.H., Murthy, I.K., Chaturvedi, R.K. et al. Carbon forestry economic mitigation potential in India, by land classification. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 12, 1027–1050 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-9063-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-9063-4