<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/rss.css" type="text/css"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
    xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:extra="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
    xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
    <channel rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/feeds/latestarticles/journal?quantity=&amp;format=rss&amp;version=">
        <title>Carbon Balance and Management - Latest Articles</title>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com</link>
        <description>The latest research articles published by Carbon Balance and Management</description>
        <dc:date>2012-02-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/3" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/2" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/1" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/18" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/17" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/16" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/15" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/14" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/13" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/12" />
                            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
                 <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </channel>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/3">
        <title>How sensitive are estimates of carbon fixation in agricultural models to input data?</title>
        <description>Background:
Process based vegetation models are central to understand the hydrological and carbon cycle. To achieve useful results at regional to global scales, such models require various input data from a wide range of earth observations. Since the geographical extent of these datasets varies from local to global scale, data quality and validity is of major interest when they are chosen for use. It is important to assess the effect of different input datasets in terms of quality to model outputs. In this article, we reflect on both: the uncertainty in input data and the reliability of model results. For our case study analysis we selected the Marchfeld region in Austria. We used independent meteorological datasets from the Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF). Land cover / land use information was taken from the GLC2000 and the CORINE 2000 products.
Results:
For our case study analysis we selected two different process based models: the Environmental Policy Integrated Climate (EPIC) and the Biosphere Energy Transfer Hydrology (BETHY/DLR) model. Both process models show a congruent pattern to changes in input data. The annual variability of NPP reaches 36% for BETHY/DLR and 39% for EPIC when changing major input datasets. However, EPIC is less sensitive to meteorological input data than BETHY/DLR. The ECMWF maximum temperatures show a systematic pattern. Temperatures above 20degreesC are overestimated, whereas temperatures below 20degreesC are underestimated, resulting in an overall underestimation of NPP in both models. Besides, BETHY/DLR is sensitive to the choice and accuracy of the land cover product.DiscussionThis study shows that the impact of input data uncertainty on modelling results need to be assessed: whenever the models are applied under new conditions, local data should be used for both input and result comparison.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/3</link>
                <dc:creator>Markus Tum</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Franziska Strauss</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ian McCallum</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Kurt Gunther</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Erwin Schmid</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:3</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-02-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-3</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-3-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>3</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-02-01T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/2">
        <title>Human and Environmental Controls over Aboveground Carbon Storage in Madagascar</title>
        <description>Background:
Accurate, high-resolution mapping of aboveground carbon density (ACD, Mg C ha-1) could provide insight into human and environmental controls over ecosystem state and functioning, and could support conservation and climate policy development.  However, mapping ACD has proven challenging, particularly in spatially complex regions harboring a mosaic of land use activities, or in remote montane areas that are difficult to access and poorly understood ecologically.  Using a combination of field measurements, airborne Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) and satellite data, we present the first large-scale, high-resolution estimates of aboveground carbon stocks in Madagascar.
Results:
We found that elevation and the fraction of photosynthetic vegetation (PV) cover, analyzed throughout forests of widely varying structure and condition, account for 27-67% of the spatial variation in ACD.  This finding facilitated spatial extrapolation of LiDAR-based carbon estimates to a total of 2,372,680 ha using satellite data.  Remote, humid sub-montane forests harbored the highest carbon densities, while ACD was suppressed in dry spiny forests and in montane humid ecosystems, as well as in most lowland areas with heightened human activity.  Independent of human activity, aboveground carbon stocks were subject to strong physiographic controls expressed through variation in tropical forest canopy structure measured using airborne LiDAR.
Conclusions:
High-resolution mapping of carbon stocks is possible in remote regions, with or without human activity, and thus carbon monitoring can be brought to highly endangered Malagasy forests as a climate-change mitigation and biological conservation strategy.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/2</link>
                <dc:creator>Gregory Asner</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>John Clark</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Joseph Mascaro</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Romuald Vaudry</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>K Chadwick</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ghislain Vieilledent</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Maminiaina Rasamoelina</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Aravindh Balaji</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ty Kennedy-Bowdoin</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Lena Maatoug</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Matthew Colgan</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>David Knapp</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:2</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-01-30T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-2</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-2-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>2</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-01-30T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/1">
        <title>Estimates of carbon stored in harvested wood products from the United States Forest Service Northern Region, 1906-2010. </title>
        <description>Background:
Global forests capture and store significant amounts of CO2 through photosynthesis.  When carbon is removed from forests through harvest, a portion of the harvested carbon is stored in wood products, often for many decades.  The United States Forest Service (USFS) and other agencies are interested in accurately accounting for carbon flux associated with harvested wood products (HWP) to meet greenhouse gas monitoring commitments and climate change adaptation and mitigation objectives. This paper uses the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) production accounting approach and the California Forest Project Protocol (CFPP) to estimate HWP carbon storage from 1906 to 2010 for the USFS Northern Region, which includes forests in northern Idaho, Montana, South Dakota, and eastern Washington.
Results:
Based on the IPCC approach, carbon stocks in the HWP pool were increasing at one million megagrams of carbon (MgC) per year in the mid 1960s, with peak cumulative storage of 28 million MgC occurring in 1995. Net positive flux into the HWP pool over this period is primarily attributable to high harvest levels in the mid twentieth century.  Harvest levels declined after 1970, resulting in less carbon entering the HWP pool. Since 1995, emissions from HWP at solid waste disposal sites have exceeded additions from harvesting, resulting in a decline in the total amount of carbon stored in the HWP pool. The CFPP approach shows a similar trend, with 100-year average carbon storage for each annual Northern Region harvest peaking in 1969 at 937,900 MgC, and fluctuating between 84,000 and 150,000 MgC over the last decade.
Conclusions:
The Northern Region HWP pool is now in a period of negative net annual stock change because the decay of products harvested between 1906 and 2010 exceeds additions of carbon to the HWP pool through harvest. However, total forest carbon includes both HWP and ecosystem carbon, which may have increased over the study period. Though our emphasis is on the Northern Region, we provide a framework by which the IPCC and CFPP methods can be applied broadly at sub-national scales to other regions, land management units, or firms.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/1</link>
                <dc:creator>Keith Stockmann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Nathaniel Anderson</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Kenneth Skog</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sean Healey</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Dan Loeffler</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Greg Jones</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>James Morrison</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:1</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-01-13T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-1</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-1-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-01-13T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/18">
        <title>Historic Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Mato Grosso, Brazil: 1) Source Data Uncertainties</title>
        <description>Background:
Historic carbon emissions are an important foundation for proposed efforts to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation and enhance forest carbon stocks through conservation and sustainable forest management (REDD+). The level of uncertainty in historic carbon emissions estimates is also critical for REDD+, since high uncertainties could limit climate benefits from credited mitigation actions. Here, we analyzed source data uncertainties based on the range of available deforestation, forest degradation, and forest carbon stock estimates for the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso during 1990-2008.
Results:
Deforestation estimates showed good agreement for multi-year periods of increasing and decreasing deforestation during the study period. However, annual deforestation rates differed by &gt; 20% in more than half of the years between 1997-2008, even for products based on similar input data. Tier 2 estimates of average forest carbon stocks varied between 99-192 Mg C ha-1, with greatest differences in northwest Mato Grosso. Carbon stocks in deforested areas increased over the study period, yet this increasing trend in deforested biomass was smaller than the difference among carbon stock datasets for these areas.
Conclusions:
Estimates of source data uncertainties are essential for REDD+. Patterns of spatial and temporal disagreement among available data products provide a roadmap for future efforts to reduce source data uncertainties for estimates of historic forest carbon emissions. Specifically, regions with large discrepancies in available estimates of both deforestation and forest carbon stocks are priority areas for evaluating and improving existing estimates. Full carbon accounting for REDD+ will also require filling data gaps, including forest degradation and secondary forest, with annual data on all forest transitions.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/18</link>
                <dc:creator>Douglas Morton</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Marcio Sales</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Carlos Souza</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Bronson Griscom</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2011, null:18</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-30T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-6-18</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-6-18-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>18</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-30T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/17">
        <title>Management Impacts on Forest Floor and Soil Organic Carbon in Northern Temperate Forests of the US
</title>
        <description>Background:
The role of forests in the global carbon cycle has been the subject of a great deal of research recently, but the impact of management practices on forest soil dynamics at the stand level has received less attention.  This study used six forest management experimental sites in five northern states of the US to investigate the effects of silvicultural treatments (light thinning, heavy thinning, and clearcutting) on forest floor and soil carbon pools.
Results:
No overall trend was found between forest floor carbon stocks in stands subjected to partial or complete harvest treatments.  A few sites had larger stocks in control plots, although estimates were often highly variable.  Forest floor carbon pools did show a trend of increasing values from southern to northern sites.  Surface soil (0-5 cm) organic carbon content and concentration were similar between treated and untreated plots.  Overall soil carbon (0-20 cm) pool size was not significantly different from control values in sites treated with partial or complete harvests.  No geographic trends were evident for any of the soil properties examined.
Conclusions:
Results indicate that it is unlikely that mineral soil carbon stocks are adversely affected by typical management practices as applied in northern hardwood forests in the US; however, the findings suggest that the forest floor carbon pool may be susceptible to loss.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/17</link>
                <dc:creator>Coeli Hoover</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2011, null:17</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-29T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-6-17</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-6-17-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>17</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-29T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/16">
        <title>Dealing with locally-driven degradation: A quick start option under REDD+
</title>
        <description>The paper reviews a number of challenges associated with reducing degradation and its related emissions through national approaches to REDD+ under UNFCCC policy.  It proposes that in many countries, it may in the short run be easier to deal with the kinds of degradation that result from locally driven community over-exploitation of forest for livelihoods, than from selective logging or fire control.  Such degradation is low-level, but chronic, and is experienced over very large forest areas. Community forest management programmes tend to result not only in reduced degradation, but also in forest enhancement; moreover they are often popular, and do not require major political shifts.  In principle these approaches therefore offer a quick start option for REDD+.   Developing reference emissions levels for low-level locally driven degradation is difficult however given that stock losses and gains are too small to be identified and measured using remote sensing, and that in most countries there is little or no forest inventory data available.  We therefore propose that forest management initiatives at the local level, such as those promoted by community forest management programmes, should monitor, and be credited for, only the net increase in carbon stock over the implementation period, as assessed by ground level surveys at the start and end of the period.   This would also resolve the problem of nesting (ensuring that all credits are accounted for against the national reference emission level), since communities and others at the local level would be rewarded only for increased sequestration, while the national reference emission level would deal only with reductions in emissions from deforestation and degradation.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/16</link>
                <dc:creator>Margaret Skutsch</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Arturo Balderas Torres</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Tuyeni Mwampamba</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Adrian Ghilardi</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Martin Herold</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2011, null:16</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-28T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-6-16</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-6-16-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>16</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-28T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/15">
        <title>Forest carbon stocks and fluxes in physiographic zones of India </title>
        <description>Background:
Reducing carbon Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) is of central importance to combat climate change. Foremost among the challenges is quantifying nation&apos;s carbon emissions from deforestation and degradation, which requires information on forest carbon storage. Here we estimated carbon storage in India&apos;s forest biomass for the years 2003, 2005 and 2007 and the net flux caused by deforestation and degradation, between two assessment periods i.e., Assessment Period first (ASP I), 2003-2005 and Assessment Period second (ASP II),  2005-2007.
Results:
The total estimated carbon stock in India&apos;s forest biomass varied from 3325 to 3161 Mt during the years 2003 to 2007 respectively. There was a net flux of 372 Mt of CO2 in ASP I and 288 Mt of CO2 in ASP II, with an annual emission of 186 and 114 Mt of CO2 respectively. The carbon stock in India&apos;s forest biomass decreased continuously from 2003 onwards, despite slight increase in forest cover. The rate of carbon loss from the forest biomass in ASP II has dropped by 38.27 % compared to ASP I.
Conclusion:
With the Copenhagen Accord, India along with other BASIC countries China, Brazil and South Africa is voluntarily going to cut emissions. India will voluntary reduce the emission intensity of its GDP by 20-25 % by 2020 in comparison to 2005 level, activities like REDD+ can provide a relatively cost-effective way of offsetting emissions, either by increasing the removals of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere by afforestation programmes, managing forests, or by reducing emissions through deforestation and degradation.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/15</link>
                <dc:creator>Mehraj Sheikh</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Munesh Kumar</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Rainer Bussmann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>N. Todaria</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2011, null:15</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-25T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-6-15</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-6-15-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>15</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-25T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/14">
        <title>Accounting for density reduction and structural loss in standing dead trees: Implications for forest biomass and carbon stock estimates in the United States</title>
        <description>Background:
Standing dead trees are one component of forest ecosystem dead wood carbon (C) pools, whose national stock is estimated by the U.S. as required by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Historically, standing dead tree C has been estimated as a function of live tree growing stock volume in the U.S.&apos;s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory. Initiated in 1998, the USDA Forest Service&apos;s Forest Inventory and Analysis program (responsible for compiling the Nation&apos;s forest C estimates) began consistent nationwide sampling of standing dead trees, which may now supplant previous purely model-based approaches to standing dead biomass and C stock estimation. A substantial hurdle to estimating standing dead tree biomass and C attributes is that traditional estimation procedures are based on merchantability paradigms that may not reflect density reductions or structural loss due to decomposition common in standing dead trees. The goal of this study was to incorporate standing dead tree adjustments into the current estimation procedures and assess how biomass and C stocks change at multiple spatial scales.
Results:
Accounting for decay and structural loss in standing dead trees significantly decreased tree- and plot-level biomass estimates (and subsequent C stocks) by decay class and tree component. At a regional scale, incorporating adjustment factors decreased standing dead quaking aspen biomass estimates by almost 50 percent in the Lake States and Douglas-fir estimates by more than 36 percent in the Pacific Northwest.
Conclusions:
Substantial overestimates of standing dead tree biomass and C stocks occur when one does not account for density reductions or structural loss. Forest inventory estimation procedures that are descended from merchantability standards may need to be revised toward a more holistic approach to determining standing dead tree biomass and C attributes (i.e., attributes of tree biomass outside of sawlog portions). Incorporating density reductions and structural loss adjustments reduces uncertainty associated with standing dead tree biomass and C while improving consistency with field methods and documentation.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/14</link>
                <dc:creator>Grant Domke</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Christopher Woodall</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>James Smith</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2011, null:14</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-24T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-6-14</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-6-14-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>14</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-24T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/13">
        <title>Options for monitoring and estimating historical carbon emissions from forest degradation in the context of REDD+</title>
        <description>Measuring forest degradation and related forest carbon stock changes is more challenging than measuring deforestation since degradation implies changes in the structure of the forest and does not entail a change in land use, making it less easily detectable through remote sensing. Although we anticipate the use of the IPCC guidance under the United Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), there is no one single method for monitoring forest degradation for the case of REDD+ policy. In this review paper we highlight that the choice depends upon a number of factors including the type of degradation, available historical data, capacities and resources, and the potentials and limitations of various measurement and monitoring approaches. Current degradation rates can be measured through field data (i.e. multi-date national forest inventories and permanent sample plot data, commercial forestry data sets, proxy data from domestic markets) and/or remote sensing data (i.e. direct mapping of canopy and forest structural changes or indirect mapping through modelling approaches), with the combination of techniques providing the best options. Developing countries frequently lack consistent historical field data for assessing past forest degradation, and so must rely more on remote sensing approaches mixed with current field assessments of carbon stock changes. Historical degradation estimates will have larger uncertainties as it will be difficult to determine their accuracy. However improving monitoring capacities for systematic forest degradation estimates today will help reduce uncertainties even for historical estimates.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/13</link>
                <dc:creator>Martin Herold</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Rosa Maria Roman-Cuesta</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Danilo Mollicone</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Yasumasa Hirata</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Patrick Van Laake</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gregory Asner</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Carlos Souza</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Margaret Skutsch</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Valerio Avitabile</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ken MacDicken</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2011, null:13</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-24T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-6-13</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-6-13-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>13</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-24T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/12">
        <title>Forest cover:  Setting Targets for the Future</title>
        <description>The International Year of Forests, declared by the UN, is a good occasion to discuss approaches to reducing forest degradation in developing countries. The articles collected in Thematic Forest Series form a diversity of ideas which is essential for setting the levels below which the countries&apos; reduced emissions could be measured and credited. This editorial calls attention to the use of Land-Use/Land-Cover Change models.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/6/1/12</link>
                <dc:creator>Georgii Alexandrov</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2011, null:12</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-24T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-6-12</dc:identifier>
                            <dc:title>Setting country specific targets for forest conservation</dc:title>
                            <dc:description>Dr Georgii Alexandrov, co Editor-in-Chief of Carbon Balance and Management, introduces the new thematic series &apos;Forests: Looking to the Future&apos; and discusses the importance of Land-Use/Land-Cover Change models in setting forest conservation targets.</dc:description>
                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-6-12-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>12</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-24T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/">
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
    </cc:License>
</rdf:RDF>

