<?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>2013-05-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/5" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/4" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/3" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/2" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/1" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/12" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/11" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/10" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/9" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/8" />
                            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
                 <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </channel>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/5">
        <title>The State of Climate Negotiations: a personal scientific commentary</title>
        <description>Humanity seems unable to rein in its CO2 emissions, and yet the author finds reasons for hope.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/5</link>
                <dc:creator>David Archer</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2013, null:5</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2013-05-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-8-5</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-8-5-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>5</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2013-05-15T00:00:00Z</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/8/1/4">
        <title>Carbon benefits from protected areas in the conterminous United States</title>
        <description>Background:
Conversion of forests to other land cover or land use releases the carbon stored in the forests and reduces carbon sequestration potential of the land. The rate of forest conversion could be reduced by establishing protected areas for biological diversity and other conservation goals. The purpose of this study is to quantify the efficiency and potential of forest land protection for mitigating GHG emissions.
Results:
The analysis of related national-level datasets shows that during the period of 1992&#8211;2001 net forest losses in protected areas were small as compared to those in unprotected areas: -0.74% and &#8722;4.07%, respectively. If forest loss rates in protected and unprotected area had been similar, then forest losses in the protected forestlands would be larger by 870 km2/yr forests, that corresponds to release of 7 Tg C/yr (1 Tg=1012 g). Conversely, and continuing to assume no leakage effects or interactions of prices and harvest levels, about 1,200 km2/yr forests could have remained forest during the period of 1992&#8211;2001 if net area loss rate in the forestland outside protected areas was reduced by 20%. Not counting carbon in harvested wood products, this is equivalent to reducing fossil-fuel based carbon emissions by 10 Tg C/yr during this period. The South and West had much higher potentials to mitigate GHG emission from reducing loss rates in unprotected forests than that of North region. Spatially, rates of forest loss were higher across the coastal states in the southeastern US than would be expected from their population change, while interior states in the northern US experienced less forest area loss than would have been expected given their demographic characteristics.
Conclusions:
The estimated carbon benefit from the reduced forest loss based on current protected areas is 7 Tg C/yr, equivalent to the average carbon benefit per year for a previously proposed ten-year $110 million per year tree planting program scenario in the US. If there had been a program that could have reduced forest area loss by 20% in unprotected forestlands during 1992&#8211;2001, collectively the benefits from reduced forest loss would be equal to 9.4% of current net forest ecosystem carbon sequestration in the conterminous US.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/4</link>
                <dc:creator>Daolan Zheng</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Linda Heath</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mark Ducey</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2013, null:4</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2013-04-17T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-8-4</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-8-4-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>4</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2013-04-17T00:00:00Z</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/8/1/3">
        <title>Case study for the assessment of the biogeophysical effects of a potential afforestation in Europe</title>
        <description>Background:
A regional-scale sensitivity study has been carried out to investigate the climatic effects of forest cover change in Europe. Applying REMO (regional climate model of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology), the projected temperature and precipitation tendencies have been analysed for summer, based on the results of the A2 IPCC-SRES emission scenario simulation. For the end of the 21st century it has been studied, whether the assumed forest cover increase could reduce the effects of the greenhouse gas concentration change.
Results:
Based on the simulation results, biogeophysical effects of the hypothetic potential afforestation may lead to cooler and moister conditions during summer in most parts of the temperate zone. The largest relative effects of forest cover increase can be expected in northern Germany, Poland and Ukraine, which is 15&#8211;20% of the climate change signal for temperature and more than 50% for precipitation. In northern Germany and France, potential afforestation may enhance the effects of emission change, resulting in more severe heavy precipitation events. The probability of dry days and warm temperature extremes would decrease.
Conclusions:
Large contiguous forest blocks can have distinctive biogeophysical effect on the climate on regional and local scale. In certain regions of the temperate zone, climate change signal due to greenhouse gas emission can be reduced by afforestation due to the dominant evaporative cooling effect during summer. Results of this case study with a hypothetical land cover change can contribute to the assessment of the role of forests in adapting to climate change. Thus they can build an important basis of the future forest policy.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/3</link>
                <dc:creator>Borbála Gálos</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Stefan Hagemann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Andreas Hänsler</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Georg Kindermann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Diana Rechid</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Kevin Sieck</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Claas Teichmann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Daniela Jacob</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2013, null:3</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2013-02-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-8-3</dc:identifier>
                                    <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;Based atmospheric carbon projections and a climate change model, afforestation may be an effective strategy to mitigate for increases in temperature in Europe. Planting of deciduous forests is predicted to decrease temperatures and increase precipitation across many areas.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-8-3-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>2013-02-01T00:00:00Z</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/8/1/2">
        <title>Potential stocks and increments of woody biomass in the European Union under different management and climate scenarios</title>
        <description>Background:
Forests play an important role in the global carbon flow. They can store carbon and can also provide wood which can substitute other materials. In EU27 the standing biomass is steadily increasing. Increments and harvests seem to have reached a plateau between 2005 and 2010. One reason for reaching this plateau will be the circumstance that the forests are getting older. High ages have the advantage that they typical show high carbon concentration and the disadvantage that the increment rates are decreasing. It should be investigated how biomass stock, harvests and increments will develop under different climate scenarios and two management scenarios where one is forcing to store high biomass amounts in forests and the other tries to have high increment rates and much harvested wood.
Results:
A management which is maximising standing biomass will raise the stem wood carbon stocks from 30 tC/ha to 50 tC/ha until 2100. A management which is maximising increments will lower the stock to 20 tC/ha until 2100. The estimates for the climate scenarios A1b, B1 and E1 are different but there is much more effect by the management target than by the climate scenario. By maximising increments the harvests are 0.4 tC/ha/year higher than in the management which maximises the standing biomass. The increments until 2040 are close together but around 2100 the increments when maximising standing biomass are approximately 50 % lower than those when maximising increments. Cold regions will benefit from the climate changes in the climate scenarios by showing higher increments.
Conclusions:
The results of this study suggest that forest management should maximise increments, not stocks to be more efficient in sense of climate change mitigation. This is true especially for regions which have already high carbon stocks in forests, what is the case in many regions in Europe. During the time span 2010&#8211;2100 the forests of EU27 will absorb additional 1750 million tC if they are managed to maximise increments compared if they are managed to maximise standing biomass. Incentives which will increase the standing biomass beyond the increment optimal biomass should therefore be avoided. Mechanisms which will maximise increments and sustainable harvests need to be developed to have substantial amounts of wood which can be used as substitution of non sustainable materials.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/2</link>
                <dc:creator>Georg Kindermann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Stefan Schörghuber</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Tapio Linkosalo</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Anabel Sanchez</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Werner Rammer</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Rupert Seidl</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Manfred Lexer</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2013, null:2</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2013-02-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-8-2</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-8-2-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>2013-02-01T00:00:00Z</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/8/1/1">
        <title>Imputing forest carbon stock estimates from inventory plots to a nationally continuous coverage</title>
        <description>The U.S. has been providing national-scale estimates of forest carbon (C) stocks and stock change to meet United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) reporting requirements for years. Although these currently are provided as national estimates by pool and year to meet greenhouse gas monitoring requirements, there is growing need to disaggregate these estimates to finer scales to enable strategic forest management and monitoring activities focused on various ecosystem services such as C storage enhancement. Through application of a nearest-neighbor imputation approach, spatially extant estimates of forest C density were developed for the conterminous U.S. using the U.S.&#8217;s annual forest inventory. Results suggest that an existing forest inventory plot imputation approach can be readily modified to provide raster maps of C density across a range of pools (e.g., live tree to soil organic carbon) and spatial scales (e.g., sub-county to biome). Comparisons among imputed maps indicate strong regional differences across C pools. The C density of pools closely related to detrital input (e.g., dead wood) is often highest in forests suffering from recent mortality events such as those in the northern Rocky Mountains (e.g., beetle infestations). In contrast, live tree carbon density is often highest on the highest quality forest sites such as those found in the Pacific Northwest. Validation results suggest strong agreement between the estimates produced from the forest inventory plots and those from the imputed maps, particularly when the C pool is closely associated with the imputation model (e.g., aboveground live biomass and live tree basal area), with weaker agreement for detrital pools (e.g., standing dead trees). Forest inventory imputed plot maps provide an efficient and flexible approach to monitoring diverse C pools at national (e.g., UNFCCC) and regional scales (e.g., Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation projects) while allowing timely incorporation of empirical data (e.g., annual forest inventory).</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/8/1/1</link>
                <dc:creator>Barry Wilson</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Christopher Woodall</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Douglas Griffith</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2013, null:1</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2013-01-11T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-8-1</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-8-1-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>2013-01-11T00:00:00Z</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/7/1/12">
        <title>Total carbon accumulation in a tropical forest landscape</title>
        <description>{\bf Background}: Regrowing tropical forests worldwide sequester important amounts of carbon and restore part of the C emissions emitted by deforestation. However, there are large uncertainties concerning the rates of carbon accumulation after the abandonment of agricultural and pasture land. We report here accumulation of total carbon stocks (TCS) in a chronosequence of secondary forests at a mid-elevation landscape (900-1200 m asl) in the Andean mountains of Colombia. \\{\bf Results}: We found positive accumulation rates for all ecosystem pools except soil carbon, which showed no significant trend of recovery after 36 years of secondary succession. We used these data to develop a simple model to predict accumulation of TCS over time. This model performed remarkably well predicting TCS at other chronosequences in the Americas (Root Mean Square Error $&lt; 40$ Mg C ha$^{-1}$), which provided an opportunity to explore different assumptions in the calculation of large-scale carbon budgets. Simulations of TCS with our empirical model were used to test three assumptions often made in carbon budgets: 1) the use of carbon accumulation in tree aboveground biomass as a surrogate for accumulation of TCS, 2) the implicit consideration of carbon legacies from previous land-use, and 3) the omission of  landscape age in calculating accumulation rates of TCS. \\{\bf Conclusions}: Our simulations showed that in many situations carbon can be released from regrowing secondary forests depending on the amount of carbon legacies and the average age of the landscape. In most cases, the rates used to predict carbon accumulation in the Americas were above the rates predicted in our simulations. These biome level rates seemed to be realistic only in landscapes not affected by carbon legacies from previous land-use and mean ages of around 10 years.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/12</link>
                <dc:creator>Carlos Sierra</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jorge del Valle</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Hector Restrepo</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:12</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-12-19T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-12</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-12-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>2012-12-19T00:00:00Z</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/7/1/11">
        <title>Revaluing unmanaged forests for climate change mitigation</title>
        <description>Background:
Unmanaged or old-growth forests are of paramount importance for carbon sequestration and thus for the mitigation of climate change among further implications, e.g. biodiversity aspects. Still, the importance of those forests for climate change mitigation compared to managed forests is under controversial debate. We evaluate the adequacy of referring to CO2 flux measurements alone and include external impacts on growth (nitrogen immissions, increasing temperatures, CO2 enrichment, changed precipitation patterns) for an evaluation of central European forests in this context.
Results:
We deduce that the use of CO2 flux measurements alone does not allow conclusions on a superiority of unmanaged to managed forests for mitigation goals. This is based on the critical consideration of uncertainties and the application of system boundaries. Furthermore, the consideration of wood products for material and energetic substitution obviously overrules the mitigation potential of unmanaged forests. Moreover, impacts of nitrogen immissions, CO2 enrichment of the atmosphere, increasing temperatures and changed precipitation patterns obviously lead to a meaningful increase in growth, even in forests of higher age.
Conclusions:
An impact of unmanaged forests on climate change mitigation cannot be valued by CO2 flux measurements alone. Further research is needed on cause and effect relationships between management practices and carbon stocks in different compartments of forest ecosystems in order to account for human-induced changes. Unexpected growth rates in old-growth forests &#8211; managed or not &#8211; can obviously be related to external impacts and additionally to management impacts. This should lead to the reconsideration of forest management strategies.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/11</link>
                <dc:creator>Joachim Krug</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Michael Koehl</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Dierk Kownatzki</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:11</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-11-14T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-11</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-11-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>11</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-11-14T00:00:00Z</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/7/1/10">
        <title>A sample design for globally consistent biomass estimation using lidar data from the Geoscience Laser Altimeter System (GLAS)</title>
        <description>Background:
Lidar height data collected by the Geosciences Laser Altimeter System (GLAS) from 2002 to 2008 has the potential to form the basis of a globally consistent sample-based inventory of forest biomass. GLAS lidar return data were collected globally in spatially discrete full waveform &#8220;shots,&#8221; which have been shown to be strongly correlated with aboveground forest biomass. Relationships observed at spatially coincident field plots may be used to model biomass at all GLAS shots, and well-established methods of model-based inference may then be used to estimate biomass and variance for specific spatial domains. However, the spatial pattern of GLAS acquisition is neither random across the surface of the earth nor is it identifiable with any particular systematic design. Undefined sample properties therefore hinder the use of GLAS in global forest sampling.
Results:
We propose a method of identifying a subset of the GLAS data which can justifiably be treated as a simple random sample in model-based biomass estimation. The relatively uniform spatial distribution and locally arbitrary positioning of the resulting sample is similar to the design used by the US national forest inventory (NFI). We demonstrated model-based estimation using a sample of GLAS data in the US state of California, where our estimate of biomass (211 Mg/hectare) was within the 1.4% standard error of the design-based estimate supplied by the US NFI. The standard error of the GLAS-based estimate was significantly higher than the NFI estimate, although the cost of the GLAS estimate (excluding costs for the satellite itself) was almost nothing, compared to at least US$ 10.5 million for the NFI estimate.
Conclusions:
Global application of model-based estimation using GLAS, while demanding significant consolidation of training data, would improve inter-comparability of international biomass estimates by imposing consistent methods and a globally coherent sample frame. The methods presented here constitute a globally extensible approach for generating a simple random sample from the global GLAS dataset, enabling its use in forest inventory activities.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/10</link>
                <dc:creator>Sean Healey</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Paul Patterson</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sassan Saatchi</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Michael Lefsky</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Andrew Lister</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Elizabeth Freeman</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:10</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-10-31T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-10</dc:identifier>
                            <dc:title>Estimating global forest biomass</dc:title>
                            <dc:description>Using this new model design, global forest biomass could be estimated using lidar height measurements recorded on board the Ice Cloud and Elevation Satellite mission (ICESat). Measuring and monitoring forest biomass of global importance as it is a large store of carbon and may mitigate for global climate change.</dc:description>
                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-10-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>Carbon Balance and Management</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1750-0680</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>10</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-10-31T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/9">
        <title>A bottom-up approach to estimating cost elements of REDD+ pilot projects in Tanzania</title>
        <description>Background:
Several previous global REDD+ cost studies have been conducted, demonstrating that payments for maintaining forest carbon stocks have significant potential to be a cost-effective mechanism for climate change mitigation. These studies have mostly followed highly aggregated top-down approaches without estimating the full range of REDD+ costs elements, thus underestimating the actual costs of REDD+. Based on three REDD+ pilot projects in Tanzania, representing an area of 327,825 ha, this study explicitly adopts a bottom-up approach to data assessment. By estimating opportunity, implementation, transaction and institutional costs of REDD+ we develop a practical and replicable methodological framework to consistently assess REDD+ cost elements.
Results:
Based on historical land use change patterns, current region-specific economic conditions and carbon stocks, project-specific opportunity costs ranged between US$ -7.8 and 28.8 tCOxxxx for deforestation and forest degradation drivers such as agriculture, fuel wood production, unsustainable timber extraction and pasture expansion. The mean opportunity costs for the three projects ranged between US$ 10.1 &#8211; 12.5 tCO2. Implementation costs comprised between 89% and 95% of total project costs (excluding opportunity costs) ranging between US$ 4.5 - 12.2 tCO2 for a period of 30 years. Transaction costs for measurement, reporting, verification (MRV), and other carbon market related compliance costs comprised a minor share, between US$ 0.21 - 1.46 tCO2. Similarly, the institutional costs comprised around 1% of total REDD+ costs in a range of US$ 0.06 &#8211; 0.11 tCO2.
Conclusions:
The use of bottom-up approaches to estimate REDD+ economics by considering regional variations in economic conditions and carbon stocks has been shown to be an appropriate approach to provide policy and decision-makers robust economic information on REDD+. The assessment of opportunity costs is a crucial first step to provide information on the economic baseline situation of deforestation and forest degradation agents and on the economic incentives required to halt unsustainable land use. Since performance based REDD+ carbon payments decrease over time (as deforestation rates drop and for each saved ha of forest payments occur once), investments in REDD+ implementation have a crucial role in triggering sustainable land use systems by investing in the underlying assets and the generation of sustainable revenue streams to compensate for opportunity costs of land use change. With a potential increase in the land value due to effective REDD+ investments, expenditures in an enabling institutional environment for REDD+ policies are crucial to avoid higher deforestation pressure on natural forests.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/9</link>
                <dc:creator>Eduard Merger</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Christian Held</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Timm Tennigkeit</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Tom Blomley</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:9</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-08-09T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-9</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-9-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>9</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-08-09T00:00:00Z</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/7/1/8">
        <title>Forest carbon in North America: annual storage and
emissions from British Columbia&apos;s harvest, 1965-
2065</title>
        <description>Background:
The default international accounting rules estimate the carbon emissions from forest products by assuming all harvest is immediately emitted to the atmosphere. This makes it difficult to assess the greenhouse gas (GHG) consequences of different forest management or manufacturing activities that maintain the storage of carbon. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) addresses this issue by allowing other accounting methods. The objective of this paper is to provide a new model for estimating annual stock changes of carbon in harvested wood products (HWP).
Results:
The model, British Columbia Harvested Wood Products version 1 (BC-HWPv1), estimates carbon stocks and fluxes for wood harvested in BC from 1965 to 2065, based on new parameters on local manufacturing, updated and new information for North America on consumption and disposal of wood and paper products, and updated parameters on methane management at landfills in the USA. Based on model results, reporting on emissions as they occur would substantially lower BC&#8217;s greenhouse gas inventory in 2010 from 48 Mt CO2 to 26 Mt CO2 because of the long-term forest carbon storage in-use and in the non-degradable material in landfills. In addition, if offset projects created under BC&#8217;s protocol reported 100&#8201;year cumulative emissions using the BC-HWPv1 the emissions would be lower by about 11%.
Conclusions:
This research showed that the IPCC default methods overestimate the emissions North America wood products. Future IPCC GHG accounting methods could include a lower emissions factor (e.g. 0.52) multiplied by the annual harvest, rather than the current multiplier of 1.0. The simulations demonstrated that the primary opportunities for climate change mitigation are in shifting from burning mill waste to using the wood for longer-lived products.</description>
        <link>http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/8</link>
                <dc:creator>Caren Dymond</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>Carbon Balance and Management 2012, null:8</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-07-24T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-8</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1750-0680-7-8-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>8</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-07-24T00:00:00Z</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>
