Forest carbon leakage quantification methods and their suitability for assessing leakage in REDD

Forests

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 33-58

  Henders, Sabine ^a   Ostwald, Madelene ^a,b  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Forest carbon accounting standards; International leakage; National scale accounting; Primary and secondary leakage; Scientific literature

Indexed keywords

ACCOUNTING METHODS; CARBON ACCOUNTING; CARBON LEAKAGE; CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM; FOREST DEGRADATION; GEOGRAPHICAL SCALE; LEAKAGE ASSESSMENT; LITERATURE REVIEWS; METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH; PRE-REQUISITES; QUANTIFICATION METHODS; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE;

DEFORESTATION;

EMISSION CONTROL;

BIODEGRADATION; CARBON EMISSION; DEFORESTATION; FORESTRY; LITERATURE REVIEW; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

ACCOUNTING; CARBON; DEFORESTATION; STANDARDS;

EID: 84869240972     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19994907     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/f3010033     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. The process around REDD has developed to present REDD+ where the + refers to forest conservation, sustainable forest management and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. For the scope of this study we refer to REDD as any activities related to maintaining and enhancing forest to keep carbon stored in the biomass.
2. Cerbu, G.A.; Swallow, B.M.; Thompson, D.Y. Locating REDD: A global survey and analysis of REDD readiness and demonstration activities. Environ. Sci. Policy 2011, 14, 168-180.
3. Angelsen, A. The 3 REDD 'I's. J. For. Econ. 2010, 16, 253-256.
4. Skutsch, M.; Bird, N.; Trines, E.; Dutschke, M.; Frumhoff, P.; de Jong, B.H.J.; van Laake, P.; Masera, O.; Murdiyarso, D. Clearing the way for reducing emissions from tropical deforestation. Environ. Sci. Policy 2007, 10, 322-334.
5. Palmer, C. Property rights and liability for deforestation under REDD+: Implications for 'permanence' in policy design. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70, 571-576.
6. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Special Report on Land Use, Land Use Change, and Forestry; Watson, R.T., Noble, I.R., Bolin, B., Ravindranath, N.H., Verardo, D.J., Dokken, D.J., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2000.
7. Murray, B.C. Leakage from an Avoided Deforestation Compensation Policy: Concepts, Empirical Evidence, and Corrective Policy Options; Working Paper of Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions; Duke University, Durham, NC, USA, 2008; NI WP 08-02.
8. Chomitz, K.M. Baseline, leakage and measurement issues: How do forestry and energy projects compare? Clim. Policy 2002, 2, 35-49.
9. Schwarze, R.; Niles, J.; Olander, J. Understanding and managing leakage in forest-basedgreenhouse-gas-mitigation projects. Philos. Trans. A 2002, 360, 1685-1703.
10. Myers Madeira, E.C. Policies to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) in Developing Countries; Atwater, S., Foerster, A., Eds.; Resources for the Future: Washington DC, USA, 2008.
11. UNFCCC: Methodological guidance for activities relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries. Decision 4/CP15; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, 2009; Document Reference FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add.1.
12. UNFCCC: The Cancun Agreements. Part C: Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries. Decision 1/CP.16; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, 2010; Document Reference FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1.
13. Fisher, B.; Lewis, S.L., Burgess, N.D.; Malimbiwi, R.E.; Munishi, P.K.; Swetnam, R.D.; Turner, R.K.; Willcock, S.; Balmford, A. Implementation and opportunity costs of reducing deforestation and forest degradation in Tanzania. Nat. Clim. Change 2011, 1, 161-164.
14. Herold, M. An assessment of national forest monitoring capabilities in tropical non-Annex I countries: Recommendations for capacity building. The Prince's Rainforests Project: London, UK; the Government of Norway: Oslo, Norway, 2009.
15. Aukland, L.; Moura Costa, P.; Brown, S. A conceptual framework and its application for addressing leakage: The case of avoided deforestation. Clim. Policy 2003, 3, 123-136.
16. Ebeling, J.; Yasué, M. Generating carbon finance through avoided deforestation and its potential to create climatic, conservation and human development benefits. Philos. Trans. B 2008, 363, 1917-1924.
17. Wunder, S. How should we deal with leakage? In Moving Ahead with REDD: Issues, Options and Implications; Angelsen, A., Ed.; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2008; pp. 65-76.
18. Gan, J.; McCarl, B.A. Measuring transnational leakage of forest conservation. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 64, 423-432.
19. Sohngen, B.; Beach, R.H.; Andrasko, K. Avoided deforestation as a greenhouse gas mitigation tool: Economic issues. J. Environ. Qual. 2008, 37, 1368-1375.
20. Sathaye, J.A.; Andrasko, K. Special issue on estimation of baselines and leakage in carbon mitigation forestry projects. Mitig. Adapt Strat Glob. Change 2007, 12, 963-970.
21. Fry, I. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation: Opportunities and pitfalls in developing a new legal regime. Rev. Eur. Community Int. Environ. Law 2008, 17, 166-182.
22. De Gorter, H.; Drabik, D. Components of carbon leakage in the fuel market due to biofuel policies. Biofuels 2011, 2, 119-121.
23. Sun, B.; Sohngen, B. Set-asides for carbon sequestration: Implications for permanence and leakage. Clim. Change 2009, 96, 409-419.
24. Sohngen, B.; Brown, S. Measuring leakage from carbon projects in open economies: A stop timber harvesting project in Bolivia as a case study. Can. J. For. Res. 2004, 34, 829-839.
25. Murray, B.C.; McCarl, B.A.; Lee, H. Estimating leakage from forest carbon sequestration programs. Land Econ. 2004, 80, 109-124.
26. Ewers, R.M; Rodrigues, A.S.L. Estimates of reserve effectiveness are confounded by leakage. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2008, 23, 113-116.
27. Dutschke, M.; Butzengeiger, S.; Michaelowa, A. A spatial approach to baseline and leakage in CDM forest carbon sinks projects. Clim. Policy 2006, 5, 517-530.
28. Boer, R.; Wasrin, U.R.; Perdinan, H.; Dasanto, B.D.; Makundi, W.; Hero, J.; Ridwan, M.; Masripatin, N. Assessment of carbon leakage in multiple carbon-sink projects: A case study in Jambi province, Indonesia. Mitig. Adapt Strat Glob. Change 2007, 12, 1169-1188.
29. Lasco, R.D.; Pulhin, F.B.; Sales, R.F. Analysis of leakage in carbon sequestration projects in forestry: A case study of upper magat watershed, Philippines. Mitig. Adapt Strat Glob. Change 2007, 12, 1189-1211.
30. Sohngen, B.; Mendelsohn, R.; Sedjo, R. Forest management, conservation, and global timber markets. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1999, 81, 1-13.
31. Sohngen, B.; Sedjo, R. Potential carbon flux from timber harvests and management in the context of a global timber market. Clim. Change 2000, 44, 151-172.
32. Wear, D.N.; Murray, B.C. Federal timber restrictions, interregional spillovers, and the impact on US softwood markets. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2004, 47, 307-330.
33. Zhang, J.; Gan, J. Who will meet China's import demand for forest products? World Dev. 2007, 35, 2150-2160.
34. Meyfroidt, P.; Lambin, E.F. Forest transition in Vietnam and displacement of deforestation abroad. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 16139-16144.
35. Meyfroidt, P.; Rudel, T.K.; Lambin, E.F. Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement of land use. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 20917-20922.
36. Ristea, C.; Maness, T. Opportunities, challenges and markets for forest carbon offset projects. For. Chron. 2009, 85, 715-718.
37. Merger, E.; Dutschke, M.; Verchot, L. Options for REDD+ voluntary certification to ensure net GHG benefits, poverty alleviation, sustainable management of forests and biodiversity conservation. Forests 2011, 2, 550-577.
38. Hamilton, K.; Chokkalingam, U.; Bendana, M. State of the Forest Carbon Market 2009. Taking Root and Branching Out; Market Report by Ecosystem Marketplace; Ecosystem Marketplace: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. Available online: http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com (accessed on 01 July 2011).
39. Kossoy, A.; Ambrosi, P. States and Trends of the Carbon Market 2010; Carbon Finance at The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2011.
40. Clean Development Mechanism (CDM): Approved Large-Sale and Small-Scale Afforestation and Reforestation Methodologies; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, June 2011. Available online: http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/index.html (accessed on 01 June 2011).
41. Forest Project Protocol Version 3.2; Climate Action Reserve: Los Angeles, CA, USA, June 2011. Available online: http://www.climateactionreserve.org/how/protocols/forest/current/(accessed on 18 June 2011).
42. The Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). Agriculture, Forestry and Land Use (AFOLU) Methodologies and Modules; VCS: Washington, DC, USA, June 2011. Available online: http://www.v-c-s.org/methodologies/find-a-methodology?title=&tid=14 (accessed on 15 June 2011).
43. The CarbonFix Standard Version 3.1; Carbon Fix Standard: Stuttgart, Germany, June 2011. Available online: http://www.carbonfix.info/CarbonFix-Standard.html (accessed on 18 June 2011).
44. Skutsch, M.M.; McCall, M.K. Reassessing REDD: Governance, markets and the hype cycle. An editorial comment. Clim. Change 2010, 100, 395-402.
45. Angelsen, A. Moving Ahead with REDD: Issues, Options and Implications; Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR): Bogor, Indonesia, 2008.
46. Persson, U.M.; Azar, C. Preserving the world's tropical forests: A price on carbon may not do. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 210-215.
47. The Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) Requirements; VCS: Washington, DC, USA, 19 October 2011. Available online: http://www.v-cs. org/sites/v-c-s.org/files/AFOLU%20Requirements%2C%20v3.1_1.pdf (accessed on 15 June 2011).
48. PRA is one of the tools used to gather information on community resources and needs, often applied in community development programs. It includes use of transect walks, maps, calendars, and diagrams using locally available materials.
49. Executive Board of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM): Definition of Renewable Biomass; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, 2006. Available online: http://cdm.unfccc.int/EB/Meetings/023/eb23_repan18.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2011).
50. Also by the CFS standard; which however has been classified as using PLA 4 due to its accounting for identifiable and unidentifiable leakage
51. VM0004 and VMD0011 extent the leakage factor approach by an additional logging damage factor that accounts not only for the biomass harvested, but for the non-commercial part of the felled tree (branches and stump) and neighboring trees that are incidentally destructed during harvest; thus reflecting the emissions eventually caused per unit of extracted timber
52. This is true for the three modeling approaches to primary leakage described under PLA 6; however the national scale requirement could be fulfilled if models with a larger geographical scale were developed