Making two parallel land-use sector debates meet: Carbon leakage and indirect land-use change

Land Use Policy

Volumn 36, Issue , 2014, Pages 533-542

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

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Carbon accounting system; Climate policy; Forest conservation; Greenhouse gas emissions; Land use competition

Indexed keywords

BIOFUEL; CARBON EMISSION; CARBON SINK; CLIMATE CHANGE; EMISSION INVENTORY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; FOREST MANAGEMENT; LAND USE CHANGE; UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE;

EID: 84887002589     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.09.012     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Realising REDD+ National Strategy and Policy Options 2009, Center for International Forestry Research (CIROR), Bogor, Indonesia. A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, M. Kanninen, E. Sills, W.D. Sunderlin, S. Wertz-Kanounnikoff (Eds.).
2. Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices 2012, Center for International Forestry Research (CIROR), Bogor, Indonesia. A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W.D. Sunderlin, L.V. Verchot (Eds.).
3. Air Resources Board (ARB) of California Final Regulation Order. Unofficial Electronic Version of the US Low Carbon Fuel Standard 2012, (accessed 15.01.13). http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs.htm.
4. Auckland L., Moura Costa P., Brown S. A conceptual framework and its application for addressing leakage. The case of avoided deforestation. Climate Policy 2003, 3:123-136.
5. Banse M., van Meijl H., Tabeau A., Woltjer G., Hellmann F., Verburg P.H. Impact of EU biofuel policies on world agricultural production and land use. Biomass and Bioenergy 2011, 35:2385-2390.
6. Davis S.C., House J.I., diaz-Chavez R.A., Molnar A., Valin H., DeLucia E.H. How can land-use modelling tools inform bioenergy policies?. Interface Focus 2011, 1:212-223.
7. Di Lucia L., Ahlgren S., Ericsson K. The dilemma of indirect land-use change in EU biofuel policy - an empirical study of policy-making in the context of scientific uncertainty. Environmental Science and Policy 2012, 16:9-19.
8. Dumortier J., Hayes D.J., Carriquiry M., Dong F., Du X., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J.F., Tokgoz S. Sensitivity of carbon emission estimates from indirect land-use change. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 2011, 33:428-448.
9. Eggert H., Greaker M. Trade policies for biofuels. Journal of Environment and Development 2012, 21:281-306.
10. European Commission Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the council amending Directive 98/70/EC relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. Brussels, 17.10.2012 COM(2012) 595 final. 2012/0288 2012.
11. European Parliament Texts adopted 17 December 2008: monitoring and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from fuels 2008, EP-PE_TC1-COD(2007)0019.
12. Fargione J., Hill J., Tilman D., Polasky S., Hawthorne P. Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 2008, 319:1235-1238.
13. Farrel A.E., Plevin R.J., Turner B.T., Jones A.D., O'Hare M., Kammen D.M. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 2006, 311:506-508.
14. Fritsche U., Wiegmann K. Indirect Land-use Change and Biofuels. Report for the Policy Department Economic and Scientific Policy 2011, European Parliament, Brussels, 57pp.
15. Gawel E., Ludwig G. The ILUC dilemma: how to deal with indirect land-use change when governing energy crops?. Land Use Policy 2011, 28:846-856.
16. Gan J., McCarl B.A. Measuring transnational leakage of forest conservation. Ecological Economics 2007, 64:423-432.
17. Hedenus F., Azar C. Bioenergy plantations or long-term carbon sinks? A model based analysis. Biomass and Bioenergy 2009, 33:1693-1702.
18. Hellmann F., Verburg P.H. Spatially explicit modelling of biofuel crops in Europe. Biomass and Bioenergy 2011, 35:2411-2424.
19. Henders S., Ostwald M. Forest carbon leakage quantification methods and their suitability for assessing leakage in REDD. Forests 2012, 3:33-58.
20. Hertel T.W., Golub A., Jones A.D., O'Hare M., Plevin R.J., Kammen D.M. Effects of US maize ethanol on global land use and greenhouse gas emissions: estimating market-mediated responses. Bioscience 2010, 60:223-231.
21. IFPRI Assessing the Land-use change Consequences of European Biofuel Policies. Final Report. Authors: Laborde D. October 2011 2011.
22. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Land Use, Land-use Change and Forestry 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. R.T. Watson, I.R. Nobel, B. Bolin, N.H. Ravindranath, D.J. Verado, D.J. Dokken (Eds.).
23. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Mobile combustion. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 2: Energy 2006, (Chapter 3).
24. JRC Indirect Land-use Change From Increased Biofuels Demand - Comparison of Models and Results for Marginal Biofuels Production from Different Feedstocks. Authors: Edwards, R., Mulligan, D., Marelli, L. 2010, Publications Office of the European Union.
25. Kleiner K. The backlash against biofuels. Nature Reports Climate Change 2008, 2:9-11.
26. Kline K.L., Dale V.H. Biofuels: effects on land and fire. Science 2008, 321. 10.1126/science.321.5886.199.
27. Lambin E.F., Meyfroidt P. Global land-use change, economic globalization and the looming land scarcity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2011, 108:3465-3472.
28. Lange M. The GHG balance of biofuels taking into account land-use change. Energy Policy 2011, 39:2373-2385.
29. Lapola D.M., Schaldach R., Alcamo J., Bondeau A., Koch J., Koelking C., Priess J. Indirect land-use change can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2010, 107:3388-3393.
30. 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. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies of Global Change 2007, 12:1189-1211.
31. Lenzen M., Murray J., Sack F., Wiedmann T. Shared producer and consumer responsibility-theory and practice. Ecological Economics 2007, 61:27-42.
32. LIIB Low Indirect Impact Biofuel methodology - version Zero 2012, (accessed 08.08.13). http://rsb.org/pdfs/working-and-expertGroups/II-EG/12-09-03-LIIB-methodology-Version0-July2012.pdf.
33. Macedo I., Lima Verde Leal M., Azevedo Ramos da Silva J. Assessment of greenhouse gas emissions in the production and use of fuel ethanol in Brazil 2004, Secretariat of the Environment, Government of the State of São Paulo, Archived from the original on 2008-05-28.
34. Mather A.S. The forest transition. Area 1992, 24:367-379.
35. Melillo J.M., Reilly J.M., Kicklighter D.W., Gurgel A.C., Cronin T.W., Paltsev S., Felzer B.S., Wang X., Sokolov A.P., Schlosser C.A. Indirect emissions from biofuels: how important?. Science 2009, 326:1397-1399.
36. Meyfroidt P., Rudel T.K., Lambin E.F. Forest transition, trade, and the global displacement of land use. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2010, 107:20917-20922.
37. Miyake S., Renouf M., Peterson A., McAlpine C., Smith C. Land-use and environmental pressure resulting from current and future bioenergy crop expansion: a review. Journal of Rural Studies 2012, 28:650-658.
38. 2 accounts for open economies: producer or consumer responsibility?. Energy Policy 2001, 29:327-334.
39. Murray B.C. Leakage from an avoided deforestation compensation policy: concepts, empirical evidence, and corrective policy options. Working paper (NI WP 08-02) of Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions 2008, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
40. Murray B.C., McCarl B., Lee H.C. Estimating leakage from forest carbon sequestration programs. Land Economics 2004, 80:109-124.
41. Nassar A.M., Harfuch L., Bachion L.C., Moreira M.R. Biofuels and land-use change: searching for the top model. Interface Focus 2011, 1:224-232.
42. Panichelli L., Gnansounou E. Estimating greenhouse gas emissions from indirect land-use change in biofuels production: concepts and exploratory analysis for soybean-based biodiesel production. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 2008, 67:1017-1030.
43. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) Are models suitable for determining ILUC factors? Authors: Prins, A.G., Stehfest, E., Overmars, K., Ros, J. Publication number 500143006, Bilthoven, the Netherlands 2010.
44. Peters G.P. From production-based to consumption-based national emission inventories. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:13-23.
45. Prins A., Eickhout B., Banse M., van Meijl H., Rienks W., Woltjer G. Global impacts of European agricultural and biofuel policies. Ecology and Society 2011, 16(1):49. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art49/.
46. Renewable Fuels Agency (RFA) The Gallagher Review of the Indirect Effects of Biofuels Production 2008, St Leonards-on-Sea, East Sussex, UK.
47. Rothmann D.S. Environmental Kuznets curves-real progress or passing the buck? A case for consumption-based approaches. Ecological Economics 1998, 25:177-194.
48. Sathaye J.A., Andrasko K. Special issue on estimation of baseline and leakage in carbon mitigation forestry projects. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 2007, 12:963-970.
49. Schwarze R., Niles J., Oalnder J. Understanding and managing leakage in forest-based greenhouse gas-mitigation projects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 2002, 360:1685-1705.
50. Searchinger T. Response to M. Wang and Z. Haq's E-Letter. Published 2008-08-12 in Science 2008, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.sciencemag.org/content/319/5867/1238.abstract/reply.
51. Searchinger T., Heimlich R., Houghton R.A., Dong F., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J., Tokgoz S., Hayes D., Yu T.-H. Use of U.S Croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions for land-use change. Science 2008, 319:1238-1240.
52. Skutsch M., Bird N., Trines E., Dutschke M., Frumhoff P., de Jong B.H.J., van Laake P. Clearing the way for reducing emissions for tropical deforestation. Environmental Science and Policy 2007, 10:322-334.
53. Sohngen B., Beach R.H., Andrasko K. Avoided deforestation as a greenhouse gas mitigation tool: economic issues. Journal of Environmental Quality 2008, 37:1368-1375.
54. Sonwa D.J., Nkem J.N., Idinoba M.E., Bele M.Y., Jum C. Building regional priorities in forests for development and adaptation to climate change in the Congo Basin. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 2012, 17:441-450.
55. Sperling D., Gordon D. Two Billion Cars: Driving Toward Sustainability 2009, 98-99. Oxford University Press, New York, ISBN 978-0-19-537664-7.
56. Sun B., Sohngen B. Set-asides for carbon sequestration: implications for permanence and leakage. Climatic Change 2009, 96:409-419.
57. The Economist Maized and confused, does ethanol in Iowa cause deforestation in Brazil? Published 2009-08-10 2009, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.economist.com/.
58. The New York Times The biofuel debate: good, bad or too soon to tell? By Tom Zeller Jr, published 2008-11-03 2008, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.nytimes.com/.
59. The Wall Street Journal If a tree falls in the forest, are biofuels to blame? It's not easy being green, published 2008-11-11 2008, (accessed 16.08.12). http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122636711059015989.html.
60. Time Magazine The trouble with biofuels by Bryan Walsh, published 2008-02-14 2008, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.time.com/time/magazine/.
61. Time Magazine The clean energy scam by Michael Grunwald, published 2008-03-27 2008, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.time.com/time/magazine/.
62. Time Magazine The debate on clean energy by Joe Jobe, published 2008-04-10 2008, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.time.com/time/magazine/.
63. UK Department of Transport Carbon and Sustainability Reporting Within the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation 2008, Department of Transport, United Kingdom, Archived from the original on June 25, 2008.
64. 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 (FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add) 2009.
65. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2): Final Rule 2010-02-03 2010, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/index.htm.
66. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Greenhouse Gas Reduction Thresholds. 2010-02-03 2010, (accessed 16.08.12). http://www.epa.gov/OMS/renewablefuels/420f10007.htm.
67. van Noordwijk M., Minang P.A., Dewl S., Hall J., Rantala S. Reducing emissions for all land uses (REALU): the case for a whole landscape approach. ASB Policy Brief 13 2009, ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins, Nairobi, Kenya.
68. van Stappen F., Brose I., Schenkel Y. Direct and indirect land-use change issues in European sustainability initiatives: state-of-the-art, open issues and future developments. Biomass and Bioenergy 2011, 35:4824-4834.
69. Wang M. Updated Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emission Results of Fuel Ethanol. Center for Transportation Research, Argonne National Laboratory. Presented at the 15th International Symposium on Alcohol Fuels 2005, 25 pp.
70. Wang M., Han J., Dunn J.B., Cai H., Elgowainy A. Well-to-wheels energy use and greenshouse gas emissions of ethanol from corn, sugarcane and cellulosic biomass for US use. Environmental Research Letters 2012, 7:045905.
71. Wicke B., Verweij P., van Meijl H., van Vuuren D.P., Faaij A.P.C. Indirect land use change: a review of existing models and strategies for mitigation. Biofuels 2012, 3:87-100.
72. Witcover J., Yeh S., Sperling D. Policy options to address global land use change from biofuels. Energy Policy 2013, 56:63-74.
73. Wunder S. How should we deal with leakage?. Moving Ahead with REDD: Issues, Options and Implications 2008, 65-76. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. A. Angelsen (Ed.).