Carbon accounting and the climate politics of forestry

Ellison, David and Lundblad, Mattias and Petersson, Hans (2011) Carbon accounting and the climate politics of forestry. Environmental Science & Policy, 14 (8). pp. 1062-1078. ISSN 1462-9011

[img] PDF
Ellison et al. 2011.pdf

Download (1MB)
Official URL: <Go to ISI>://WOS:000298219700013


Many proposals have been made for the more successful inclusion of LULUCF (Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry) in the Kyoto framework. Though the positions of individual states or the goal of avoided deforestation guide many approaches, our model sets cost-effective strategies for climate change mitigation and the efficient and balanced use of forest resources at its center. Current approaches to forest resource-based carbon accounting consider only a fraction of its potential and fail to adequately mobilize the LULUCF sector for the successful stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations. The presence of a significantly large "incentive gap" justifies the urgency of reforming the current LULUCF carbon accounting framework. In addition to significantly broadening the scope of carbon pools accounted under LULUCF, we recommend paying far greater attention to the troika of competing but potentially compatible interests surrounding the promotion of standing forests (in particular for the purposes of carbon sequestration, biodiversity protection and ecosystem promotion/preservation), harvested wood products (HWP) and bioenergy use. The successful balancing of competing interests, the enhancement of efficiency and effectiveness and the balanced use of forest resources require an accounting mechanism that weighs and rewards each component according to its real climate mitigation potential. Further, our data suggest the benefits of such a broadly based carbon accounting strategy and the inclusion of LULUCF in national and international accounting and emission trading mechanisms far outweigh potential disadvantages. Political arguments suggesting countries could take advantage of LULUCF accounting to reduce their commitments are not supported by the evidence we present. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Item Type: Article
Language: English
Future Forest Subject: Skogsbruk i klimatförändringens tid > Olika systemlösningar
Skogsbruk för många olika nyttor > Styrningsmodeller för skogsbruk
Depositing User: Christer Enkvist
Date Deposited: 28 Feb 2017 14:28
Last Modified: 28 Feb 2017 14:28

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item