This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Forests are critical for stabilizing our climate, but costs of mitigation over space, time, and stakeholder group remain uncertain. Using the Global Timber Model, we project mitigation potential and costs for four abatement activities across 16 regions for carbon price scenarios of $5–$100/tCO2. We project 0.6–6.0 GtCO2 yr−1 in global mitigation by 2055 at costs of 2–393 billion USD yr−1, with avoided tropical deforestation comprising 30–54% of total mitigation. Higher prices incentivize larger mitigation proportions via rotation and forest management activities in temperate and boreal biomes. Forest area increases 415–875 Mha relative to the baseline by 2055 at prices $35–$100/tCO2, with intensive plantations comprising 2 in 2055.
K. G. Austin; J. S. Baker; B. L. Sohngen; C. M. Wade; A. Daigneault; S. B. Ohrel; S. Ragnauth; A. Bean. The economic costs of planting, preserving, and managing the world’s forests to mitigate climate change. Nature Communications 2020, 11, 1 -9.
AMA StyleK. G. Austin, J. S. Baker, B. L. Sohngen, C. M. Wade, A. Daigneault, S. B. Ohrel, S. Ragnauth, A. Bean. The economic costs of planting, preserving, and managing the world’s forests to mitigate climate change. Nature Communications. 2020; 11 (1):1-9.
Chicago/Turabian StyleK. G. Austin; J. S. Baker; B. L. Sohngen; C. M. Wade; A. Daigneault; S. B. Ohrel; S. Ragnauth; A. Bean. 2020. "The economic costs of planting, preserving, and managing the world’s forests to mitigate climate change." Nature Communications 11, no. 1: 1-9.
This study quantifies the potential responses of 11 staple crop yields to projected changes in temperature and precipitation in Rwanda, using a cross sectional model based on yield data collected across more than 14,000 villages. We incorporated a relatively high spatial resolution dataset on crop productivity, considered a broad range of crops relevant to national agricultural production priorities, used environmental data developed specifically for Rwanda, and reported uncertainty both from our estimation model and due to uncertainty in future climate projections. We estimate that future climate change will have the largest impacts on potential productivity of maize, bush bean, and Irish potato. All three crops are likely to experience a reduction in potential yields of at least 10% under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 and at least 15% under RCP 8.5 by 2050. Notably, these are important crops nationally, and three of the crops targeted by Rwanda’s Crop Intensification Program. We find that the most severe reductions in potential crop yields will occur in the drier eastern savannah and plateau regions, but that the impacts of climate change could be neutral or even positive in the highlands through mid-century. The refined spatial scale of our analysis allows us to identify potentially vulnerable regions where adaptation investments may need to be prioritized to support food security and climate resilience in Rwanda’s agricultural sector.
Kemen Austin; Robert Beach; Daniel Lapidus; Marwa Salem; Naomi Taylor; Mads Knudsen; Noel Ujeneza. Impacts of Climate Change on the Potential Productivity of Eleven Staple Crops in Rwanda. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4116 .
AMA StyleKemen Austin, Robert Beach, Daniel Lapidus, Marwa Salem, Naomi Taylor, Mads Knudsen, Noel Ujeneza. Impacts of Climate Change on the Potential Productivity of Eleven Staple Crops in Rwanda. Sustainability. 2020; 12 (10):4116.
Chicago/Turabian StyleKemen Austin; Robert Beach; Daniel Lapidus; Marwa Salem; Naomi Taylor; Mads Knudsen; Noel Ujeneza. 2020. "Impacts of Climate Change on the Potential Productivity of Eleven Staple Crops in Rwanda." Sustainability 12, no. 10: 4116.
The protection of forests is crucial to providing important ecosystem services, such as supplying clean air and water, safeguarding critical habitats for biodiversity, and reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Despite this importance, global forest loss has steadily increased in recent decades. Protected Areas (PAs) currently account for almost 15% of Earth’s terrestrial surface and protect 5% of global tree cover and were developed as a principal approach to limit the impact of anthropogenic activities on natural, intact ecosystems and habitats. We assess global trends in forest loss inside and outside of PAs, and land cover following this forest loss, using a global map of tree cover loss and global maps of land cover. While forests in PAs experience loss at lower rates than non-protected forests, we find that the temporal trend of forest loss in PAs is markedly similar to that of all forest loss globally. We find that forest loss in PAs is most commonly—and increasingly—followed by shrubland, a broad category that could represent re-growing forest, agricultural fallows, or pasture lands in some regional contexts. Anthropogenic forest loss for agriculture is common in some regions, particularly in the global tropics, while wildfires, pests, and storm blowdown are a significant and consistent cause of forest loss in more northern latitudes, such as the United States, Canada, and Russia. Our study describes a process for screening tree cover loss and agriculture expansion taking place within PAs, and identification of priority targets for further site-specific assessments of threats to PAs. We illustrate an approach for more detailed assessment of forest loss in four case study PAs in Brazil, Indonesia, Democratic Republic of Congo, and the United States.
Christopher M. Wade; Kemen G. Austin; James Cajka; Daniel Lapidus; Kibri H. Everett; Diana Galperin; Rachel Maynard; Aaron Sobel. What Is Threatening Forests in Protected Areas? A Global Assessment of Deforestation in Protected Areas, 2001–2018. Forests 2020, 11, 539 -539.
AMA StyleChristopher M. Wade, Kemen G. Austin, James Cajka, Daniel Lapidus, Kibri H. Everett, Diana Galperin, Rachel Maynard, Aaron Sobel. What Is Threatening Forests in Protected Areas? A Global Assessment of Deforestation in Protected Areas, 2001–2018. Forests. 2020; 11 (5):539-539.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher M. Wade; Kemen G. Austin; James Cajka; Daniel Lapidus; Kibri H. Everett; Diana Galperin; Rachel Maynard; Aaron Sobel. 2020. "What Is Threatening Forests in Protected Areas? A Global Assessment of Deforestation in Protected Areas, 2001–2018." Forests 11, no. 5: 539-539.
We investigate the causes of deforestation in Indonesia, a country with one of the highest rates of primary natural forest loss in the tropics, annually between 2001 and 2016. We use high spatial resolution imagery made available on Google Earth to characterize the land cover types following a random selection of deforestation events, drawn from the Global Forest Change dataset. Notorious in the region, large-scale oil palm and timber plantations together contributed more than two-fifths of nationwide deforestation over our study period, with a peak in late aughts followed by a notable decline up to 2016. Conversion of forests to grasslands, which comprised an average of one-fifth of national deforestation, rose sharply in dominance in years following periods of considerable fire activity, particularly in 2016. Small-scale agriculture and small-scale plantations also contributed one-fifth of nationwide forest loss and were the dominant drivers of loss outside the major islands of Indonesia. Although relatively small contributors to total deforestation, logging roads were responsible for a declining share of deforestation, and mining activities were responsible for an increasing share, over the study period. Direct drivers of deforestation in Indonesia are thus spatially and temporally dynamic, suggesting the need for forest conservation policy responses tailored at the subnational level, and new methods for monitoring the causes of deforestation over time.
Kemen G Austin; Amanda Marie Schwantes; Yaofeng Gu; Prasad S Kasibhatla. What causes deforestation in Indonesia? Environmental Research Letters 2018, 14, 024007 .
AMA StyleKemen G Austin, Amanda Marie Schwantes, Yaofeng Gu, Prasad S Kasibhatla. What causes deforestation in Indonesia? Environmental Research Letters. 2018; 14 (2):024007.
Chicago/Turabian StyleKemen G Austin; Amanda Marie Schwantes; Yaofeng Gu; Prasad S Kasibhatla. 2018. "What causes deforestation in Indonesia?" Environmental Research Letters 14, no. 2: 024007.
This study examines underlying reasons for differences among land-based greenhouse gas flux estimates in Indonesia, where six national inventories reported average emissions of between 0.4 and 1.1 Gt CO2e yr−1 over the 2000–2012 period. The large range among estimates is only somewhat smaller than Indonesia's GHG mitigation commitment. To determine the reasons for these differences, we compared input data and estimation methods, including the definitions and assumptions used for setting accounting boundaries, including emitting activities, incorporating fluxes from various carbon pools, and handling legacy fluxes. We also tested the sensitivity of methodological differences by generating our own reference emissions estimate and iteratively modifying individual components of the inventory. We found that the largest changes stem from the inclusion of legacy GHG emissions due to peat drainage (which increased emissions by at least +94% compared to the reference), methane emissions due to peat fires (+35%), and GHG emissions from belowground biomass and necromass carbon pools (+61%), modifications to assumptions of the mass of fuel burnt in peat fire events (+88%), and accounting for regrowth following a deforestation event (−31%). These differences cumulatively explain more than half of the observed difference among inventory estimates. Understanding the various approaches to emissions estimation, and how these influence the magnitude of component GHG fluxes, is an important first step towards reconciling GHG inventories. The Indonesian government's success in achieving its mitigation goal will depend on its ability to measure progress and evaluate the effectiveness of abatement actions, for which reliable harmonized greenhouse gas inventories are an essential foundation.
Kemen G Austin; Nancy L Harris; Arief Wijaya; Daniel Murdiyarso; Tom Harvey; Fred Stolle; Prasad S Kasibhatla. A review of land-based greenhouse gas flux estimates in Indonesia. Environmental Research Letters 2018, 13, 055003 .
AMA StyleKemen G Austin, Nancy L Harris, Arief Wijaya, Daniel Murdiyarso, Tom Harvey, Fred Stolle, Prasad S Kasibhatla. A review of land-based greenhouse gas flux estimates in Indonesia. Environmental Research Letters. 2018; 13 (5):055003.
Chicago/Turabian StyleKemen G Austin; Nancy L Harris; Arief Wijaya; Daniel Murdiyarso; Tom Harvey; Fred Stolle; Prasad S Kasibhatla. 2018. "A review of land-based greenhouse gas flux estimates in Indonesia." Environmental Research Letters 13, no. 5: 055003.
Kemen G Austin; Mariano González-Roglich; Danica Schaffer-Smith; Amanda M Schwantes; Jennifer J Swenson. Erratum: Trends in size of tropical deforestation events signal increasing dominance of industrial-scale drivers (2017 Environ. Res. Lett. 5 054009). Environmental Research Letters 2017, 12, 079601 .
AMA StyleKemen G Austin, Mariano González-Roglich, Danica Schaffer-Smith, Amanda M Schwantes, Jennifer J Swenson. Erratum: Trends in size of tropical deforestation events signal increasing dominance of industrial-scale drivers (2017 Environ. Res. Lett. 5 054009). Environmental Research Letters. 2017; 12 (7):079601.
Chicago/Turabian StyleKemen G Austin; Mariano González-Roglich; Danica Schaffer-Smith; Amanda M Schwantes; Jennifer J Swenson. 2017. "Erratum: Trends in size of tropical deforestation events signal increasing dominance of industrial-scale drivers (2017 Environ. Res. Lett. 5 054009)." Environmental Research Letters 12, no. 7: 079601.