Details about publication

Author(s): Swallow B, M van Noordwijk, S Dewi, D Murdiyarso, D White, J Gockowski, G Hyman, S Budidarsono, V Robiglio, V Meadu, A Ekadinata, F Agus, K Hairiah, P Mbile, D Sonwa and S Weise

Title: Opportunities for Avoided Deforestation with Sustainable Benefits

Publication: An interim report of the ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins

Year: 2007

Type: Monographs and Sections of Monographs

Abstract: Trees and forests play important roles in global climate change mitigation. On the one hand, trees growing in forests and on farms are one of the worlds greatest sinks of carbon. Afforestation in Europe now offsets significant amounts of global emissions and there are many unexploited opportunities for afforestation and reforestation in the developing world. On the other hand, tropical deforestation is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimate that in 2004, the forest sector was responsible for 17.4% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Global-level studies of the economics of climate change mitigation indicate that afforestation and avoided deforestation are among the most attractive investments for reducing net greenhouse gas emissions (total emissions less total sequestration). The ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins has conducted biophysical, socioeconomic and institutional research on the tradeoffs associated with alternative land uses in the humid tropics. Building on previous research at the ASB benchmark sites, this paper presents spatially-explicit analyses of the tradeoffs between carbon and economic returns in three sites in Indonesia, and one site in each of Peru and Cameroon. Located in the humid forest zones of Southeast Asia, the Amazon basin, and Central Africa, these sites represent a range of the conditions that shape tree and forest management across the humid tropics. Indonesia is particularly distinguished by having the worlds highest levels of land-based emissions of greenhouse gases and largest CO2 emissions from conversion of peat lands.

Results presented in this report indicate similarities and differences across the sites. The patterns of land use transition over the last 10-20 years vary considerably, with some sites experiencing general trends of carbon-emitting land use changes, while others experiencing a balance of carbon-emitting and carbon-sequestering land use changes. In general, however, the carbon losses due to carbon-emitting forest conversion vastly exceed the carbon gains due to carbon-sequestering land use changes. This is exemplified by the Indonesian province of East Kalimantan. Although it has experienced more sequestering land use changes than emitting land use changes, the province has on net lost huge amounts of carbon overall since 1990. . This is because the carbon-emitting land use changes have resulted in average losses of 230 tonnes per hectare per in the year that they occur, while shifts from lower to higher carbon-sequestering land uses have resulted in just 4 tonnes of sequestration per hectare per year.

Further results from across the 3 provinces of Indonesia indicate that there is, even without specific support programs, substantial activity to restore carbon to landscapes that have been previously degraded. In East Kalimantan, the bulk of the carbon-sequestering land use changes are natural regrowth from cleared land, while in Jambi the transition to carbon-sequestering land uses mostly represent transitions from cropland to rubber agroforestry systems. Win-win solutions are possible: transitions from cropland to rubber agroforestry in Jambi and from coffee to complex damar agroforestry in Lampung increase returns to farmers and time-averaged carbon stocks. In Cameroon, shifts from crop-fallow systems agriculture into shaded cocoa systems can also be such a win-win solution.

The analysis of the economic returns associated with the land use transitions (measured in terms of discounted net present value) shows that there is clear economic rationale for almost all of the land use transitions occurring in the 5 sites. That is, almost every land use transition has been economically rational from the perspective of private land users responding to: market incentives to harvest and sell timber; market opportunities for new cash crops; the lack of incentives they have to maintain the value of standing carbon, and high interest rates in local financial markets.

Expressed in terms of tonnes of emissions of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq), however, the economic gains associated with deforestation are very low. In the three provinces of Indonesia included in the study, between 6 and 20% of the area where emissions increased have generated returns less than 1$ per tonne of CO2eq and between 64 and 92% of the emission generating changes have resulted in returns less than 5$ per tonne of CO2eq. In the benchmark site in Ucayali Province in Peru, over 90% of emissions from land use change have generated returns less than 5$ per tonne of CO2eq. If carbon stock of standing forests were valued and sellable during 20 years, a large percentage of greenhouse emissions from deforestation in the Indonesia and Peru sites might have been avoided. Current market and incentive conditions in the humid tropics continue to inadequately provide incentives for cost-effective reduction of CO2 emissions.

The global analysis also reveals heterogeneity in carbon stocks in humid tropical forests. Results from the Indonesian province of Jambi show that peat forests, as well as other peat lands, should be given special attention in negotiations and programmes for reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. The customary slash-and-burn system known as sonor is particularly damaging to the atmosphere, releasing large amounts of carbon from the rich peat soils, while providing very little return in terms of income to the local farming populations. The return per tonne of CO2 emitted is as low as US$0.10-0.20 in those landscapes.

Policy makers concerned about carbon emissions can and should harvest some low hanging fruits by devising early and effective mechanisms for compensating land users for the carbon storage value of forests and trees. Policy makers should pay greater attention to below-ground carbon, particularly the need to conserve the peat lands of Indonesia that store large amounts of carbon. Investments in these high carbon payoff areas can clearly be a good deal for investors and for the planet. To be effective, sustainable and fair, the deals will also have to make good sense for the tens of millions of farmers and other rural residents whose actions together drive land use change in the tropical forest margins.

Keywords: Climate Change, deforestation, reduced emissions, REDD, RED, carbon abatement, CDM, UNFCCC, poverty reduction, agroforestry, opportunity costs, tropical forests, Amazon, Congo, Indonesia, Peru, Cameroon

Corresponding Author: asb@cgiar.org

Download publication: Download PDF pdf (3000 KB)

See also:

Region: Amazon Congo Basin Southeast Asia Global

Topic: Climate Change Sustainability Poverty, Policy and Deforestation

Author(s):	Swallow B, M van Noordwijk, S Dewi, D Murdiyarso, D White, J Gockowski, G Hyman, S Budidarsono, V Robiglio, V Meadu, A Ekadinata, F Agus, K Hairiah, P Mbile, D Sonwa and S Weise
Title:	Opportunities for Avoided Deforestation with Sustainable Benefits
Publication:	An interim report of the ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins
Year:	2007
Type:	Monographs and Sections of Monographs
Abstract:	Trees and forests play important roles in global climate change mitigation. On the one hand, trees growing in forests and on farms are one of the worlds greatest sinks of carbon. Afforestation in Europe now offsets significant amounts of global emissions and there are many unexploited opportunities for afforestation and reforestation in the developing world. On the other hand, tropical deforestation is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimate that in 2004, the forest sector was responsible for 17.4% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Global-level studies of the economics of climate change mitigation indicate that afforestation and avoided deforestation are among the most attractive investments for reducing net greenhouse gas emissions (total emissions less total sequestration). The ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins has conducted biophysical, socioeconomic and institutional research on the tradeoffs associated with alternative land uses in the humid tropics. Building on previous research at the ASB benchmark sites, this paper presents spatially-explicit analyses of the tradeoffs between carbon and economic returns in three sites in Indonesia, and one site in each of Peru and Cameroon. Located in the humid forest zones of Southeast Asia, the Amazon basin, and Central Africa, these sites represent a range of the conditions that shape tree and forest management across the humid tropics. Indonesia is particularly distinguished by having the worlds highest levels of land-based emissions of greenhouse gases and largest CO2 emissions from conversion of peat lands. Results presented in this report indicate similarities and differences across the sites. The patterns of land use transition over the last 10-20 years vary considerably, with some sites experiencing general trends of carbon-emitting land use changes, while others experiencing a balance of carbon-emitting and carbon-sequestering land use changes. In general, however, the carbon losses due to carbon-emitting forest conversion vastly exceed the carbon gains due to carbon-sequestering land use changes. This is exemplified by the Indonesian province of East Kalimantan. Although it has experienced more sequestering land use changes than emitting land use changes, the province has on net lost huge amounts of carbon overall since 1990. . This is because the carbon-emitting land use changes have resulted in average losses of 230 tonnes per hectare per in the year that they occur, while shifts from lower to higher carbon-sequestering land uses have resulted in just 4 tonnes of sequestration per hectare per year. Further results from across the 3 provinces of Indonesia indicate that there is, even without specific support programs, substantial activity to restore carbon to landscapes that have been previously degraded. In East Kalimantan, the bulk of the carbon-sequestering land use changes are natural regrowth from cleared land, while in Jambi the transition to carbon-sequestering land uses mostly represent transitions from cropland to rubber agroforestry systems. Win-win solutions are possible: transitions from cropland to rubber agroforestry in Jambi and from coffee to complex damar agroforestry in Lampung increase returns to farmers and time-averaged carbon stocks. In Cameroon, shifts from crop-fallow systems agriculture into shaded cocoa systems can also be such a win-win solution. The analysis of the economic returns associated with the land use transitions (measured in terms of discounted net present value) shows that there is clear economic rationale for almost all of the land use transitions occurring in the 5 sites. That is, almost every land use transition has been economically rational from the perspective of private land users responding to: market incentives to harvest and sell timber; market opportunities for new cash crops; the lack of incentives they have to maintain the value of standing carbon, and high interest rates in local financial markets. Expressed in terms of tonnes of emissions of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq), however, the economic gains associated with deforestation are very low. In the three provinces of Indonesia included in the study, between 6 and 20% of the area where emissions increased have generated returns less than 1$ per tonne of CO2eq and between 64 and 92% of the emission generating changes have resulted in returns less than 5$ per tonne of CO2eq. In the benchmark site in Ucayali Province in Peru, over 90% of emissions from land use change have generated returns less than 5$ per tonne of CO2eq. If carbon stock of standing forests were valued and sellable during 20 years, a large percentage of greenhouse emissions from deforestation in the Indonesia and Peru sites might have been avoided. Current market and incentive conditions in the humid tropics continue to inadequately provide incentives for cost-effective reduction of CO2 emissions. The global analysis also reveals heterogeneity in carbon stocks in humid tropical forests. Results from the Indonesian province of Jambi show that peat forests, as well as other peat lands, should be given special attention in negotiations and programmes for reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. The customary slash-and-burn system known as sonor is particularly damaging to the atmosphere, releasing large amounts of carbon from the rich peat soils, while providing very little return in terms of income to the local farming populations. The return per tonne of CO2 emitted is as low as US$0.10-0.20 in those landscapes. Policy makers concerned about carbon emissions can and should harvest some low hanging fruits by devising early and effective mechanisms for compensating land users for the carbon storage value of forests and trees. Policy makers should pay greater attention to below-ground carbon, particularly the need to conserve the peat lands of Indonesia that store large amounts of carbon. Investments in these high carbon payoff areas can clearly be a good deal for investors and for the planet. To be effective, sustainable and fair, the deals will also have to make good sense for the tens of millions of farmers and other rural residents whose actions together drive land use change in the tropical forest margins.
Keywords:	Climate Change, deforestation, reduced emissions, REDD, RED, carbon abatement, CDM, UNFCCC, poverty reduction, agroforestry, opportunity costs, tropical forests, Amazon, Congo, Indonesia, Peru, Cameroon
Corresponding Author:	asb@cgiar.org
Download publication:	Download PDF (3000 KB)
See also:
Region:	Amazon Congo Basin Southeast Asia Global
Topic:	Climate Change Sustainability Poverty, Policy and Deforestation