Securing tropical forest carbon: the contribution of protected areas to REDD

Forest loss and degradation in the tropics contribute 6-17% of all greenhouse gas emissions. Protected areas cover 217.2 million ha (19.6%) of the world's humid tropical forests and contain c. 70.3 petagrams of carbon (Pg C) in biomass and soil to 1 m depth. Between 2000 and 2005, we estimate that 1.75 million ha of forest were lost from protected areas in humid tropical forests, causing the emission of 0.25-0.33 Pg C. Protected areas lost about half as much carbon as the same area of unprotected forest. We estimate that the reduction of these carbon emissions from ongoing deforestation in protected sites in humid tropical forests could be valued at USD 6,200-7,400 million depending on the land use after clearance. This is >1.5 times the estimated spending on protected area management in these regions. Improving management of protected areas to retain forest cover better may be an important, although certainly not sufficient, component of an overall strategy for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD

Mapping vulnerability of tropical forest to conversion, and resulting potential CO2 emissions: A rapid assessment for the Eliasch Review

This report is a rapid assessment analysis undertaken to inform the UK's Eliasch Review on the role of international finance mechanisms to preserve global forests in tackling climate change. The results should be used with an understanding of the caveats specified at the end of the report

Towards a Global Tree Assessment

Although trees have high economic, cultural and ecological value, increasing numbers of species are potentially at risk of extinction because of forest loss and degradation as a result of human activities, including overharvesting, fire and grazing. Emerging threats include climate change and its interaction with the spread of pests and diseases. The impact of such threats on the conservation status of trees is poorly understood. Here we highlight the need to conduct a comprehensive conservation assessment of the world's tree species, building on previous assessments undertaken for the IUCN Red List. We suggest that recent developments in plant systematics, online databases, remote sensing data and associated analytical tools offer an unprecedented opportunity to conduct such an assessment. We provide an overview of how a Global Tree Assessment could be achieved in practice, through participative, open-access approaches to data sharing and evaluation

Biophysical suitability, economic pressure and land-cover change: a global probabilistic approach and insights for REDD+

There has been a concerted effort by the international scientific community to understand the multiple causes and patterns of land-cover change to support sustainable land management. Here, we examined biophysical suitability, and a novel integrated index of “Economic Pressure on Land” (EPL) to explain land cover in the year 2000, and estimated the likelihood of future land-cover change through 2050, including protected area effectiveness. Biophysical suitability and EPL explained almost half of the global pattern of land cover (R 2 = 0.45), increasing to almost two-thirds in areas where a long-term equilibrium is likely to have been reached (e.g. R 2 = 0.64 in Europe). We identify a high likelihood of future land-cover change in vast areas with relatively lower current and past deforestation (e.g. the Congo Basin). Further, we simulated emissions arising from a “business as usual” and two reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) scenarios by incorporating data on biomass carbon. As our model incorporates all biome types, it highlights a crucial aspect of the ongoing REDD + debate: if restricted to forests, “cross-biome leakage” would severely reduce REDD + effectiveness for climate change mitigation. If forests were protected from deforestation yet without measures to tackle the drivers of land-cover change, REDD + would only reduce 30 % of total emissions from land-cover change. Fifty-five percent of emissions reductions from forests would be compensated by increased emissions in other biomes. These results suggest that, although REDD + remains a very promising mitigation tool, implementation of complementary measures to reduce land demand is necessary to prevent this leakage

Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration

Extensive ecosystem restoration is increasingly seen as being central to conserving biodiversity1 and stabilizing the climate of the Earth2. Although ambitious national and global targets have been set, global priority areas that account for spatial variation in benefits and costs have yet to be identified. Here we develop and apply a multicriteria optimization approach that identifies priority areas for restoration across all terrestrial biomes, and estimates their benefits and costs. We find that restoring 15% of converted lands in priority areas could avoid 60% of expected extinctions while sequestering 299 gigatonnes of CO2—30% of the total CO2 increase in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution. The inclusion of several biomes is key to achieving multiple benefits. Cost effectiveness can increase up to 13-fold when spatial allocation is optimized using our multicriteria approach, which highlights the importance of spatial planning. Our results confirm the vast potential contributions of restoration to addressing global challenges, while underscoring the necessity of pursuing these goals synergistically.Fil: Strassburg, Bernardo B. N.. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Iribarrem, Alvaro. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Beyer, Hawthorne L.. The University of Queensland; Australia. University of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Cordeiro, Carlos Leandro. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Crouzeilles, Renato. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Jakovac, Catarina C.. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Braga Junqueira, André. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Lacerda, Eduardo. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil. Universidade Federal Fluminense; BrasilFil: Latawiec, Agnieszka E.. University of East Anglia; Reino Unido. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Balmford, Andrew. University of Cambridge; Estados UnidosFil: Brooks, Thomas M.. University Of The Philippines Los Banos; Filipinas. Institute For Marine And Antarctic Studies; Australia. International Union For Conservation Of Nature And Natural Resources; SuizaFil: Butchart, Stuart H. M.. University of Cambridge; Estados UnidosFil: Chazdon, Robin L.. University Of The Sunshine Coast; Australia. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Erb, Karl-Heinz. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Brancalion, Pedro. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Buchanan, Graeme. Royal Society For The Protection Of Birds; Reino UnidoFil: Cooper, David. Secretariat Of The Convention On Biological Diversity; CanadáFil: Díaz, Sandra Myrna. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Donald, Paul F.. University of Cambridge; Estados UnidosFil: Kapos, Valerie. United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre; Reino UnidoFil: Leclère, David. International Institute For Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg; AustriaFil: Miles, Lera. United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre; Reino UnidoFil: Obersteiner, Michael. Oxford Social Sciences Division; Reino Unido. International Institute For Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg; AustriaFil: Plutzar, Christoph. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; Austria. Universidad de Viena; AustriaFil: de M. Scaramuzza, Carlos Alberto. International Institute For Sustainability; BrasilFil: Scarano, Fabio R.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Visconti, Piero. International Institute For Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg; Austri

Congo Basin peatlands: threats and conservation priorities

The recent publication of the first spatially explicit map of peatlands in the Cuvette Centrale, central Congo Basin, reveals it to be the most extensive tropical peatland complex, at ca. 145,500 km2. With an estimated 30.6 Pg of carbon stored in these peatlands, there are now questions about whether these carbon stocks are under threat and, if so, what can be done to protect them. Here, we analyse the potential threats to Congo Basin peat carbon stocks and identify knowledge gaps in relation to these threats, and to how the peatland systems might respond. Climate change emerges as a particularly pressing concern, given its potential to destabilise carbon stocks across the whole area. Socio-economic developments are increasing across central Africa and, whilst much of the peatland area is protected on paper by some form of conservation designation, the potential exists for hydrocarbon exploration, logging, plantations and other forms of disturbance to significantly damage the peatland ecosystems. The low level of human intervention at present suggests that the opportunity still exists to protect the peatlands in a largely intact state, possibly drawing on climate change mitigation funding, which can be used not only to protect the peat carbon pool but also to improve the livelihoods of people living in and around these peatlands

The Impact of Global Climate Change on Tropical Forest Biodiversity in Amazonia

Species’ ranges are configured according to their tolerance of environmental conditions, especially climate, and their history of dispersal since speciation. Previous studies of the potential impact of climate change on biodiversity have been biased towards species of high latitudes. This situation results from a lack of detailed knowledge about the distribution of tropical biodiversity, and from the smaller degree of warming expected at low latitudes. However, various General Circulation Models (GCMs) simulate regional drying and increasing seasonality for parts of the tropics, including Amazonia. This may have a greater impact on tropical forest flora than temperature change alone. The Amazon region holds a high proportion of global biodiversity, yet conservation plans rarely consider possible climate change impacts. This thesis presents a methodology for projecting a set of Amazonian plant species’ ranges from limited data, and estimating their response to climate change scenarios. Species are classified into plant functional types (PFTs), which share traits such as growth form and reproductive strategy. Species' current distributions are modelled over a coarse scale (a 1º latitude-longitude grid), using a suitability index based on bioclimate variables. Distributions are additionally limited by species’ absolute tolerances to extreme values, and by dispersal barriers. A sizestructured population is simulated for each cell, to enable modelling of lags in response to climate change. In the standard impact scenario (SIS), future population processes are simulated over 100 years, with changes in the variables governing cell suitability being applied annually according to anomalies from a selected GCM. The run is repeated for each species using anomalies of half that magnitude, as a reduced-impact scenario (RIS). The range of potential outcomes for each species and PFT is evaluated. Widespread impacts are seen under both scenarios. An alternative impact scenario (AIS) is devised to examine the effects of allowing some "c-species" to thrive under heightened AET. The most vulnerable taxonomic groups, PFTs and geographical regions are identified as targets for monitoring and conservation action. In particular, there is a dramatic loss of species' viability in much of northeastern Amazonia at 2095 under all scenarios. The far western part of Amazonia is identified as important for persistence of the greatest number of species. Areas falling between the major rivers of the region have very limited distribution data, so are highlighted for future biodiversity survey work