Climate, Biodiversity, and Forests Issues and Opportunities Emerging from the Kyoto Protocol Paige Brown

CLIMATE, BIODIVERSITY, AND FORESTS ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES EMERGING FROM THE KYOTO PROTOCOL PAIGE BROWN

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIAnVE iNCOLLABORAnONWITH IUCN Tie Wodil C.semton U.imi CLIMATE, BIODIVERSITY, AND FORESTS ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES EMERGING FROM THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

BY PAIGE BROWN

A Contribution to the Forest Frontiers Initiative and the IUCN Climate Change Initiative

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE IN COLLABORATION WITH IUCN The World Conservation Uni< CAROL ROSEN Publications Director

Hyacinth Billings Production Manager

Each World Resources Institute report represents a timely, scholarly treatment of a subject of public concern. WRI takes responsibility for choosing the study topics and guaranteeing its authors and researchers freedom of inquiry. It also solicits and responds to the guidance of advisory panels and expert reviewers. Unless otherwise stated, however, all the interpretation and findings set forth in WRI publications are those of the authors.

Copyright © 1998 World Resources Institute and IL'CN - The World Conservation Union. All rights reserved. ISBN 1-56973-285-x Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 98-88915 Printed in the United States of America on Recvcled Paper. CONTENTS

Acknowledgments Foreword 1 Introduction 2 Getting to Kyoto 2 Kyoto Protocol Overview 5 Synergies Between Climate Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation 6 Unresolved Issues That Impede Capturing Climate and Biodiversity Benefits 7

Generic Issues Associated with Forests and Land-Use Change in the Kyoto Protocol 9 Forests as a Distraction from Reducing Energy-Related Emissions 9 Forest Options Could Become a Loophole 10 The Possibility of Negative Environmental Impacts 10 The Question of Property Rights 11 Threats to National Sovereignty 11 The Treatment of Forests and Land-Use Change in Industrialized Countries 12 Current Protocol Rules for Domestic Inventories of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Forests and Land-Use Change 12 The 1990 Base Year 12 The 2008-2012 Commitment Period 13 The 1990-2008 Interim Period 13 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines for Domestic Inventories of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Forests and Land-Use Change 13 Defining and Tracking Deforestation 13 What Is Left Uncounted in National Inventories? 14 Forest Harvest and Management 14 Forest Degradation 14 Storage in Wood Products 15 Forest Fires 16 Soil Carbon 16 Methods for Including Additional Activities Under Domestic Inventories 16 The Treatment of Forests and Land-Use Change Under the Market Mechanisms for Reductions Between Developed Countries 17 Project-Based Credit Trading 17 Emissions Trading 18 The Role of Forests and Land-Use Change in Developing Countries 19 The Clean Development Mechanism 20 Project Eligibility 21 Forest Harvest and Management 21 Carbon Stored in Wood Products 22 Forest Conservation 22 Improving Agricultural Productivity 22 Fire Suppression 23 Contributing Elements for a Successful CDM 23

Technical Concerns Associated with Measuring and Verifying Forest and Land-Use Change Emissions and Reductions 24 Establishing a Reference Case 24 Leakage 24 Permanence of Reductions 25 Measurement Accuracy 25

Recommendations 26 Glossary 30 Notes 31

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE III FOREST FRONTI E RS I N IT! ATI VE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

his report is the result of a collaboration between WRI and IUCN-The World Conservation Union. The author would first and foremost like to T thank Brett Orlando of IUCN-The World Conservation Union, who made this collaboration possible. Brett provided invaluable editorial input to ensure balance and clarity within the report. Additionally, he drafted the box on Potential Impacts of Climate Change. At WRI, the author is extremely grateful to Nancy Kete and Nigel Sizer for invaluable input and guidance that helped bridge the issues of climate and biodiversity. The report benefited greatly from the comments and suggestions of reviewers, both from within WRI, including Bruce Cabarle, Laura Lee Dooley, Paul Faeth, Nels Johnson, Tony La Vina, Gwen Parker, Walt Reid, and Frances Seymour, and from IUCN-The World Conservation Union, Andrew M. Deutz, Patrick Dugan, Scott A. Hajost, Bill Jackson, Rachel Kyte, Jeffrey A. McNeely, Simon Rietbergen, and Richard Tarasofsky. I would particularly like to thank Liz Cook for her contributions throughout the project. The comments of external reviewers Sandra Brown, Kenneth Chomitz, Darren Goetze, David Pearce, and Youba Sokona were exceedingly valuable. The author is grateful to Hyacinth Billings and Carol Rosen for managing the publication process. The report also benefited from the editorial talents of Patricia Ardila and Robert Livernash. This author alone is, of course, responsible for the document's accuracy and recommendations.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE IV FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE FOREWORD

ver the past several A great deal, as we now know. Can the world community Without a much stronger decades, two profound At the first level, climate change is a respond to these dire threats to the commitment to solving climate O global environmental major threat to efforts to conserve global environment? The 1997 change and biodiversity loss, we will issues-biodiversity loss and climate biodiversity. Some species already on Kyoto Protocol to the Framework bequeath to our children and change-have often moved in whol- the verge of extinction could be Convention on Climate Change is a grandchildren an irretrievably ly unconnected domains. After all, pushed over the edge as their habitats key step towards the mitigation of impoverished world. Such a fate can what possible connection could disappear because of climatic climate change-it was the first be avoided, but it requires a strong there be between the fate of unknown changes. More drought and floods international agreement to place international commitment and species in the Amazon rainforest that may be influenced by climate legally binding limits on greenhouse concerted action. We hope this report and emissions of carbon dioxide change will also make communities gas emissions from developed helps to encourage such action. from coal-burning power plants in struggling to improve their livelihoods countries. Although the Protocol We would like to express our industrialized countries? even more vulnerable. Another area significantly advanced the cause of gratitude to the AVINA Foundation, where these two issues strongly climate protection, it left many the John D. and Catherine T. intersect is in the carbon stored in questions unanswered, including the MacArthur Foundation, and the the world's forests and other natural role of forests and land-use change United States Agency for International ecosystems. When forests are burned in meeting obligations to slow global Development, whose support has or otherwise destroyed, carbon is warming. Just as the negative effects made this work possible. released into the atmosphere. For on biological diversity of global even' forest or other ecosystem that is warming and deforestation reinforce Jonathan Lash spared this fate, carbon is stored and each other, there are considerable President kept out of the atmosphere. While positive synergies between reducing World Resources Institute energy sector emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions and step- predominant contributor, forest ping up efforts to conserve forests. As David McDowell conversion is also a significant part the Conference of the Parties prepares Director General of the climate change problem, to tackle these questions, this report IUCN-The World Conservation Union contributing some 20 percent of offers timely insight into the potential annual carbon dioxide emissions and, of forests to advance both climate over the past 150 years, an estimated and biodiversity goals throughout 30 percent of the atmospheric buildup the world. of carbon dioxide. Climate, Biodiversity, and In much of the world, far more Forests: Issues and Opportunities forests are being lost than protected. Emerging from the Kyoto Protocol This is bad news for climate change, examines why the role of forests and and worse news for the world's land-use change under the Kyoto biological resources. As a very rough Protocol remains controversial and guess, there are perhaps 14 million attempts to clarify and separate the species in the world. At least 50 issues. For example, some perceive percent of these species may reside forests and land-use change as a in tropical forests; some are restricted distraction from reducing energy- to a single patch of trees. Once the related emissions, while others fear trees are gone, these species are gone that greenhouse gas fluxes from forever. The rapid loss of forests thus forests and land-use change cannot is doubly damaging, adding to the be credibly quantified. It will require global burden of atmospheric carbon further research and careful con- dioxide and undermining the world's struction of mechanisms created by biological resources, which in turn the Protocol to resolve these issues reduces the resilience of ecosystems and ensure that the treatment of faced with a changing climate. forests and land-use change is consistent with credible greenhouse reductions and biodiversity and social benefits.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE INTRODUCTION

or more than a decade, the One of the most important areas proven controversial. Finally, the Propelled by increasing under- community of nations has yet to be resolved concerns how paper highlights key future deci- standing of global weather and evi- F engaged in a difficult and much of a role forests and land-use sions that will determine whether dence of growing concentrations of crucial debate that has set the change will play under the Kyoto these opportunities are seized and atmospheric carbon dioxide, in framework for international efforts Protocol. They are both a part of examines how these decisions can 1988 the UN Environment to reduce the risk of climate change the problem and of the solution of be made to work for climate, forests, Programme (UNEP) and the World into the next century. That debate climate change. Saving or increasing and biodiversity. Meteorological Organization estab- took a significant new turn in forest cover, particularly of old-growth lished the Intergovernmental Panel December 1997, when nations met forests, stores carbon, thus keeping GETTING TO KYOTO on Climate Change (IPCC). The in Kyoto, Japan, to forge a follow-on it out of the atmosphere and slowing In order to better appreciate the IPCC is charged with assessing cur- Protocol to the original 1992 global warming. Conversely, the issues and opportunities associated rent information on climate change Framework Convention on Climate global loss of forests plays a with land-use change and forests and its potential impacts and with Change. The Kyoto Protocol marks significant role in increasing the risks presented by the Kyoto Protocol, it is framing strategies to mitigate or the first international agreement to of climate change. Forest conversion useful to understand the events adapt to such change.2 The IPCC place legally binding limits on has contributed an estimated 30 leading up to it. contains three working groups: the greenhouse gas emissions from percent of the atmospheric buildup Climate change was initially first concentrates on the climate developed countries but leaves in carbon dioxide.' recognized as a serious problem system, the second on impacts and many issues to be resolved in future This report focuses on the ways meriting international attention at response options, and the third on negotiations. in which forests and land-use the First World Climate Conference economic and social dimensions. change can both exacerbate and in 1979- At that time, a declaration Box 1 provides a chronology of key mitigate climate change. It identi- was issued calling on the world's events. fies the opportunities the Protocol governments to prevent potential presents regarding the conservation, human-caused changes in climate improved management, and that would adversely impact people's restoration of forests and considers well-being. some of the reasons the issue has

CHRONOLOGY OF KEY EVENTS

1979. World Meteorological 1990. IPCC's First Assessment to 1990 levels by the year 2000 the balance of evidence "suggests Organization (WMO) and United Report affirms scientific basis for and to help developing countries a discernible human influence on Nations Environment Programme climate change. respond to climate change through global climate." (UNEP) convene First World 1990. The Second World technology transfer and funding. 1997. Third Conference of the Climate Conference and establish Climate Conference calls for a 1995. First Conference of the Parties produces the Kyoto Protocol World Climate Program. treaty on climate change. Parties establishes that initial FCCC to the FCCC that includes legally 1988. WMO and UNEP establish 1990. United Nations establish- commitments are inadequate. It binding limits on greenhouse gas the Intergovernmental Panel on es Intergovernmental Negotiating issues the "Berlin Mandate" that emissions. Climate Change to assess threat of Committee that ultimately drafts leads to the Protocol by the third climate change. the Framework Convention on Conference of the Parties. Nofe; l. Ministerial Conference on 1989. Noordwijk Declaration Climate Change (FCCC). 1996. Second Conference of the Atmospheric Pollution and Climatic Change. signed by 68 environmental minis- 1992. FCCC opened for signa- Parties. The ministers endorse the 1990. The Noordwijk Declaration on ters from around the world; it pro- ture at the Rio Earth Summit. Second Assessment Report of the Atmospheric Pollution and Climate Change. poses increasing global forest cover Developed countries commit to Intergovernmental Panel on to help slow climate change. (1) return greenhouse gas emissions Climate Change, which states that

WORtD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE hi- ••

The IPCC published its First Although this paper does not To aid Parties in preparing their Beyond overseas development Assessment Report on Climate provide full coverage of the FCCC, it national communications, in 1995 assistance, industrialized countries Change in 1990. The report does contain a general outline that the IPCC issued a workbook con- also agreed to provide new and affirmed the underlying scientific focuses on its treatment of forests taining guidelines for undertaking additional financial resources and basis of climate change. It noted and land-use change. inventories with the aim of develop- to promote the transfer of environ- fossil fuel combustion from vehicles All FCCC parties-developing ing internationally agreed report- mentally sound technologies to and industrial activities as one of and developed countries-agreed to ing, data gathering, and documenting assist developing countries in meet- the main contributors to human- submit "national communications" methods for greenhouse gases.6 In ing their obligations. induced carbon dioxide emissions. that would include inventories of addition to industrial emissions, the The FCCC designated the It also explicitly recognized the his- human-caused emissions of green- IPCC workbook instructs nations to Global Environment Facility (GEF) toric, current, and future contribu- house gases from sources such as do a comprehensive inventory of the as an interim financing mechanism. tions of forests to climate change, vehicles, industries, deforestation, total emissions and removals from The GEF, conceived in 1989, is focusing on emissions from defor- and removals such as reforestation. forest and land-use change activi- intended to serve as a mechanism estation and potential uptake from The national communications were ties. The workbook asks for the for providing financial resources to reforestation.3 also to describe programs that con- inventory' to include three categories help developing countries address At the close of 1990, the United tained measures to mitigate climate of emissions and removals: a) global environmental issues, Nations General Assembly accepted change, with developed countries increases or decreases in biomass including climate change and the first IPCC Report and established being required to describe specific within a standing forest, such as biodiversity loss.7 the Intergovernmental Negotiating policies and measures to implement from logging, fuelwood collection, The FCCC also recognized the Committee to begin discussing the their commitments. or regrowth; b) conversion of forests concept of Joint Implementation, terms of a Framework Convention The Climate Convention explic- or grasslands to other land uses; that is, agreements between at least on Climate Change. The United itly includes the role of forests and and c) sequestration from regrowth two parties (be it individuals, non- Nations Conference on Environment land-use change under commit- of abandoned land, such as pasture. governmental organizations, gov- and Development, or Earth Summit, ments, stating that Parties shall Parties using the IPCC report- ernmental bodies, academic held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, was promote and cooperate in the sus- ing and accounting guidelines for institutions, or the private sector in set as the target for completing the tainable management, conserva- national inventories identified sev- two or more countries) to offset negotiations. At the Earth Summit, tion, and enhancement of sinks of eral issues where further method- greenhouse gas emissions by reduc- 154 governments signed the United greenhouse gases, including forests ological work would be needed. In ing, avoiding, or sequestering Nations Framework Convention on and other terrestrial, coastal, and particular, Parties have identified greenhouse gas emissions. For Climate Change (FCCC). The stated marine ecosvstems.5 the need to improve methods to example, one project in Mexico dis- objective of the FCCC is to stabilize track emissions from forests and tributed energy-efficient light bulbs, greenhouse gas concentrations in land-use change. Several Parties while a second project in the Czech the atmosphere at a level that would requested further scientific work in Republic, funded by three American prevent dangerous, human-caused measuring emissions and sequestra- utilities, switched an electrical plant climate change.4 tion in order to reduce uncertainty from high-emission coal to lower- in estimates. emission natural gas. The concept is not limited to energy projects but also includes forest and land-use change sector offsets. Some forest and land-use sector carbon sequestration projects that illustrate this concept are described in Box 2.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE FOREST AND LAND-USE CHANGE CARBON SEQUESTRATION PROJECTS

Early carbon sequestration pro- reduce residual damage to sur- ocelot, and Baird's tapir. Over its providing training for community jects such as the Reduced Impact rounding forest. lifetime, the project is estimated to forest fire brigades (4). WRI cal- Logging Project in Malaysia and The project's potential benefits sequester slightly over 1 million culated that the project would CARE/Guatemala were primarily include reduced damage to the tons of carbon. sequester an estimated 11.2 mil- bilateral agreements between a sin- residual forest; decreased erosion, • FORESTS ABSORBING CARBON lion tons of carbon over 40 \ears gle investor seeking to offset its carbon emissions, and land EMISSIONS (FACE)/KRKONOSE through net addition to the standing greenhouse gas emissions and an degradation; increased capacity NATIONAL PARK, CZECH REPUBLIC inventory of biomass carbon, implementing agency. Perhaps in for future timber production; FACE was founded by the retention of standing forests as a response to concerns about risk of increased biodiversity protection; Electricity Generating Board (SEP) result of demand displacement via failure, more recent projects have decreased incidence of fire; of the Netherlands to sequester woodlots and agroforestry projects, moved away from bilateral agree- reduced weed infestations; and part of the CO2 it emitted from protection of some carbon in soils, ments to either investor pools, such increased long-term ecological the use of fossil fuel for electricity and retention of some standing as Rio Bravo, or project portfolios and economic productivity. generation in that country. The forests because of community fire such as those offered by Costa Rica. • THE RIO BRAVO CARBON project area, in the Czech Republic, brigades. • REDUCED IMPACT LOGGING IN SEQUESTRATION PROJECT, BELIZE contains the only Norway spruce SABAH, MALAYSIA Multiple utilities are investing in forest in Europe adapted to a Notes: 1. Michelle A Pinard and In August 1992, New England Belize's Rio Bravo Carbon montane climate. Because of this Francis E. Putz. "Retaining Forest Biomass Electric Systems of Massachusetts, Sequestration Project, implement- unusual flora, 38,500 hectares of by Reducing Logging Damage." Biotropiai a coal-burning utility, decided to ed by the Programme for Belize this forest was designated a National 28, no 3 (1996V \ provide funds to Innoprise Corp., and The Nature Conservancy, to Park in 1963. The park and its 2. Programme for Belize. The Nature of Sabah, Malaysia, a timber con- stop forests from being converted to forests have become heavily Conservancy, and \\ isconsin Electric Power cession holder, to implement reduced- agricultural land. The project degraded by air pollution. In 1984, Company. "The Rio Bravo Conservation impact logging guidelines for 1,400 purchased approximately 6,014 the IUCN-the World Conservation and Management Area, Belize. Carbon hectares of Innoprise's 1 million hectares of endangered forest that Union listed Krkonose as one of Sequestration Pilot Project Proposal.' hectare concession (1). The project would have been converted to the ten most threatened national Submitted for consideration under the emphasized staff training to use mechanized agriculture and is parks in the world. FACE is financ- I'nited States Initiative on Joint existing technology and machinery developing a sustainable forest ing the reforestation of 15,000 implementations (November, 1994). in an environmentally sensitive management component that will hectares of damaged and dead forest 3. "Forests Absorbing Carbon Emissions, way and to increase supervision of provide income to local people and in Krkonose National Park (3). Annual Report" (Arnhem, "Die

harvesting operations. increase the amount of carbon • CARE/GUATEMALA Netherlands, 1993). FACE Website-

The harvesting guidelines sequestered (2). AGROFORESTRY PROJECT httpVAww facefoundation.nl. include specifications for creating If the protected forest area A project proposed and implement- 4. Paul Faeth, Cheryl Cort, and Robert buffer zones for streams and roads, had been converted to agricultural ed by CARE in Guatemala fea- l.neraash. "Evaluating the Carbon developing a formal harvesting land, it would have separated cur- tured several components, Sequestration Benefits ot Forestn Projects plan, cutting climber vines before rently protected forest areas, thus including creating community in Developing Countries" (Washington DC: harvesting, planning and marking compromising their ecological woodlots, implementing agro- World Resources Institute, 199-U. skid trails, marking trees for future integrity (2). The project area forestry practices, terracing vul- harvests, and undertaking direc- contains nine endangered mam- nerable slopes (thus improving tional felling of marked trees to mals, among them the jaguar, agricultural productivity), and

To gain experience and test the Some environmental groups Implementation, in 1995 the first credits can accrue during the pilot efficacy of Joint Implementation, and various developing countries Conference of the Parties estab- phase, which lasts until the end of the United States, Costa Rica, the have been critical of Joint lished a pilot phase, termed 1999, when a review is scheduled. Netherlands, and several other Implementation, arguing that it Activities Implemented Jointly (AIJ). There are currently over 15 forest countries established experimental would allow developed countries to AIJ is similar to Joint Implementation and land-use-based mitigation national programs to evaluate, avoid making difficult changes in that both are based on greenhouse projects underway, and many more approve, and, in some cases, fund domestically by buying cheap car- gas reduction projects among several have been proposed. projects. bon offsets in developing countries.8 countries. Any country may partici- As a result of the opposition to Joint pate in AIJ, but no actual reduction

WORtD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Finally, in recognition of their At this first meeting the Parties KYOTO PROTOCOL greenhouse gas emission limits, historical responsibility for the concluded that the voluntary com- OVERVIEW and developing or "non-Annex I," buildup of greenhouse gases in the mitments under the FCCC were On December 10,1997, delegates countries with no binding limits. atmosphere, under the FCCC devel- indeed inadequate, as it became from 160 nations completed The Annex I group consists of 39 oped nations voluntarily committed clear that most developed countries negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol industrialized nations and to reduce emissions to f 990 levels would not meet them. Negotiators at the third Conference of the economies in transition, including by the year 2000. The FCCC agreed to the Berlin Mandate that Parties. By providing that industri- the United States, the European instructed the first Conference of the established the need for quantified alized nations should adopt legally Union, Canada, Japan, the Czech Parties to determine whether devel- limits on greenhouse gas emissions binding emission limits on green- Republic, and Russia." oped countiy commitments were beyond the year 2000. The Berlin house gases, the Kyoto Protocol took adequate. Mandate talks were given a signifi- the significant step of moving from cant push in 1995 when the IPCC voluntary to binding commitments. issued its Second Assessment Report, While individual countiy commit- concluding that "the balance of evi- ments vary; the Protocol calls for dence suggests a discernible human reductions of aggregate industrial- 9 influence on global climate." A ized countiy emissions by roughly 5 separate subsidiary body, the Ad Hoc percent below 1990 levels.10 Group on the Berlin Mandate, was Following the FCCC, the Protocol created to draft a protocol for adop- divides the world into two tion at the third Conference of the groups-industrialized, or "Annex I," Parties in 1997. countries which committed to

Q POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE

By Brett Orlando. Species will be more vulner- of ten areas with the highest per- lUCN-Workl Conservation I num. able, and even where they are able centage of threatened plants are on Notes: i. Intergovernmental Panel Washington o/fice to tolerate climate change, they could small islands, and climate change on Climate Change. "Summary for face new competitors, predators, will onh exacerbate these threats (3). Policymakers," in Climate Change There is a growing scientific con- diseases, and alien species for which Finallv, carbon stored in forests 1995- Impacts. Adaptations, and sensus that climate change could they have no natural defense. could be lost as forests transition Mitigation of Climate Change: present a major threat to biodiver- Existing forested areas might under- from one type to another under Scientific-Technical Analyses of sity at both the species and the go major changes: some may entirely changed climate conditions, thus Impacts. Adaptations, and Mitigation ecosystem levels. The IPCC stated disappear, while others might enhancing the greenhouse effect. qj (lunate Change Contribution of that human-induced climate experience changes in species com- Human society is also miner- Working Group II to the Second change could bring about losses in position. Half of coastal wetlands able to climate change. For exam- Assessment Report of the Tntergo\emmental biological diversity and in the goods of international conservation ple, increased incidence of drought, Panel on Climate Change. and services that ecosystems provide importance could be lost. Coral triggered by climate change, could 2. "Summary for Policymakers," jb. society(l). Many ecosystems are reefs and mangroves would be lead to threats to food security, 3. The IUCX Species Survival already threatened b\ human threatened by sea level rise,increas - particularly in arid and semi-arid Commission. 1997IUCX Red List of activities such as pollution, ing temperatures, and changes in regioas. Communities that are cur- Threatened Plants. Kern S. Walter and increasing resource demands, and storm patterns. Small islands are renth struggling to improve their Harriet J. Gillett. eds Compiled by The nonsustainable management particularly vulnerable to sea level livelihoods are the most vulnerable World Conservation Monitoring Centre practices. Human-induced climate rise, as much of the land mass could to the potential impacts of climate (Gland, Switzerland' IUCN-The World change represents an important be lost, potentially displacing large change as they will have fewer Conservation Union, 1998). xxxiv additional stress. numbers of people (2). Also, seven resources for adaptation measures.

WORtD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Forest and Land-Use Change Under the Kyoto Protocol

ARTICLE RELEVANCE TO LAND USE CHANGE AND FORESTS

Article 3.3 Domestic Greenhouse Emissions by Industrialized Countries. Defines which domestic emissions should be inventoried by industrialized countries during the 2008-2012 commitment period. The Protocol currently requires tracking greenhouse gas removals and emissions from human-induced afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation that have occurred since 1990.

Article 3.4 Inventorying Additional Activities. While Article 3-3 defines three activities to be inventoried, Article 3.4 states that later Conferences of the Parties may include additional activities such as forest harvest and management, or remove activities that must be inventoried.

Article 6 Project-based Credit and Emissions Trading Between Industrialized Countries. and • Define two market mechanisms that allow industrialized countries to trade emission allowances with other industrialized countries. Article 17 • Article 6 specifies project-based credit trading and explicitly refers to enhancing carbon storage and reducing emissions but does not specify which kinds of projects, such as those aimed at slowing forest degradation and tree planting, are allowed.

Article 12 Clean Development Mechanism (COM). Allows industrialized countries to meet their reductions via activities in developing countries. There is no explicit mention of land-use change and forest projects, making it unclear what kind of endeavors will be allowed.

Under the Protocol, each Annex The Protocol requires inventories domestic action through a limited versity and human society. The I country agreed to a specific green- of the six major greenhouse gases.12 set of forest-sector activities-afforesta- FCCC also commits nations to pro- house gas reduction target using its Carbon dioxide, the most prevalent tion and reforestation that count as moting sustainable management 1990 levels as a baseline. Parties of them, is emitted from energy pro- reductions, and deforestation that and conservation of forests and negotiated these non-uniform targets duction, transport, industry, and counts as an emission; c) use two other terrestrial ecosystems. If rati- in order to address varying national land-use conversion such as defor- market-based mechanisms (emis- fied by the Parties, the Kyoto circumstances. For example, Japan estation. Land-use changes primarily sions trading and project-based credit Protocol could offer incentives for and the United States committed to emit carbon dioxide, though methane trading) that allow them to buy, sell, the restoration, protection, and con- a 6 percent and 7 percent reduction and nitrous oxide are also emitted or trade greenhouse gas reductions servation of forests and other from their 1990 emission levels, in trace quantities. and emission allowances from other ecosystems within developed and respectively, while Australia set its cap These reductions must be accom- Annex I countries; and d) use a third developing countries, thus present- to an 8 percent increase. Japan plished within the "commitment market mechanism that allows buying clear synergies between climate received a lower target than the period," 2008-2012, which provides ing or trading of project-based credits mitigation and biodiversity conser- United States, as it is a relatively increased timing flexibility. For from non-Annex I countries-e.g., vation. Emissions from the conver- more energy efficient nation and example, Japan's average yearly the Clean Development Mechanism. sion and degradation of forest and therefore claimed that greater reduc- greenhouse gas emissions for 2008- grassland ecosystems is not only a tions would be more difficult than 2012 must be 6 percent below what SYNERGIES BETWEEN contributor to climate change but is for the United States. Australia argued they were in 1990. F.missions may CLIMATE MITIGATION also a significant driving force that its dependence on coal would be above the 6 percent reduction in AND BIODIVERSITY behind species extinctions and the make reductions, or even a stabi- any given year during the commit- CONSERVATION loss of critical ecosystem functions lization at 1990 levels, too difficult. ment period, but the average must The FCCC explicitly recognizes the and sendees such as regenerating be compensated in later years. links between climate change and watersheds, purifying water, slowing Annex I countries have four biodiversity conservation in both its soil erosion, and providing food, means by which to meet their objective and its commitments. The fiber, and medicines.13 Protocol commitments and to cal- objective states the importance of culate their net emission inventory. preventing dangerous changes to (See Table 1.) They may a) take the climate system within a time any domestic action to reduce emis- frame that would not allow ecosys- sions from their industrial sectors, tems to adapt naturally. Box 3 such as replacing fossil fuel use with describes some of the potential renewable energy sources; b) take impacts of climate change on biodi-

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE !*•:-/•

Temperate forests, most of which Carbon sequestration potential, kinds of activities that might be decide whether forest and land-use have already been converted and endangered forest regions, and bio- allowed under the Clean Development change projects are eligible under the degraded, still offer important diversity "hot spots" often overlap, Mechanism (CDM). Clean Development Mechanism opportunities to protect biodiversity particularly in developing countries. If the Protocol creates incentives (CDM). In particular, decisions on and slow climate change. For This offers opportunities for synergies to conserve and better manage forests project eligibility and guidelines will example, in the United States, where among the various concerns, as in both developed and developing determine whether the CDM can overall only 1-2 percent of native illustrated by Table 2, which lists countries, tremendous climate and provide assistance to slow deforesta- forest remains, the Pacific Northwest the top ten countries in order of biodiversity benefits could be realized. tion, contribute to sustainable devel- retains 13 percent of its old-growth plant biodiversity in their frontier However, a great deal of work remains opment, and reduce greenhouse gas forest, which provides critical forests.17 These countries exhibit to ensure that including forests and emissions and biodiversity loss in breeding and feeding habitat to a an important link to a similar land-use change more fully within developing countries. As the Parties range of species, such as the spotted ranking of developing country car- the Protocol results in credible decide how to incorporate forests and owl and northern goshawk.14 Old- bon sequestration potential, shown greenhouse gas reductions. land-use change into the Protocol, growth Douglas fir forests in the in the far right column of the table.18 they should seek greater collaboration Pacific Northwest are also one of the Because Annex I countries UNRESOLVED ISSUES THAT with other international agreements, most efficient storehouses of carbon. must limit their greenhouse gas IMPEDE CAPTURING particularly the two that emerged from Even after that length of time, natural emissions, the Protocol could create a CLIMATE AND BIODIVERSITY the Rio Faith Summit-the Convention on forests store greater amounts of carbon disincentive for forest conversion and BENEFITS Biological Diversity and the Convention than tree plantations and provide degradation. The three market By not fully counting emissions and to Combat Desertification—with the greater biodiversity benefits. mechanisms could potentially provide removals from forest management purpose of ensuring that they neither Boreal forests remain largely funds for carbon offset projects that and by not defining deforestation, contradict each other nor miss key intact, with Russia containing nearly provide alternatives to conversion or the Protocol has not yet seized the overlaps." (See Box 4.) If the one fifth of the world's forest and intensive use of forests, as Annex I opportunity to provide incentives to opportunities to link actions to slow Canada housing the second largest countries seek to meet their emission improve forest management and climate change with halting biodi- forest expanse, making these two limits. Box 2 describes forest and possibly slow forest loss in developed versity loss and desertification are to nations critical carbon storehouses. land-use projects funded and designed countries. These omissions could lead be realized, the issues associated with The Russian Federation contains to reduce or sequester carbon. These to large uncounted emissions from fully accounting for emissions and about 20 percent of the world's carbon carbon offset projects provide examples Annex I nations that continue to reductions from forests and land-use stored in forest vegetation, meaning of actual Activities Implemented deforest, or from countries with poor change must be understood and that further deforestation or degra- Jointly (AIJ) pilot projects and as forest management policies. The addressed. dation of Russian forests could such offer possible examples of the Parties to the Convention will also potentially be a significant source of emissions.15 An estimated 19 percent of Russian forests are currently under 16 threat from logging and mining. Plant Biodiversity and Carbon Sequestration These same forests also harbor endangered animal species such as PLANT BIODIVERSITY RANK COUNTRY CARBON RANK the Amur tiger and are the traditional homeland of indigenous peoples. 1 Brazil 1 2 Colombia 8 3 Indonesia 2 4 Venezuela 16 5 Peru 15 6 Ecuador 19 7 Bolivia Unranked 8 Mexico 6 9 Malaysia 5 10 Papua New Guinea 10

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE ••••

This paper examines the reasons The next four sections will • TIK Treatment of Forests and • Technical Concents Associated why the above-described issues exist address each of the main issues, as Land-Use Change in Industrialized with Measuring and Verifying and how they may be overcome. follows: Countries. This examines issues Forest and Land-Use Change The concerns relating to land-use • Generic Issues Associated with related to national inventories of Emissions and Reductions. These change, forests, and global warming Forests and Land-Use Change in emissions and sequestration from relate primarily to project-level emis- addressed in this paper fall into two the Kyoto Protocol. These encom- land-use change and forests and sions and reductions under project- broad categories: a) Annex I national- pass national inventories and pro- briefly covers project-based credit based credit trading and the Clean level inventories and actions to ject-level accounting and are and emissions trading. Development Mechanism, aside reduce greenhouse gas emissions, relevant to both Annex I and non- • UK Role of Forests and Land-Use from measurement accuracy, which which relate only to countries that Annex I countries. Change in Developing Countries. also applies to national inventories. have accepted greenhouse gas limits, This focuses on the Clean Development thus far limited to industrialized Mechanism as the primary means countries; and b) project-level esti- to influence emissions from devel- mates of net greenhouse gas reduc- oping countries under the Protocol. tions (the Clean Development Mechanism and project-based credit trading), which may relate to either industrialized or developing countries.

MAXIMIZING SYNERGIES BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

The four agreements emerging impact and avoid actions on the the environmental implications of such as moist forests, such projects from the Rio Earth Summit-the part of one that contradict the forest product harvest. are still often more cost-effective Convention on Biological Diversity, objectives of another. Synergies among the agree- than similar efforts in Europe or the Framework Convention on A number of international ments clearly exist and should be the United States, where hind and Climate Change, the Convention initiatives relating to forests have fully exploited. For example, finding labor are relatively more expensive. to Combat Desertification, and the been launched, including the avenues to slow the loss of forests Similarly, replacing fuel sources Forest Principles-call for policies, Intergovernmental Forum on Forests. in areas that are high in biodiver- in economies in transition can strategies, and solutions to mitigate The Forest Principles suggest sity and are large carbon storehouses reduce the acid precipitation that the effects of climate change, bio- principles and actions but do not (in the Congo Basin and the damages and kills forests in Central diversity loss, desertification, and provide guidance on issues. The Amazon) should be explored. and Eastern Europe, among other forest degradation and conversion, Intergovernmental Forum on Rehabilitating degraded range- regions, while reducing greenhouse respectively. In particular, each Forests is a continuation of the lands and planting windbreaks gas emissions (1). document calls on countries to Intergovernmental Panel on both increases carbon storage and integrate these four objectives into Forests, established by the reverses desertification. Arid lands Note: 1. World Resources Institute, in national and regional development Commission on Sustainable in developing countries may present collaboration with the United Nations plans, policies, programs, and Development to provide guidance a significant opportunity for carbon Environment Programme, the (nited strategies. Coordinating policies and on improving national forest poli- sequestration, since there are large Nations Itaelopment Programme, and the strategies between the Conventions cies, international coordination, cri- areas requiring restoration. Even World Bank. World Resources. A Guide to and other international forest agree- teria and indicators for sustainable though arid areas sequester less thedhibtdEnvironment 1996-97 (New ments will both enhance their forest management, and assessing carbon than some other land types. York: Oxford Umversih Press, 1996).

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE GENERIC ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH FORESTS AND LAND-USE CHANGE IN THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

his section describes the How much of a difference can countries has contributed an esti- The buildup of greenhouse ways in which forest and land-use change and forest projects mated 23 percent of average annual gases in the atmosphere that causes T land-use change climate make? A significant amount, but global emissions of carbon dioxide.23 climate change is primarily due to mitigation efforts may have unin- hardly enough to allow nations to Further, the buildup of carbon diox- fossil fuel use; therefore, climate tended negative consequences, completely bypass the industrial ide emissions in the atmosphere change can be avoided only by including failure to sequester the sector. By 2050, land-use and forest during the 1980's from land-use seeking changes in the world's use estimated amount of greenhouse options from all regions, including change and deforestation accounts of fossil fuels. However, in tandem gases, thus diluting the Protocol's temperate and boreal, could reduce for nearly 20 percent of the human- with, and in some cases prior to, effectiveness in slowing global or sequester about 12-15 percent of caused "radiative forcing" of green- these changes, emission reductions warming, or misuse that results in cumulative fossil fuel emissions house gases, an amount greater than from other sectors, such as agricul- negative social or environmental over the same period.20 In the that for nitrous oxide at 6 percent ture and manufacturing, that impacts. United States, domestic forest and about equal to methane at 19 release the other greenhouse gases options could remove or conserve percent.24 (See Figure 1.) Radiative are also necessary, in order to avoid FORESTS AS A about 16 percent of the needed forcing describes a change in the or slow climate change. Among DISTRACTION FROM reductions over the commitment energy balance of the Earth's other sources of greenhouse gases, REDUCING ENERGY- period.21 Thus, the United States atmospheric system in response to forest and land-use change is most RELATED EMISSIONS cannot rely solely on its domestic alterations, such as a change in the in danger of exclusion, despite the For many national governments forest and land-use sector. Given the concentration of greenhouse gases. fact that it bears such a large his- and environmental organizations, physical limits, the concern that This energy balance controls the torical, current, and future respon- climate change is solely an energy forest and land-use projects will dis- Earth's climate system. sibility foremissions , and one that issue, so they do not want the focus tract developed nations from the offers such important additional of the negotiations to shift from fos- goal of reducing industrial fossil benefits to climate. sil fuel emissions to forest-sector fuel use seems overstated. emissions. They fear that if Annex I While land-use change and countries have broad latitude to uti- forests may play a relatively small lize forests and land-use activities to part in the solution to global warm- Greenhouse Gas Share of Radiative Forcing meet their commitments, either ing, they are a part of the problem. domestically or through market During the initial period of eco- mechanisms, then these nations nomic development in Europe and can avoid making difficult changes North America, land-use change in their fossil fuel consumption pat- resulted in large releases of carbon terns by investing in relatively dioxide.22 Deforestation in tropical cheap projects to maintain rain- forests in tropical countries, or by undertaking massive tree planting schemes domestically. If this proves to be the case, the Protocol's ability to induce the development of new climate-friendly technology in the industrial sector would be diminished.

10% Halogenated Compounds 20% 45% C02 Deforestation CO, Industrial Processes & Land-Use Change

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE FOREST OPTIONS COULD THE POSSIBILITY OF NEGATIVE reduction credits from the conversion rather than becoming "overmature" BECOME A LOOPHOLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS of natural forests to fast-growing and releasing carbon, as was Forest options could become a loop- Some environmental groups are plantations. This concern stems from previously thought28 Compared with hole if, under the two project-based concerned that including forests the common misconception that a forest conservation, tree planting is mechanisms, governments or other and land-use change more fully in rapid harvest and tree planting regime a less efficient carbon storage entities try to claim "credit" for the Protocol will lead to some maximizes carbon removal.26 method, in terms both of cost per 29 activities they would have done interpretations of its terms that Mature forests have often been ton and tons per hectare. (See anyway, regardless of the Protocol. result in negative environmental accumulating carbon for centuries Figure 2.) The carbon stored in the Moreover, this issue is not confined to impacts for both market mechanisms and store tremendous amounts four plantation and afforestation forest and land-use change projects and domestic reduction efforts.25 relative to young, growing forests.27 sites includes both carbon stored in but can also afflict energy-sector Further, new evidence is emerging that living biomass and wood products One prominent concern is that 10 projects under the market mecha- governments and forest products mature tropical forests continue to after 300 years nisms, where a recipient government companies will attempt to claim sequester small amounts of carbon, or other agency claims an incorrect "reference" scenario (that is, the likely course of future development in an area if projects were not implemented). Comparison of Potential Biomass For example, a country may claim that an area of forest would have been converted to agricultural use, although it is in fact not in 137 danger of being converted. Climate Industrial Poplar Plantation mitigation funds would be used to EUROPE protect the area, and an investor would gain unearned greenhouse Afforestation of Tropical Wasteland gas reduction credits. Similarly, in BORNEO the energy sector, a recipient country may gain funds to switch an electrical power station from high- Industrial Slash Pine Plantation emission coal to low-emission nat- BRAZIL ural gas, but the municipality may have already been planning such a Industrial Black Locust Plantation fuel switch. In both sectors, the EUROPE CDM and project-based credit trading must establish guidelines requiring proof of prevailing man- Mature Primary Moist Forest agement practices, trends, and legal CAMEROON requirements, all of which must be surpassed if the project is to claim Mature Closed Forest credit. SABAH. MALAYSIA 611

Mature Douglas Fir NORTHWESTERN UNITED STATES 200 300 400 500

TONS OF CARBON PER HECTARE

Sources: Mark K. Harmon. William K. Ferrell, and Jen)' F. Franklin. "Kffects on Carbon Storage of Conversion of Old-Growth Forests to Young Forests." Science 247 (1990): 699. Francis E. Putz and Michelle Pinard. "Reduced Impact Logging as a Carbon Offset Method." Conservation Biology 7, no. 4 (December 1993): 755-57. Sandra Brown. Andrew J. R. Gillespie, and Mel E. Lugo. "Biomass Estimation Methods for Tropical Forests with Applications to Forest Inventor;' Data." Forest Science 35, no. 4 (December 1989): 895.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 10 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE The market-based mechanisms THE QUESTION OF ability to enforce its ownership Similarly, some developing and Annex I countries must incor- PROPERTY RIGHTS rights, leading to an "open access" countries note that forest and land- porate guidelines that prevent If the market mechanisms introduce situation in which many different use projects under the CDM may greenhouse gas reduction credits new financing for forest and land-use users rely on forest resources with- threaten national sovereignty. This from accruing at the expense of projects, competition for control over out legally recognized rights. concern stems from the perception negative overall environmental forest resources may intensify as Projects should be screened to that forest and land-use projects impacts, even if the net result is various users try to gain access to the ensure that property and usage under the CDM, such as forest positive for climate change. For new financial flows. These factors rights and the needs of local users conservation activities, could preclude example, converting open woodland make it especially important that are taken into account. using that forest for other purposes, or grassland to tree plantations may, projects be screened and designed thus slowing development. However, in some cases, increase net carbon with potential social impacts in THREATS TO NATIONAL this problem can be avoided if sequestered, but such a strategy mind, so that their design and SOVEREIGNTY projects contain a strong social and would destroy a natural ecosystem. negotiation involve not only state In part because the Protocol is an community component that furthers Social and environmental governments or private entities but international legal agreement, both national development priorities. criteria could serve as screens for also local users. In many cases it Annex I and non-Annex I countries Moreover, Article 12 specifies that projects under the mechanisms. will not be sufficient to contract have expressed concerns about the participation in the CDM is voluntary Many public institutions involving with the host government entities potential threat to national sover- and must be approved by each Parry international trade and investment for projects; it may also be necessary eignty. If Annex I countries ratify involved, including both investor regimes employ such environmental or preferable to negotiate and/or the Protocol, they will have to and host countries. screens, with varying degrees of contract directly with local and inventory and report emissions and be success. The Protocol also explicitly indigenous users of the project area. legally bound to meet their greenhouse states that the Clean Development From the Dayaks in Sarawak, gas limits; thus, some international Mechanism must contribute to Malaysia, to the Kyuquot People in oversight will be required. While sustainable development, which, if Vancouver Island, Canada,31 the FCCC commits all Parties to defined appropriately, would require property and usage rights for forest implement programs that mitigate the screening of projects for negative resources are unclear or contested climate change, such as those that social and environmental impacts, between the state and local or forest promote the sustainable manage- including biodiversity. dwelling communities; this makes ment and conservation of forests. social screens an important part of Annex I countries have resisted both the CDM and the project-based listing specific policies, such as car- credit trading regime.32 Also, in bon taxes, due to sovereignty and some regions the state lacks the other concerns.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 11 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE THE TREATMENT OF FORESTS AND LAND-USE CHANGE IN INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES

his section focuses on the CURRENT PROTOCOL In their national communica- Interestingly, the Protocol con- current Protocol provisions RULES FOR DOMESTIC tions to the FCCC, most Annex I tains an asymmetry between what is T regarding which forest and INVENTORIES OF countries reported land-use change inventoried in 1990 and in the land-use change activities must be GREENHOUSE GAS and forest sector as being a net sink commitment period. The Protocol inventoried by industrialized countries, EMISSIONS FROM FORESTS for greenhouse gases (removals does not specify any restrictions on the methods that may be used to AND LAND-USE CHANGE were greater than emissions). the forest and land-use activities quantify them, and the potential role A clear interpretation of the Kyoto Therefore, it benefited most nations inventoried in 1990. Countries of such activities under emissions and Protocol rules is difficult because to exclude the land-use change and included a wide variety of activities project-based credit trading. Because many decisions remain to be finalized forest sector from their 1990 base- in their national communications, many rules and guidelines are not set by later Conferences of the Parties. lines because, if included, net 1990 such as forest conversion, managed but will be finalized in later Three time periods are relevant to emissions would be lower. As a forests, and sequestration inpeatland. Conferences, this section can only the role of forests and land-use result, forest and land-use change While most Annex I countries describe the current status, options change in estimating the domestic net emissions are only counted in do not include emissions or seques- available to delegates, and possible inventories of Annex I countries: the the 1990 base year if they were a net tration from the land-use change implications of the decisions. 1990 base year, the compliance source (emissions were greater than and forest sector in 1990 because To assist delegates in finalizing period (2008-2012), and the inter- removals) in that year. If the land- they were a net source, the base year the rules related to land-use change im period (1990- 2008). use and forest sector was a net sink, inventories will be important for the and forests, the Subsidiary Body for countries may exclude it from their commitment period. During the Scientific and Technical Advice to the THE 1990 BASE YEAR base year calculations. This con- commitment period, Annex I coun- FCCC asked the IPCC to prepare a Annex I countries adopted greenhouse struct allows Annex I countries to tries must inventory emissions and Special Report on key forest and gas limits during the 2008-2012 include net land-use change and sequestrations from afforestation, land-use change issues, to be complet- commitment period based on a per- forest-sector emissions only if it reforestation, and deforestation due ed by mid-2000. The Special Report centage of their emissions in 1990. increases their base year emissions, to direct human activity since 1990. will investigate defining terms in Therefore, a higher amount of but not if it decreases them. Therefore, to determine whether Article 3-3, which, if any, emissions emissions during the base year Australia and Estonia were the only afforestation, deforestation, or refor- from additional land-use activities makes it easier to meet their com- two countries for whom the forest estation has taken place since 1990, should be inventoried by Annex I mitments. For example, Japan and land-use sector constituted a Annex I countries must determine countries, and issues related to project- agreed to a 6 percent reduction and net source. Australia particularly what forests were present in 1990. level accounting under the market thus its emissions during 2008-2012 benefited from including forest and Annex I countries will require a mechanisms. If forest, biodiversity, and must be 94 percent of 1990 emis- land-use change emissions, as it snapshot of the landscape in 1990 to development experts participate in the sions; therefore, the larger the 1990 significantly raised its 1990 emission establish what has changed during IPCC Special Report process and other emissions, the more that may be level. (SeeBox5.) 2008-2012. Many countries have fora, they may contribute to the decision- emitted during the commitment not yet reported adequate 1990 data. making process relating to land-use period. Canada, for example, has not yet change and forest trends by suggesting reported emissions or sequestration how, where, and whether they can be from its forest and land-use sector. influenced for the betterment of both climate and biodiversity.

THE CASE OF AUSTRALIA During the Kyoto negotiations, from their forests and land-use The Protocol provides little, if The current approach encourages Australia was granted two conces- conversion in the 1990 base year. any, incentive forAustrali a to begin less-efficient carbon gains from sions that provide an example of Forest and land-use-sector emissions valuing its natural resources for tree planting rather than native how the Protocol may fail to induce increase Australia's 1990 base year more than the agricultural land forest protection. changes in resource use. First, releases by about 24 percent (1). beneath them. A more restrictive Australia may increase emissions Such a large base year increase will commitment might have prompted Note: 1. Global Environmental Change by 8 percent. Second, including lighten Australia's burden during Australia to rethink land clearing Report. "A Brief Analysis of the Kyoto land-use change and forest-sector the commitment period, thus policies or coal use. Further, the Protocol," mGbbal Environmental Change emissions in the base year primarily decreasing incentives to slow or Protocol's emphasis on tree planting Report IX, no. 24 (December 24,1997). benefits Australia, only one of two halt deforestation and industrial does little to encourage more countries that reported net emissions emissions. benign, integrated land-use policies.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 12 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE THE 2008-2012 As previously mentioned, national INTERGOVERNMENTAL Part of the reason why negotia- COMMITMENT PERIOD communications were not compre- PANEL ON CLIMATE tors of the Protocol delineated such Article 33 of the Protocol requires hensive regarding forest and land- CHANGE GUIDELINES FOR a limited set of activities may be Annex I countries to inventory use emissions, nor were they submitted DOMESTIC INVENTORIES that while the IPCC workbook pro- afforestation, reforestation, and by all Annex I countries. As a result, OF GREENHOUSE GAS vided guidelines for inventorying deforestation that have occurred it was difficult for negotiators to EMISSIONS FROM FORESTS emissions and sequestration from a since 1990, but the emissions and incorporate into targets the positive or AND LAND-USE CHANGE broad range of activities, many removals from these activities are negative impact of including emis- The Protocol and the IPCC countries did not provide their data. only measured during the 5-year sions or sequestration from forests Guidelines for national greenhouse This lack of data hampered the commitment period between 2008- and land-use change, and how they gas emissions inventories are incon- negotiators in assessing how and 2012. Article 3.4 then instructs the might change through time. sistent in some respects. The IPCC whether to include a wide spectrum Conference of the Parties, with Incorporating additional activities recommends inventorying emis- of forests and land-use change 33 guidance from the advisory bodies, in the first commitment period will sions and sequestration under three activities. Further, Parties reporting to decide how and whether Annex I be even more difficult than the broad categories of land-use change national communications noted countries must inventory emissions original negotiations, since Annex I and forest management. These cat- problems with data generation and and sequestration from additional countries are now unable to adjust egories contain activities, such as methodological issues. Several activities, such as forest manage- their agreed-upon targets. logging and sequestration from nat- Annex I countries requested further ment or agricultural practices. ural regeneration, that are not listed scientific work to determine the A significant barrier to bring- THE T 990-2008 INTERIM under the Kyoto Protocol, which appropriate methods for estimating ing in additional forest and land- PERIOD only requires inventorying afforesta- emissions and sequestration from 36 use change activities-even if proven As negotiators decide what activities tion, reforestation, and deforesta- forests and land-use change To to be quantifiable and a significant should be counted during the com- tion. The IPCC's Guidelines for correct this lack of data and deter- greenhouse gas source-is the mitment period, they will need to be National Greenhouse Gas mine the importance of emissions uncertain impact on Annex I tar- cognizant of the potential impact of Inventories35 recommends track- and sequestration from forest and gets. Each Annex I country negoti- these decisions on actions taken ing emissions and sequestration land-use change, Annex I countries ated its limitation target based on a during the interim period. For from the following categories: should begin tosystematicall y col- rough understanding of how the example, the Protocol may create an lect information on changes in target would be reached. As certain incentive to clear land during the Changes in forest and other these activities. gases or flexibility mechanisms interim 1990-2008 period, when woody biomass stock: These are were or were not included in the emissions are not inventoried, later carbon fluxes within a forest due to DEFINING AND TRACKING Protocol during negotiations. Annex allowing them to gain carbon credit logging or fuelwood gathering, DEFORESTATION I nations would adjust the accepted for replanting trees and inventorying among other possible management Each activity required to be invento- limitation target accordingly. Each their carbon uptake during the com- practices. ried will need to be precisely and negotiated item impacted these tar- mitment period. This could occur carefully defined, as Annex I coun- gets either higher or lower. For because emissions from deforesta- Forest and grassland conversion: tries will use these legal definitions example, the United States would tion may be counted only during This involves emissions resulting to estimate their greenhouse gas probably not have agreed to a 7 per- the 2008-2012 commitment period, from converting forest or grassland emissions. Afforestation is defined cent reduction target if "flexibility but not during the period from to other land uses, such as cropland as tree planting on lands that his- mechanisms" such as the CDM and 1990 to 2008. One way to avoid or pasture. torically have not contained forests; emissions trading had not been creating this incentive would be for reforestation is tree planting on incorporated into the Protocol. negotiators to agree that credit Abandonment of managed lands: lands that have historically con- should be given for reforestation or This is sequestration due to the tained forests, but have been con- afforestation only if the area con- abandonment of previously managed verted to some other use. 34 tained no forest in 1990. If land was lands, so that they are "regrowing Deforestation is thus far undefined, forested in 1990 and is not in 2012, towards a natural state." leaving this to a later Conference of then greenhouse gas emissions the Parties or IPCC research.37 from deforestation should be reported and counted as a liability against compliance, unless a natural disturbance caused the conversion.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 13 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Individual countries have been WHAT IS LEFT Because of the size of the forest Measuring and tracking proposing definitions that may have UNCOUNTED IN NATIONAL products industry in Canada, the changes within a forest stand are little scientific basis. For example, INVENTORIES? United States, and Scandinavian also technically feasible. Inventory one government proposed that The Conference of the Parties will countries in particular, changes in methods for stand density and 44 deforestation has occurred only if a decide what, if any; additional activ- forest management, (e.g. longer biomass have been developed. structure, such as a building or a ities should be inventoried, based on rotation times) may offer signifi- Furthermore, new applications of road, replaces the forest, arguing the work of the advisor)' bodies. cant reductions in greenhouse gas global positioning systems, survey that any other conversion, such as Clearly, some of these omitted activ- emissions. Instituting sustainable data, and remote sensing will aid in to agriculture, does not preclude the ities have a large impact on global forest management or reduced performing the required inventories, forest from growing back. This greenhouse gas emissions. This sec- impact logging improves carbon as they may more accurately example illustrates the importance tion discusses activities not current- storage, reduces the risk of fire, and measure forest biomass, rather than of constructing a careful definition; ly included under the Protocol and offers environmental benefits such simply forest cover. if defined too narrowly. Annex I examines possible missed opportu- as diminished erosion and improved 42 countries will not be required to nities and risks of each. wildlife habitat FOREST DEGRADATION report emissions, thus creating a Many, though not all, non- Because some forest management loophole. FOREST HARVEST AND governmental organizations oppose systems are neutral with respect to net A number of widely accepted MANAGEMENT requiring inventories of emissions greenhouse gas fluxes, the Parties definitions of deforestation exist. The Protocol does not require and sequestration from forest may instead choose to require For example, the Food and inventories of emissions and seques- management activities. They fear inventories of degradation, rather Agriculture Organization (FAO) tration in forests managed for wood that the carbon fluxes are too than all management systems. defines deforestation as a reduction harvest. Harvested forests may be difficult to estimate because they Degradation could be defined as the of forest stand density to less than carbon-neutral, if biomass regrowth involve periodic losses and uptake loss of biomass within a forest. Causes 38 20 percent of its original cover. balances biomass removal, but of carbon. Some also worry that if of degradation may include conver- Yet another definition is the conver- some harvest regimes may result in forest management is inventoried, sion of primary forests to secondary, sion of forest to "nonforest uses'' net emissions. Studies to date have then large reductions will be or unsustainable harvesting of and as such may be even more easi- shown mixed results. One study claimed from replanted harvest managed forests, pollution, or grazing. ly monitored than the FAO defini- estimated that uptake of carbon sites, thus reducing the Protocol's As previously discussed in this paper 39 tion. Even though greenhouse from regrowth and storage in wood ability to change developed countries' and elsewhere, and illustrated in gas emissions from forest harvesting products (this is discussed below) fossil fuel consumption. Figure 2, converting primary forests are not currently counted under was greater than emissions from However, at least an equal danger to secondary forests can be a signifi- Protocol rules, if human activities harvest and product decay in is that excluding forest harvest and cant source of carbon emissions result in deforestation or severe Canada and New Zealand.40 management from Annex I and biodiversity loss. ** degradation and the area is not However, studies using national inventories will result in uncounted Air pollution is a major cause replanted, then the activity should inventories mask important differ- greenhouse gas emissions and miss of degradation in Annex I countries; be labeled as deforestation and the ences in forest types and manage- an opportunity to create incentives it is estimated to have contributed to emissions inventoried. For exam- ment regimes. While the forest for improved forest management. If the loss of at least 100,000 hectares of ple, logging in some areas such as sector as a whole in the United forest harvest and management are forests in Central and Eastern Europe slopes, high altitudes, and boreal States may be a net sink, one analy- included, the Kyoto Protocol could over the last 20 years. *" However, the zones compromises a forest's ability sis shows that converting old- create an incentive to manage for question is whether degradation from to regenerate. Harvest in these areas growth forests to younger forests more mature, potentially more pollutants would be inventoried amounts to deforestation. The results in net emissions of carbon.4' biologically diverse forests that because the Protocol stipulates Conference of the Parties should If the Parties decide to require generally store more carbon than measuring emissions and removals seek advice from forest and biodi- inventories of emissions and reduc- younger forests.43 Also, not counting from direct human activities. What versity experts in deciding which tions from managed forests, a emissions from forest harvest and constitutes a direct human activity definition to adopt. greater understanding of net green- management may create a loophole has yet to be defined. While the house gas flows due to various har- for Annex I countries, depending on greenhouse gas implications of vest and management systems will how deforestation is defined. degradation from pollution may not be needed. be inventoried, it does offer an example of further connections between global warming and biodiversity loss.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 14 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Sulfur dioxide emissions from coal- STORAGE IN WOOD There is also demonstrated As methods are improved and fired power plants are killing forests PRODUCTS interest in storing carbon in wood standardized, it may be prudent to in Eastern Europe and acidifying The IPCC workbook recommends products as a greenhouse gas mitiga- inventor}1 carbon in wood products, soil so that regeneration is difficult the default assumption that all car- tion strategy.48 {SeeBox 6.) Because but, as was stated previously, the net or impossible. Acid-rain-damaged bon in harvested biomass is released wood products are the result of a carbon flux of the entire management forests bum or die and decay, exac- in the harvest year rather than greenhouse gas emitting system, from harvest to product, erbating these countries' green- stored or released over time. This activity-logging-more research is should be taken into account when house gas emissions and resulting assumption is clearly inaccurate, needed to differentiate between types devising emission reduction strategies. in biodiversity loss. Converting and studies have begun to explore of forests and management strategies Box 6 describes a U.S. proposal power plants from coal to gas elimi- inventory methods. These same to determine those that are a net sink, to increase logging intensity as a nates these sulfur dioxide emissions, studies suggest that the carbon net source, or in balance over the carbon sequestration strategy, despite thus decreasing acid precipitation stored in wood products is signifi- long term. A review of studies shows the negative climatic and ecological and benefiting forests, in addition to cant enough to warrant inclusion a mixed result. For example in Russia, consequences. Storage in wood offering human health benefits. in national inventories.47 However, it is estimated that 33 teragrams (Tg) products can be a useful climate Incorporating forest degradation important questions remain to be of carbon per year are stored in wood mitigation strategy, particularly if into the inventoried activities could resolved such as how to account for products, while 115 Tg are released efforts are undertaken to increase potentially be accomplished by a decay over time and who is liable from logging49 milling or logging efficiency by sufficiently broad definition of for emissions from products that are reducing wood waste, or under deforestation. traded internationally certain management regimes.

A U.S. PROPOSAL — CUTTING DOWN TREES TO SAVE CARBON

The U.S. House of Representatives harvest of primary forests or estab- strategy for both climate and recently passed a nonbinding lishing a management regime that biodiversity. Notes: l. House of Representatives measure to manage national maintains older forests is more cost- Unlike the IPCC Inventory 1997. House Resolution 151 Regarding forests to reduce greenhouse gases effective, even when carbon in Guidelines, the Kyoto Protocol Management of National Forests to Reduce (1). The measure notes that CCh wood products from the increased does not require inventorying Greenhouse Gases. October 21 may be kept out of the atmosphere harvests is included (2). emissions and reductions from 2. Mark E Harmon, \\ llliam k Ferrell. "by harvesting the forest before it Ecologically, it is unwise to forest management; thus the strate- and Jem E Franklin "Effects on Carbon begins to decompose or burn, thus encourage converting older forests gies outlined in the House measure Storage of Comersion of O'd-Grovrth storing the carbon in wood products.'' to young, even-aged stands, as the would not impact emissions mea- Forest to \oung Forests." Science 2-C But this strategy is inconsistent measure implies. Even-aged sured under the current rules. It with climate mitigation and other monoculture forests are less bio- does, however, illustrate the dan- Robert N Stauns "Hie Costs of environmental goals. As noted in logically diverse than older, uneven- gers of inventorying a wider group Carbon Sequestration. A Re\ealed the text, a rapid harvest and tree aged, multispecies stands, so this of land-use change and forest Preference Approach" CSIA Discussion planting regime is not a cost- measure would negatively impact activities but not fully accounting Paper 95-06 I Kenneth School of effective carbon storage method, biodiversity. Increased logging and for their emissions, only their Government, Harvard I mversin, 19951 nor will it result in large amounts tree planting for harvests on sequestration. of sequestered carbon. Preventing national forests is a losing

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 15 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE FOREST FIRES SOIL CARBON One option that would enable Under a project-based approach, Forest fires are a massive source of The Protocol does not require that Parties to explore the efficacy of sequestration under the reference uncounted greenhouse gas emissions, carbon fluxes from soil due to land- inventorying additional activities scenario is subtracted; this means yet even those caused by human use change be inventoried. This is would be to use z project-based that only the incremental increase activities are not inventoried under problematic, as it is estimated that greenhouse gas accounting system in sequestration or reduction in current Protocol rules. In fact, if at least 75 percent of terrestrial car- in the first commitment period. emissions is counted. Subtracting human-caused fires were invento- bon is stored in the soil and its This would allow the Parties to the carbon stored under the refer- ried, some countries' forest sectors, organic layer as opposed to the veg- determine what methods can be ence scenario ensures that the activ- such as Russia's, might move from etation, much of it being stored in used to inventory emissions and ity increases net carbon sequestered, being a net sink to a net source. nonforest ecosystems such as peat- what management practices and since an activity that results in an One study estimated that forest fires lands.51 The percentage is higher in policies can reduce them. If the annual uptake of carbon may not in Russia emit an estimated f 37 boreal forest soils, which hold about activities are found to be significant, represent the optimal option compared million tons of carbon annually but 84 percent of the total carbon. Some they could be phased in during the with alternate activities. Figure 3 did not distinguish between anthro- question whether soil carbon can be first commitment period without illustrates a proposed carbon miti- pogenic and non-anthropogenic accurately measured and thus resist distorting agreed-upon targets. gation project involving improved 50 fires. It does note that forests including carbon fluxes in national A project-based approach for forest management. The reference stressed by pollutants, pests, and inventories. However, given the currently excluded activities would scenario shows a positive annual diseases are more fire-prone. magnitude of carbon stored in soil, if resemble project-based credit trad- uptake of carbon. However, better Despite the importance of standardized measurement tech- ing, but function domestically. management brings an improve- emissions from forest fires, it may niques can be developed, as some Emission reductions beyond a busi- ment from the reference case. be difficult to determine whether a suggest, then soil carbon could be ness as usual, or reference, case fire was the direct result of human an important piece of the puzzle.52 (such as from improving harvest activities. However, excluding fires practices) would count towards the from national inventories may open METHODS FOR INCLUDING limitation targets. The reference a loophole for Annex I countries, as ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES cases should be established by the fire would not register as an UNDER DOMESTIC developing a minimum set of per- emission, but reforesting the area INVENTORIES formance standards whereby only would result in a credit for green- It appears that the Protocol negotiators improvements over this minimum house gas removals. attempted to resolve technical issues would be credited. For example, Including wildfire may also be associated with forest and land-use existing regulations for forest har- ecologically unwise, since much recent change by allowing only three vest in a given region could be research suggests that fire is often part activities-afforestation, reforesta- required to be surpassed for crediting. of a healthy disturbance regime. tion, and deforestation—rather than One area may require 100-meter Carbon sequestration should not attempting to address them. As the buffer zones along riparian areas, override natural ecosystem patterns. advisory bodies weigh whether to but the landowner creates a 200- include additional activities, they meter buffer. Only the carbon stored should consider the magnitude of on the additional 100-meter buffer the potential impact on greenhouse could be registered as an emission gas emissions or removals and the reduction. degree of scientific uncertainty in quantifying emissions. For example, given the potential greenhouse gas emissions from forest harvest and management and the available tools for inventories, the advisory bodies should consider requiring inventories of emissions from these and other activities.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 16 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Using a project-based approach THE TREATMENT OF The project is estimated to sequester If the cost per ton of reductions in conjunction with minimum per- FORESTS AND LAND-USE approximately 29,000 tons of car- is high relative to emissions trading, formance standards would accom- CHANGE UNDER THE bon over its lifetime, half of which, the Clean Development Mechanism, plish the following: MARKET MECHANISMS 14,500 tons of carbon, will be trans- or domestic reductions, then pro- • Allow time to develop standard- FOR REDUCTIONS ferred to the United States from ject-based credit trading may be 53 ized methods for inventories and BETWEEN DEVELOPED Russia. In order to do so, Russia's rarely used. But it could provide a identify best management practices as COUNTRIES emissions reductions must exceed new tool forslowin g deforestation later Conferences of the Parties The Protocol describes three distinct its commitment by the amount and encouraging restoration in decide whether to include additional market mechanisms, two of which are traded to the United States. Because Annex I countries such as Russia activities. reserved for Annex I parties-project- rules and guidelines are not yet in and Canada. The relative costs will • Limit the amount of greenhouse based credit trading and emissions place, it is unclear when Russia be determined largely by transac- gas reductions claimed to only net trading. It is unclear what types of must show that it has met its com- tion costs and varying costs of land improvements from a minimum forest and land-use change projects mitments, or what sanctions will be and labor in different countries. reference case, based on minimum will be eligible under any of these in place if the seller country fails to Because this mechanism is project- performance standards, thus reducing mechanisms. meet its commitments. based, it should not necessarily be the danger that forests and land-use If Annex I countries sell green- bound by the restrictions of Article strategies would dominate reduction house gas reductions through emis- PROJECT-BASED CREDIT 3.3. efforts. sions or project-based credit TRADING As described earlier, in order to • Ensure reporting rigor in esti- trading, the seller nation must Annex I countries may transfer to sell reduction credits, the Annex I mating greenhouse gas reductions exceed its emission reduction target other Annex I countries greenhouse seller must have exceeded its total from project-level forest and land- by at least the amount sold. One gas reductions resulting from projects reduction commitments or kept its use change activities, thus decreas- project from the Activities that diminish, avoid, or sequester emissions below the amount trans- ing uncertainly in greenhouse gas Implemented Jointly (AIJ) pilot greenhouse gas emissions (Article ferred. A compliance mechanism reduction estimates. Such an approach phase illustrates how these two 6). The FACE project in the Czech will be required to create an incen- would also require that reduction mechanisms may operate. The Republic, described in Box 2, offers tive for the "seller" Annex I country policies and strategies result in net United States and Russia are under- an example of a likely mitigation to exceed its target by at least the climate benefits, thus possibly avoiding taking a reforestation project in project between Annex I countries. amount of reductions it has sold. If incentives to move to short rotation Russia, RUSAFOR, and dividing the As with all of the market mecha- at the end of the commitment peri- periods with young stands, which is emission reductions evenly. nisms, the rules have not been od the country has failed to exceed not an efficient means to sequester finalized, so it is not possible to its target, then it may be subject to carbon and does not yield the highest know what types of projects will be sanctions. biodiversity benefits. {See Box 6.) eligible. If forest and land-use If "credit" were given only for activities are eligible, they may be incremental improvement, then bound by decisions relating to incentives for increased environ- Article 3-3 limiting them to mental performance on public and afforestation, reforestation, and private lands could be put in place. deforestation projects. These new activities-such as managing for older forests and sustainable timber-generate increased biodiversity, climate, and watershed benefits, among others.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 17 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE • • _••*

The role of forests and land-use change under emissions trading will Improved Management C2 i (i i\.,r depend upon the type of system and the forest-related activity allowed by z the Conference of the Parties. For 2 48.52 M example, a member may generate *** additional emission credits via reforestation and afforestation, „_ 43.89 M which they may use or trade. Forest harvest, which under 0 some management systems is a net (A y Z 39-26 M source, provides a second example. 0 The timber industry could receive h- emission allowances. If they altered management practices in ways that 34.63 M 1 13 19 25 31 37 reduced emissions below their allotted amounts, they could trade or save TIME (YEAR) them for later use. Credits could also be accrued for regrowth following Reference With Offset Activities Activities harvest, which could be used in later harvests or traded. Other schemes may also provide EMISSIONS TRADING A target level of cumulative The sulfur dioxide trading sys- a model for trading forest and land- Many aspects of emissions trading emissions for a prescribed period of tem in the United States is one use change reductions, especially in (Article 17) remain to be defined, time is developed and a defined functioning example of a trading the early phases of the system. including structure, rules, and group of trading members is estab- system, but it covers only one pollutant Non-point-source water pollution guidelines. An emissions trading lished. Parties to the trading system within a single regulator)7 system. trading systems, for example, dis- system is a complicated mechanism can emit up to their limit or reduce However, the emissions trading system count for uncertainty and establish to create and monitor. There is very emissions below their budget or cap that emerges from the Kyoto Protocol area-specific management norms limited experience with pollution and bank the reductions for future may build upon the monitoring, and minimum standards that must trading on a global scale, though use or sell them, Conversely, Parties reporting, and verification successes be surpassed to trade reductions.55 frameworks and issues have been that exceed their budget or limits of the sulfur dioxide trading system. The incremental improvement and explored. There are variations of may purchase emission It is also likely that the green- resulting pollution reductions may trading systems, but all start with allowances.54 house gas trading system under the then be traded. binding commitments within an Depending on the system, group Protocol would be developed incre- overall emission limit. members could be nations or private mentally, thus simplifying its imple- entities from a greenhouse gas emit- mentation. Some have suggested ting sector, such as power producers. creating "umbrella groups'' of As with project-based credit countries that comprise a trading trading, another key element of an group. For example, New Zealand, emissions trading system will be a Canada, and the Czech Republic compliance or liability mechanism; could form one group that estab- if a member of the trading group lishes a trading system for a limited sells or exceeds its emission limits, it number of gases, such as C02, might be subject to some type of under the expectation that as an sanctions and trading privileges economy in transition, the Czech could be suspended. Republic may offer low-cost emission reductions.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 18 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE &••• THE ROLE OF FORESTS AND LAND-USE CHANGE IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

he FCCC commits all The CDM provides a significant As with many other parts of the There is disagreement over the Parties, both Annex I and opportunity in the Protocol to iden- Protocol, the decisions relating to extent to which forest and land-use T non-Annex I, to imple- tify and finance lower-emission the treatment of forests and land-use change projects are allowed under the ment programs that mitigate cli- development paths in developing change within the CDM have yet to be Clean Development Mechanism, if mate change. However, developing countries. It is also the first mecha- finalized. The current text of Article at all. Several countries claim that, countries are not bound by limits nism to become operational under 12 provides a skeletal outline of how because forests and land-use change on greenhouse gas emissions under the Protocol, possibly as early as the CDM should operate, thus its are not explicitly mentioned in the the Kyoto Protocol. The FCCC 2000; thus work on the institutional entire institutional structure remains Protocol text on the CDM, they are describes these varying levels of and technical aspects of implementing, to be constructed. (See Box 7) therefore not included. Others claim commitments as "differentiated monitoring, and verifying projects that since there are no explicit limits responsibilities."56 In general, is a priority. placed on the CDM, any and all non-Annex I countries have resisted forest and land-use projects are adopting any limits until Annex I eligible. The matter will have to be countries demonstrate real emis- decided by negotiators. sions reductions themselves.

OUTSTANDING ISSUES FACING THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM

Most aspects of the CDM remain holder representatives from non- Implementation felt that their sector faces similar choices. For to be decided; however, the Protocol governmental organizations, needs were being addressed. example, using clean rather than calls for a supervisory executive governments, and the private sector However, a trade-off clearly exists conventional coal results in green- board to oversee it and for "oper- also be included? Some also have between creating a fund that house gas reductions, but coal power ating entities" that will certify proposed that the executive board provides needed adaptation funds plants may not be made eligible. The project activities. Unlike the be sited in an existing body, such and increasing the costs of CDM types of eligible projects will in turn current pilot phase, a share of the as the World Bank, while others projects such that they are no determine which of the current AIJ investments will cover administra- argue for an independent and longer attractive options. projects will be brought into the CDM. tive expenses for the executive new institution. board and operating entities, as • Who may serve as a certifying PROJECTS ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN well as assist developing countries agency? The certification process • By what criteria and stan- BUYERS AND SELLERS particularly vulnerable to the will be an important determinant dards will proposed projects be • Should the CDM consist of a impacts of climate change in of project credibility, as it will bear evaluated (social, environmental, portfolio of projects waiting for meeting the costs of adaptation responsibility for monitoring and economic) ? The evaluation may support, or a series of bilateral (such as the small island states). verification of greenhouse gas be based on a project-by-project agreements? A portfolio approach Because actions under the CDM reductions. Public agencies or a review by the executive board or may consist of one or multiple may begin crediting in 2000, before mix of private and public entities an operating entity; on a basic set clearinghouses that offer emission any other mechanism, the urgency may be allowed to certify reductions. of underlying standards, allowing reduction certificates from a pool of setting up a workable system is For example, SG8-Forestry, a for- for individual projects to be of projects, such as the case of Costa greater than with emissions trading profit firm, is monitoring Costa reviewed by different entities; or Rican Certifiable Tradable Offsets, or project-based credit trading. Rica's Certifiable Tradable Offsets. according to country-by-country perhaps offered by a non-Annex I Some critical unanswered questions • What should be the amount criteria, with the reference case country, the World Bank, or a private are discussed here. of the adaptation fee and admin- determined by standard practice entity. A bilateral approach would istrative expenses? The adminis- within that country. involve individual agreements INSTITUTIONAL trative expenses will cover the cost • What type of projects will be between private entities and/or • Who should serve on the of running the institution, such as eligible? As this paper has discussed countries, as is the case of the Rio supervisory executive board, and housing and staffing the executive at length, there is a range of Bravo and CARE/Guatemala projects what should be its main functions? board. The adaptation fee was an options within the forest sector with described in Box 2. However, it is Should the board include technical important piece of the CDM, as respect to what types of projects will possible that both approaches experts only, or should key stake- countries strongly opposed to Joint be eligible for credits. The energy mav be allowed under the CDM.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 19 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE The current AIJ pilot phase THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT Because developing countries While developing countries extends to the end of 1999, and MECHANISM have no legally binding emission resist any actions they believe would additional greenhouse gas offset The Clean Development Mechanism limits, the CDM offers a means to stifle economic development, social projects continue to be funded. The allows project-based trading between move investments in a more climate- and environmental benefits may be Conference of the Parties has yet to developed and developing nations. friendly direction. If not carefully gained from strong commitments evaluate the pilot phase for lessons The stated purpose of the Clean set up, however, the absence of and pro-active policy reforms on the about issues and opportunities and Development Mechanism is to assist emission limits or caps in the CDM part of both industrialized and what may be lost or gained due to non-Annex I countries in achieving could provide Annex I countries industrializing economies. The decisions relating to project eligibil- sustainable development, to with a potentially limitless pool of optimistic scenario is one where ity and institutional structure. As contribute to the ultimate objective reduction opportunities, rendering developing countries take a different Parties make these decisions, an of the Convention (stabilizing their limits virtually meaningless. path and minimize or in some evaluation of the current AIJ pilot atmospheric greenhouse gas The CDM has the potential to cases avoid the choking smog and phase might provide valuable concentrations), and to assist Annex meet the needs of both developing accompanying human deaths, lessons, if undertaken in advance of I countries in attaining compliance and industrialized countries. It massive deforestation, and species the establishment of the CDM. with their binding emissions targets. responds to the needs of Annex I loss that developed countries These purposes are to be achieved nations by offering lower-cost, more experienced. Developing countries through three key elements outlined flexible options in meeting emis- may find ways of sustainably using in the Protocol: certified emissions sions constraints, while providing a their biological resources so that reductions from project activities in source of capital for the financing livelihoods can be realized while developing countries, a financial of clean, energy-efficient economic maintaining resource productivity mechanism that funnels investments development and for projects with in terms of local and global climate, towards these emission reduction and the potential to reduce deforestation biological diversity, water purification, sequestration activities, and the appli- and forest degradation in non-Annex and myriad other services just cation or use of some or all of these I countries. beginning to be recognized. certified reductions in meeting Annex I emissions limits. The difficulty lies in constructing an institution that achieves the stated purposes.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 20 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Similarly, the CDM has the Because such a large percentage FOREST HARVEST AND To avoid rewarding poor potential to fund "technological of greenhouse gas emissions from MANAGEMENT logging practices by paying for leapfrogging" that would enable non-Annex I countries comes from Projects involving sustainable forest improvements over a low reference developing countries to bypass the deforestation, excluding or narrowly management or reduced-impact case, minimum performance stan- inefficient choices made by defining the options to address logging in place of an intensive dards and practices for the reference industrialized countries. While deforestation will weaken the ability harvest regime have been shown to case should be established. most examples of leapfrogging of non-Annex I countries to limit result in quantifiable carbon Minimum practices should consist center on the energy sector, such as current and future emissions. emission reductions.58 of basic standards for harvesting; improving building efficiency, the Future trends show continuing forest Some of these projects have only avoided emissions due to forest and land-use sector also offers degradation and loss, along with been carefully monitored for their improvement over these standards technology transfer opportunities. high carbon emissions, unless carbon gains and losses. It is would be creditable. Without these Some examples include: improving action is taken quickly.57 The Clean relatively easy to estimate the net minimum standards, the most agricultural productivity through Development Mechanism offers an carbon sequestered due to such destructive harvest operations would transfer of irrigation, management opportunity to slow both greenhouse projects because of past research on yield greater carbon credits than practices, or techniques to restore gas emissions and forest loss. logging practices and the ability of less destructive operations, due to a degraded agricultural land; increas- The types of activities allowed such activities to utilize control plots lower baseline. The minimum ing milling efficiency; and improv- will impact future and current forest for reference cases. Six AIJ pilot-phase reference case should at least be ing silvicultural practices or and land-use sector investments. carbon projects involve sustainable equal to, or above, the existing laws sustainable forest management Subsequent Conferences of the forest management or reduced- of the host country. techniques. Through carbon Parties, under guidance from the impact logging. A current example If such efforts were allowed sequestration activities, the CDM advisory bodies, may choose to of a reduced-impact logging project, under the Clean Development may help slow the loss of biological exclude certain project activities, described in Box 2, is underway in Mechanism, sustainable forest diversity, protect critical watersheds, thus preventing some current projects Malaysia and is estimated to have management could become more and accelerate the reforestation of from transferring to the Clean sequestered about 42 megagrams profitable in developing countries degraded forests and the restoration Development Mechanism. Conservation (Mg) of carbon per hectare.59 At a than clearing forest for low- of degraded agricultural land. and forestmanagemen t projects minimum, before deciding project productivity agriculture.61 appear to be in question, as Article eligibility, the Conference of the PROJECT ELIGIBILITY 3.3, which lists the forest and land- Parties should investigate their The Parties are beginning to make use activities that must be invento- efficacy and overall environmental decisions about how to operational- ried, may also apply to the Clean impacts under the current AIJ pilot ize the CDM. One of the most Development Mechanism. phase. Emerging institutions and important choices is whether forest efforts, such as the Forest Stewardship and land-use change projects will Council, may also offer lessons for have a place under the CDM. monitoring and verifying improved forest management.60

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 21 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE CARBON STORED IN WOOD These factors indicate that Defining a reference scenario Conservation projects could also PRODUCTS increasing area or harvest intensity will require evidence of an immi- be required to consist of multiple As noted in the section on Annex I will not result in carbon gains, but nent threat to the standing forest in funding sources, of which carbon countries, the impact of harvest they point to other opportunities for the absence of action. The project sequestration can be only a fixed regimes "with" and "without" pro- greenhouse gas reductions through activities should seek to address and percentage, and solely that percentage ject intervention must be carefully projects that increase the use of mill counter the threats leading to land- of greenhouse gas reductions could considered. Increasing harvest in residue for fuel or wood products, use change by providing alternate be credited. Or, conservation projects pursuit of storing carbon in wood improved logging techniques that income sources such as land pur- may only be allowed in certain areas, products is not a prudent strategy reduce damage to surrounding forest, chase or payments, or substitutes for such as buffer zones of existing pro- for either climate or biodiversity increased milling effideriCT to reduce the alternate use of the forest land. tected areas proven to be under threat. because a relatively small percentage wood waste through improved tech- For example, if fuelwood gathering 64 of the tree removed becomes wood nology, and training of foresters. is resulting in deforestation, the IMPROVING AGRICULTURAL product. WRI evaluated the net project should seek to provide alter- PRODUCTIVITY carbon sequestration potential of FOREST CONSERVATION nate fuelwood sources in addition to Increasing agricultural productivity five forestry and land-use projects, Conservation, or avoided deforesta- protection. in developing countries can stabi- some of which included storing tion, offers the greatest confluence Under these conditions, the lize the agricultural frontier, thus carbon in wood products as part of of climate and biodiversity benefits project could combine enforcement slowing deforestation. Early carbon 62 their strategy. Of the projects and presents significant emission of protected areas with alternatives sequestration offset projects included 65 examined, the average amount of reduction opportunities. However, to forest conversion. The Rio Bravo increasing agricultural productivity carbon in wood products as a per- some environmental organizations project in Belize combined forest as a component.66 The connection centage of total carbon sequestered and developing countries seek to protection with income from between deforestation and agricultural was 1.5 percent, the maximum specifically exclude conservation sustainable forest management to land demand makes improving being 2 percent, while strategies projects. Their opposition is based replace farming. In other cases, agricultural productivity an focusing on storing carbon in living on two concerns: a) it is too difficult though not all, the value of carbon important strategy for reducing biomass yielded greater greenhouse to determine whether deforestation sequestration may be able to greenhouse gas emissions from gas reductions. These projects would have occurred in the absence provide an income stream that non-Annex I countries. involved community forestry, not of carbon offset activities; and b) competes with the value of forest The difficulty is that the commercial timber operations, so the CDM may create an incentive to conversion, such as the CARFIX connection between maintaining the former may be less efficient. exaggerate threats to a forest. project in Costa Rica. forest cover and increasing agricultur- However, one study of tropical timber However, under appropriate Some fear that allowing al productivity is indirect, even if it harvests found that a maximum of CDM guidelines, conservation pro- conservation projects will give non- is well understood.67 If possible, the 31 percent of individual tree biomass jects can potentially result in reli- Annex I countries an incentive to Clean Development Mechanism became sawn timber, with the average able greenhouse gas reductions. exaggerate the threat to forests. If guidelines should be designed to being 25 percent, meaning that the First, the "without mitigation" or avoided deforestation projects are allow projects that seek to increase remaining carbon previously stored in "reference" case must be con- allowed under the CDM, it will be 63 agricultural productivity in con- the tree returns to the atmosphere. firmed, using local deforestation important to avoid constructing junction with forest protection. An Additionally, harvesting typically trends. Second, the underlying guidelines that inadvertently dis- example of such a project, damages the surrounding forest, causes of these trends must be courage governments from under- CARE/Guatemala, is described in resulting in carbon emissions. Most established. taking conservation efforts. For Box 2. timber products are not long-lived, example, if conservation projects as only a small percentage of are allowed only in countries with harvested wood goes into furniture almost no protected areas, it would or buildings; the majority becomes penalize countries with significant short-lived products such as shipping protected areas. One option would be pallets that are used several times, to allow conservation offsets only in then burned. countries that had designated a certain percentage, such as 10 percent, of their forests as protected areas.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 22 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE FIRE SUPPRESSION If countries participating in Although significant progress currently testing and developing Huge swaths of Brazilian forest and the CDM have policies that exacer- has been made, more research is technologies that combine in situ Indonesian peat bogs have burned bate deforestation through subsi- needed to fully understand the cal- measurements with current and in human-caused conflagrations dies, tax breaks, or below-cost sales, culation of greenhouse gas benefits. planned satellite systems; these will leading to massive carbon emissions. then carbon sequestration projects Concerns about accurately quantify- be able to inventory global land In moist forests,huma n activities may only be mitigating the impact ing greenhouse gas reductions and cover and land-use change with the such as selective logging, shifting of poor policies. The same danger emissions can in large part be goal of providing policy-relevant cultivation, and fuelwood gathering exists for energy' offset projects as solved by sharpening the IPCC data that will be applicable at the dry out the forest floor, increasing the well, if countries offer subsidies for methodology guidelines, establish- regional scale.72 risk of wildfires.6S Several jointly high-emission fuel sources. As was ing national-level inventory meth- Such a system could identify implemented projects include suggested previously for developed ods, instituting procedures for forest areas threatened with conver- decreased incidence of fire as an countries, minimum performance independent verification required sion and degradation, or candidate objective and benefit of the project. standards could help to avoid under Article 12, and utilizing exist- areas for restoration. A subset of the The CARE/Guatemala Agroforestry rewarding countries or private sec- ing technology and data on forest threatened forests could then become project includes a fire protection tor entities with extremely poor cover and land-use change. candidates for CDM projects, provided component, from funding fire practices or policies by paying for If the Convention Parties allow that the drivers leading to forest brigades and moving from slash management improvements over an a broad range of projects and activi- conversion could be replaced with and burn agriculture to agroforestry. exceedingly low baseline. ties under the CDM, that will neces- lower-impact, lower-emitting activities. Not allowing projects that decrease Social benefits are an impor- sitate putting new systems and For example, in Costa Rica sustain- the incidence of fire under the tant part of the CDM for two rea- technologies in place that accurate- able forest management is replacing Clean Development Mechanism sons. First, sustainable development ly monitor and verify? regional forest conversion to relatively low-produc- could remove an incentive for an is one of the purposes of the CDM. and land-use change trends, a sig- tivity cattle ranching. important carbon reduction strategy. Its success will be measured both by nificant contribution in itself. To The associated monitoring and In many cases, however, fires appear achieving emission reductions and include forest and land-use change verification costs should be consid- to be the secondary impact of other by sustainable development, as projects, the CDM will require ered integral to the project, not as activities, such as logging, pollu- these represent the respective priori- putting in place monitoring and unnecessary transaction costs to be tant-stress, or clearing for cattle ties of Annex I and non-Annex I verification systems that can track eliminated. To realize the potential pasture; therefore, if CDM projects countries69 Thus, land-use change regional and local changes in land- biodiversity and climate benefits of and national policies discouraged and forest-related projects will be use. These systems could combine the CDM, it is critical to build it these activities, then human-caused undertaken to the extent that they the use of remote sensing technolo- with appropriate project guidelines, fires would decrease as well. contribute to sustainable develop- gies with ground truthing, which as well as auditing and verification ment, which will probably be would serve those concerned gener- systems. These are better approach- CONTRIBUTING ELEMENTS defined by host countries' develop- ally with the loss and degradation es than severely restricting project FOR A SUCCESSFUL CDM ment priorities. of forests and the accompanying eligibility. The chances of realizing the poten- Secondly, the goals of emission greenhouse gas emissions. Many Most importantly, if the CDM tial benefits of the CDM would be reductions and sustainable develop- projects under the AIJ pilot phase couples credible guidelines for enhanced, though not guaranteed, ment need not be in conflict. are employing such techniques in verification, accountability, and by consideration of several addition- Providing economic benefits to people their monitoring and verification monitoring with a broad inclusion al elements that go beyond institu- in the project region gives them a protocols. If governments or certifi- of forests and land-use change, tional structure and project greater stake in the project's cation agencies employ and install including avoided deforestation and eligibility. First is the danger that success.70 Carbon alone will not be regional monitoring systems, then forest management, the Protocol's the CDM will reward environmen- a sufficient motivator to ensure a costs are likely to decrease.71 The impact on both biodiversity and tally harmful policies and practices; project's longevity? in the absence of U.S. National Aeronautics and climate will be maximized. second is the role of local benefits; strict oversight. Space Administration (NASA) is and third is the need for data, This chapter was adapted from improved methods, and monitoring Paige Brown, Nancy Kete, and systems for the quantification of Robert Livernash, "Forests and Land greenhouse gas benefits. Use Projects," in Issues and Options: The Clean Development Mechanism, Jose' Goldemberg, ed. (United Nations Development Programme, 1998).

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 23 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE TECHNICAL CONCERNS ASSOCIATED WITH MEASURING AND VERIFYING FOREST AND LAND-USE CHANGE EMISSIONS AND REDUCTIONS

he key scientific and tech- The reference case is the foun- Determining the reference may Preliminary research and pro- nical issues include con- dation for determining net green- be more difficult in other cases. For ject implementation experience, T cerns about the difficulty house gas reductions and example, under a reforestation project, such as that of The Nature of quantifying and verifying green- emissions. In many cases, prevail- it may be difficult to prove why the Conservancy, have pointed to some house gas reductions from the forest ing forest and land-use practices area would not have regrown under initial suggestions for project-level sector, especially when compared and conversion trends are well a business-as-usual case. Or, clear guidelines for avoiding leakage.77 with the energy sector. The main understood and can be documented. data and evidence of deforestation One study argues that leakage can scientific and technical issues asso- Some activities, such as the may exist, but determining the cause, be anticipated and prevented by ciated with forest and land-use mit- reduced-impact logging project in and therefore the necessary response, properly designing projects or, if igation activities include Malaysia and a more recent AIJ pro- may be difficult. For example, if leakage does occur, net carbon esti- establishing a reference case, leak- ject in Bolivia (Noel Kempff), estab- farmers are converting forest to mates can be revised.78 Leakage age, permanence of reductions, and lished control areas similar to the agriculture, the reference case may can be anticipated primarily based measurement accuracy. Except for project site, which allow a direct be based on migration fueled by on whether the project activities dis- the last, these technical concerns comparison of "with-mitigation" government policies or the need for place the emitting activity or pro- remain to be fully resolved for ener- and "without-mitigation" activities.73 improved agricultural practices, vide an alternative use or income gy-based projects as well. These Determining the business-as- among other possible drivers. source for the forest. The emitting concerns primarily apply to the usual reference case for any kind of Recent and continued improve- activity will be displaced if the pro- market-based mechanisms, though project requires understanding barriers ments in the monitoring and inven- ject does not in some way address measurement accuracy is an issue to improvements in practices over time. torying of regional and local the demands leading to land-use for national inventories as well as Parallel barriers exist between the land-use cover and change, which change, whether they be for agricul- the market-based mechanisms. energy and the forest and land-use incorporate on-the-ground mea- tural land, fuelwood, or logging. sectors, suggesting that guidelines surements, will help to develop ref- These risk assessments should be ESTABLISHING A could be developed that cover both erence cases. In 1997, the first codified within the market mecha- REFERENCE CASE sectors. Typical barriers to improved global maps showing existing land nism's certification systems so that Determining the reference, or busi- practices include high, fixed, up-front cover were produced using satellite leakage-prone projects can be iden- ness-as-usual, case requires estimating costs, higher costs over time, or a data.75 Maps such as these can tified and avoided. what would hare happened in the need for technical assistance. For provide the basis for tracking future absence of greenhouse gas reduction example, up-front fixed costs may land-use changes. efforts. The reference case will be a be a barrier even if the project's challenge for both energy and forest- costs over time are lower than under LEAKAGE sector projects. the conventional scenario. Switching Leakage is the unexpected loss of from conventional light bulbs to anticipated greenhouse gas reduc- compact fluorescents involves higher tions due to the displacement of up-front costs but uses less energy activities leading to carbon emis- and saves money in the long run. sions. For example, in some cases, Similarly, adopting reduced-impact a reduced-impact logging project logging results in higher up-front may lower timber output in the costs, but over time economic benefits short term, temporarily causing may be realized from increased yield increased harvests in another area and improved efficiency.74 There to fill unmet demand.76 Because of are also opportunity costs due to this displacement of the emitting foregone timber production while activity, total greenhouse gas bene- waiting for these benefits to accrue. fits will be lower than expected. In these cases, funding from greenhouse gas mitigation helps overcome the barriers.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 24 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE PERMANENCE OF Using a portfolio approach MEASUREMENT The main hurdle facing accu- REDUCTIONS under the market mechanisms may ACCURACY rate carbon accounting is the cost The issue of permanence of reduc- be a second strategy to reduce the Lastly, some question the ability to of obtaining the measurements. tions is unique to forests and land- risk of losing greenhouse gas estimate accurately carbon losses Any project or effort can be moni- use change. While replacing coal benefits. In a portfolio approach, and gains from vegetation and soils tored and measured closely, but burning with natural gas results in greenhouse gas reductions come due to land-use and management increasing accuracy raises costs. a permanent emissions reduction, from a pool of projects rather than strategies. While there continues to be uncer- natural ecosystems are inherently individual ones. For example, Costa At the project level, mounting tainty regarding forest soil carbon, dynamic, so sequestered carbon Rica recently established Certifiable evidence indicates that measurement the majority of pilot offset projects may not be held forever.Weather , Tradable Offsets, in which certified uncertainty is overstated.80 The have not included soil in their net climate change itself, pests, disease, carbon sequestration activities are Intergovernmental Panel on Climate carbon estimates. or fire can all reverse efforts to bundled under one of two national Change (IPCC) indicates a high Studies have pointed to both reduce or sequester greenhouse gas umbrellas-the Protected Areas confidence that site-level estimates data sources and methods for track- emissions. Or, the contract could be Project and the Private Forestry of net carbon conserved or sequestered ing carbon flows over larger areas, reversed and the trees cut, thus los- Project. The portfolio approach to under specific management schemes which is required for national ing carbon gains. To guard against sequestration could mean that the are more certain than large-scale inventories. One U.S. study, for this, a fixed ratio of greenhouse gas failure of one project may be estimates of carbon fluxes, such as example, combined regional forest offset credits sold could be required mitigated by a buffer if portfolios those at the national level.8' Thus, inventories undertaken by the U.S. to be held in a contingency pool are required to hold a greater amount project-based efforts, if well moni- Forest Service with ecosystem stud- that would be used if credits are of reductions than are traded or sold. tored, could yield measurable carbon ies to estimate carbon storage for somehow lost. This requirement While the question of perma- losses and gains due to project major forest types in the United 83 would create a buffer of credits so nence can not be completely solved, activities. The IPCC defines high States. These data and methods that if one project fails, then the instruments such as discounting and confidence as a high degree of could be used to track changes in additional "buffer" reductions will portfolios can help ensure that there consensus among the report's authors carbon storage. However, some cover any losses. Such an approach are real benefits to the global based on "substantial" evidence.82 Annex I countries may lack the could also generate added funds for climate system. appropriate monitoring systems to sustainable development projects. A track changes in land use and their similar scheme relies on ton-year subsequent greenhouse gas emis- equivalents to equate temporary sions and reductions, especially if carbon with perpetual carbon. The they are not timber producers. Also, ton-year equivalence is based on the further research is required to deter- dispersion rate of the greenhouse mine greenhouse gas flows over gas and the social discount rate, time in forests under various man- thus equating carbon that may only agement schemes. Measurement be held for2 0 years with that held accuracy remains a key issue for in perpetuity.79 improving national inventories of emissions and reductions from forests and land-use change.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 25 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE &•••••• RECOMMENDATIONS

wo next steps emerge that Identify and exploit syner- The approaches of the three Overlapping areas of high value will help ensure that deci- gies between efforts to halt conventions and global forest to climate, biodiversity, or devel- T sions taken by the Conference climate change and promote processes are similar in that they opment should be identified and of the Parties lead to the best possible environmental stewardship, call for capacity building and creat- given a high priority. Ecosystems environmental outcome. First, the recognizing that responsible ing financing mechanisms to cap- under threat offer double dividends impact of forest and land-use practices forest and land-use policies ture and promote nonmarket social for climate and biodiversity. Projects, on climate and biodiversity are result in climate benefits. and environmental values. Each activities, and policies that benefit often linked positively and negatively, stresses the importance of main- climate, biodiversity, and human so policy decisions should take each Projects and policies should be taining the productivity of genetic, society should be identified and made into account. Second, the Protocol's coordinated among the Convention agricultural, and forest resources a high priority, as should improve- institutions, rules, and guidelines on Climate Change, the Convention while sustaining human developments in management practices should be developed with wide on Biological Diversity, and the ment. Clearly, the implementation that accomplish more than one participation of stakeholders from Convention to Combat Desertification, of these agreements should be better goal. For example, removing ripari- fields such as forestry, ecology, rural with international forest processes. coordinated, as this will enhance an areas from agricultural produc- and agricultural development, and Coordinating international environ- their impact. tion and reforesting them offers conservation. As the IPCC and the mental efforts under the Convention • Lenders and development climate benefits and improves water Subsidiary Body for Scientific and on Biological Diversity, the Convention agencies, such as the Global quality and wildlife habitats. Technical Advice (SBSTA) undertake on Climate Change, the Convention Environment Facility and the World The energy and forest sectors the research agenda relating to cli- to Combat Desertification, the Bank, should assign a high priority also intersect in some cases to offer mate, land-use change, and forests, Forest Principles, and the to those projects that allow coun- climate, biodiversity, and social the expertise of the conservation Intergovernmental Forum on tries to meet both climate and biodi- benefits. For example, a low-emis- and development communities Forests, among other international versity convention objectives. sion in-situ hydropower project may should be tapped in terms of trends, forest processes, can help capture • The technical advisory bodies for depend on forested riparian areas to measurements, and viable climate social and environmental benefits the climate and biodiversity conven- avoid siltation. Also, introducing mitigation projects and policies. while slowing global warming. tions should meet to compare research improved cookstoves can reduce The period for meeting Protocol (See Box 4) agendas and identify gaps and fuelwood demand, resulting in less commitments begins in ten years opportunities for coordination. For forest degradation. These synergies (2008), "demonstrable progress'' example, adopting a common defi- should be sought out and exploited, must be shown in seven (2005), nition fordeforestatio n would be one as they tend to magnify the impacts and credits from the Clean avenue for beginning coordination. of individual efforts. Development Mechanism may • Nongovernmental organizations begin to accrue in two years (2000). and national governments should The Protocol requires much substan- identify threatened forest areas of high tive input between each of these value with respect to biodiversity', milestones. We recommend the human culture, or ecosystem following actions. services that may become candidate CDM projects or protected areas in Annex I countries.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 26 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE • Nongovernmental organizations • Annex I policy-makers should • Annex I countries should ratify • Convention bodies should and development agencies should reverse ill-advised policies that result the Protocol and implement policies explore requiring inventories of explore including carbon sequestra- in poor management and carbon that will reduce the risk of danger- emissions from additional activities, tion as part of the bundle of envi- emissions, such as subsidized ous climate change such as those then, as appropriate, phasing them ronmental services under integrated harvest on public lands. described in the Protocol: enhance in on a project-level basis during financing instruments for ecological • Annex I policy-makers should energy efficiency, protect and restore the first commitment period; this is stewardship, such as the biodiversity offer incentives that result in biodi- forests, promote and develop renew- to avoid upsetting expectations on trust funds being explored for versity and climate gains, such as able energy, and phase out subsidies the meaning of the greenhouse gas Guyana and Central America. Such encouraging restoration of areas high of greenhouse gas emitting sectors. targets. Phasing in activities will funds serve as mechanisms that sup- in ecosystem services and discouraging create incentives to manage more port the healthy development of deforestation of old growth or primary If the Conference of Parties appropriately forest resources and ecosystems, often by combining forests on public and private lands. determines that additional land- allow time to develop the necessary protected areas with sustainable use. use change and forest activities monitoring systems for inventorying Incorporating carbon sequestration Ensure that accounting warrant inventorying in Annex I emissions during the second com- among the values supported by these methods, mitigation countries, they should be phased in mitment period. funds could offer them an important frameworks, definitions, and under a project-based accounting additional source of income, thus implementation of the Kyoto method. Some additional activities, Emissions from land-use change increasing their effectiveness. The Protocol help meet climate, among them forest harvest and and forests should be included in funds will be administered and development, and environ- degradation, may prove to be an Annex A of the Kyoto Protocol, implemented by groups with multiple mental objectives. important source of emissions, which lists sources that must be objectives, such as biodiversity and especially in countries such as inventoried by industrialized social benefits, which will have a Nations should ratify and imple- Russia, where new areas are being countries. The most comprehensive M greater stake in the project's success. ment the Kyoto Protocol and the opened for logging. This delay will solution is to count all carbon diox- United Nations Framework also allow time for improving ide sources, both energy and non- Annex I countries should reform Convention on Climate Change to national-level monitoring of bio- energy. Deforestation, degradation, national forest and land-use policies slow human-caused climate mass changes and exploiting syner- and land-use conversion, such as to ensure that bey da not contradict change. Rapid, human-caused cli- gies with forest certification systems from forests or grasslands toagri - the goals of the Kyoto Protocol, but mate change is likely to result in such as that of the Forest culture, should be counted as emis- further them. The Kyoto Protocol biodiversity loss by altering regional Stewardship Council. A system of sions. Human-caused land-use has given Annex I countries more precipitation and temperatures that this nature will require the develop- emissions are no different than reason than ever to provide incen- will affect the range and species ment of social and environmental those from driving or electricity tives for the improved management composition of ecosystems, perhaps criteria, such as disallowing generation-all release greenhouse of private and public lands. Just as more rapidly than they are able to afforestation on biologically unique gases into the atmosphere. abolishing fossil fuel subsidies is an adapt.85 Boreal forests and per- lands to avoid perverse environmen- • Convention bodies should efficient means of reducing emissions, mafrost may be particularly vulner- tal outcomes. explore inventorying of a wide array so is ending subsidies that encourage able to shifting weather patterns. of land-use change and forest logging on marginal timberlands greenhouse gas sources, such as those and forest conversion to low-pro- from forest harvest and management. ductivity agriculture or pasture.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 27 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Deforestation should be defined Build the Clean Development Non-Annex I and Annex I countries Parties should implement project appropriately, fully counted, and Mechanism from the ground up. should establish minimum per- and policy guidelines that avoid avoided where possible. with involvement from a full formance standards for land-use merely displacing the drivers of Deforestation is a major source of range of nations and interest change and forest-based domestic land-use change and carbon both carbon emissions and biodi- groups. Though this recommenda- reductions and projects under the emissions, referred to as leakage. versity loss. Because of these two tion appears obvious, it bears market-based mechanisms. Ideally, Leakage, described earlier, is the factors, it is critical that the repeating that Joint Implementation it would be possible to draw up a set loss of estimated carbon benefits, Protocol create incentives to avoid and its pilot phase faced opposition of required national policy reforms typically due to the displacing of deforestation in both developing from developing countries in large in addition to minimum perfor- carbon emitting activities, rather and developed countries. part because each was seen solely as mance standards. However, such a than substituting for carbon emit- • Parties should review existing a tool of developed countries. This process would be highly contentious. ting activities. and accepted definitions of defor- same fate could befall the CDM. The Alternatively, both Annex I and non- • If climate mitigation policies estation from the scientific commu- issues and questions relating to the Annex I countries could establish a or projects result in a reduction in nity such as the FAO definition Clean Development Mechanism are set of minimum performance stan- timber output, Annex I countries described earlier in this report. too complex for a comprehensive dards for projects. should find alternative fiber sources Deforestation should not be narrow- set of recommendations to be made • Convention bodies should through increased recycling, refor- ly defined so as to create a loophole in this paper. The Clean delineate a set of minimum stan- esting of abandoned land, or that allows Annex I countries to Development Mechanism must be dards and practices for eligible CDM increasing wood-use efficiency. If avoid inventorying emissions from constructed with input from a projects. Only greenhouse gas reductions in output result in forest conversion by contending that diverse and representative group of improvements over this reference unmet demand for wood fiber, it deforestation has occurred only if a countries, nongovernmental orga- would be creditable. will only displace demand onto structure, such as a building, nizations, and the private sector. • Convention bodies should also other wood fiber sources, leading to replaces the forest. • To ensure that a broad array of delineate minimum standards and higher emissions elsewhere. • Parties should not create an stakeholders and perspectives is rep- practices, at least equal to or above • The project activities should incentive to clear land during the resented at decision-making fora, existing domestic laws governing seek to address and counter the interim period from 1990 to 2008 UN agencies, multilateral institu- land use for project-based efforts threats leading to land-use change by giving credit for reforestation tions, and development agencies pursued by Annex I countries. Any by providing alternative income during the 2008 to 2012 commit- should support representation of emission reduction credit must go sources, or substitutes for the alter- ment period but not inventorying NGOs that may lack the resources to beyond these performance standards. native use of the forest land. deforestation between 1990 and participate. In particular, they 2008. To avoid this incentive. should support participation from Parties should stipulate that credit developing country government and for reforestation may only be given nongovernmental representatives for land that was not forested in the that have expertise in forest and 1990 base year86 land-use change. In addition, such • If strict monitoring and verifi- agencies should sponsor representa- cation guidelines and systems are tives at various workshops and deci- developed, avoided deforestation sion-making fora concerning the should be considered for inclusion CDM in particular. under the CDM.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 28 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE Research remaining issues Wose with knowledge of and • Nongovernmental organizations Establish a monitoring and concerning measurement, technical expertise in land-use and governmental agencies working inventory system that identifies patterns of land-use change, change and forest trends should on climate change should highlight changes in land cover and inten- and their underlying drivers participate more widely in climate the issues and opportunities in other sity of use. A monitoring system to understand more fully the change fora. The IPCC Special fora, such as the Convention on that combines remote sensing with difficulties of including land- Report on key forest and land-use Biodiversity and international forest ground truthing is essential both to use change and forests and change issues is to be completed in meetings, thus increasing the number properly inventor}' carbon fluxes the implications of not mid-2000. The IPCC Special Report of individuals and institutions from Annex I country forest and counting them. will investigate the implications of engaged in climate change policy. land-use change sectors and to defining terms, explore including • Lenders and development monitor and verify projects under Evaluate the Activities Implemented inventories of additional land-use agencies should support greater the Clean Development Mechanism, Jointly (AIJ) Pilot Phase. Currently activities, and assess project eligibility involvement from developing country if such projects are deemed eligible. implemented mitigation projects under the market mechanisms. governmental and nongovernmental Such a system will also be invalu- should be reviewed forthei r climate The upcoming Conference of the groups in decision-making meetings able to governments, nongovern- impacts, uncertainties, issues, and Parties and string of advisory meet to the FCCC. mental organizations, the private benefits. Lessons from the AIJ pilot ings (see Box 8) offer opportunities • National governments should sector, and local communities as phase should inform the creation of for input from additional experts ensure their delegations to the they seek to make informed decisions the Clean Development Mechanism. and interested parties. Additional Conference of the Parties include about the highest and best use of The pilot phase will yield lessons advisory' meetings, workshops, and participants with relevant forest- forest resources. 88 regarding transaction costs, institu- conferences will be convened. related expertise. • National governments and tional structures and barriers, and Wider participation and a higher international agencies, with estab- standard setting. profile can only help further the lished data gathering agencies, • The Convention bodies should goals of the climate convention. should begin to channel data into arrange for an independent project the greenhouse gas reporting systems and institutional evaluation of the and make it widely available. One AIJ pilot phase before finalizing II MAJOR DECISION POINTS example would be the Food and work on the CDM. Agriculture Organization, which • Countries with established joint AND COMMITMENT DATES publishes eveiy two years the State implementation pilot programs, of the Worlds Forests report, giving 1990 Baseline year for calculating emissions. such as the Netherlands, Costa Rica, an overview of the status of the 1998 November-Fourth Conference of the Parties for the and the United States, should also world's forests. formally evaluate them. For exam- FCCC meets in Buenos Aires, Argentina. • International and national-level ple, the U.S. Initiative on Joint 2000 Certified emissions reductions in non-Annex I policy makers should put increased Implementation, one of the most countries may be credited under the Clean resources into monitoring forest active programs, stipulated that the Development Mechanism. and land-use trends. program would be evaluated and 2000 IPCC scheduled tocomplet e a Special Report on Land Use, • Nongovernmental organizations assessed "within two years of its Land-Use Change, and Forestry and Carbon Emissions. tracking trends in forest conversion inception," which was 1993, or 2001 Third Assessment Report due from the IPCC. and intensity of use should channel within six months of adoption of The Report will describe the state of scientific that information into the climate international criteria for Joint understanding on the impacts and status of climate processes. Implementation by the parties change and address the role of land-use change and under the Climate Convention.87 ABOUT THE AUTHOR the forest sector in mitigating, slowing, or contributing The evaluation has yet to occur. Given Paige Brown is a research analyst to climate change. the developments under the Kyoto in the Climate, Energy, and Pollution 2005 Annex I countries should have made "demonstrable Protocol, an evaluation of the U.S. Program of the World Resources Initiative on Joint Implementation progress" in meeting commitments. Institute. Her work focuses on the would be a useful input to the 2008-2012 Compliance period during which reduction targets role of forests in climate change process of building the CDM. must be reached. mitigation.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 29 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE GLOSSARY

ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED CLEAN DEVELOPMENT JOINT IMPLEMENTATION: PROJECT-BASED CREDIT JOINTLY (AIJ): The pilot phase MECHANISM (ARTICLE 12): Activities undertaken voluntarily TRADING (ARTICLE 6): Annex I of Joint Implementation, established The CDM mechanism will allow and cooperatively between at least Parties may trade "emission reduction at the first Conference of the Parties, certified emission reductions from two parties in two or more countries units" resulting from projects that ending in 1999- project activities that assist non-Annex that reduce, avoid, or sequester diminish greenhouse gas emissions I countries in achieving sustainable greenhouse gas emissions. or enhance removals. ANNEX I COUNTRIES: The 39 development, and Annex I countries industrialized countries that agreed in complying with greenhouse gas NON-ANNEX I COUNTRIES: SINK: Any process, activity, or to binding limitations on greenhouse reduction limitations. Participation The group of developing countries mechanism that removes a green- gas emissions. The Annex I group is voluntary by each part}'. that do not have binding commit- house gas, an aerosol, or a precursor includes developed economies such ments on greenhouse gas emissions. of a greenhouse gas from the as those in the European community, GREENHOUSE GASES: atmosphere. Canada, and New Zealand as well as Those gases that comprise the countries in transition to a market atmosphere, both natural and SOURCE: Any process or activity economy such as the Russian anthropogenic, that absorb and that releases a greenhouse gas, an Federation, the Czech Republic, re-emit infrared radiation. aerosol, or a precursor of a green- Hungary, and Poland. house gas into the atmosphere.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 30 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE NOTES

1 Duncan Austin, Jose Goldemberg, and 9 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 14 Nigel Dudley, Jean Jeanrenaud, and 19 The three Conventions and Forest Gwen Parker. Contributions to Climate Change. Climate Change 1995: The Science Francis Sullivan. Bad Harvest? 'the Timber Principles that emerged from the 1992 Rio Change: Are Conventional Metrics of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Trade and the Degradation of the World's Earth Summit are: Misleading the Debate? (Washington DC: Group I to the Second Assessment Report of Forests. World Wildlife Fund (London: United Nations Environment Programme World Resources Institute, 1998). the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Earthscan Publications, Ltd, 1995). (UNEP). United Nations Convention to Change. World Meteorological Organization Combat Decertification. Text with Annexes. 2 Alan D. Hecht and Dennis Tirpak. and United Nations Environment Programme. 15 Robert Dixon et al. "Carbon Pools and (Geneva: UNEP, 1995). "Framework Agreement on Climate Change: J.T. Houghton, L.G. Meira Filho, BA Callandei Flux of Global Forest Ecosystems." Science United Nations. United Nations Framework A Scientific and Policy History." Climatic N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, and K. Maskell. eds. 263 (1994):185-90. Convention on Climate Change (United Change 2% no. 4 (April 1995): 371. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Nations Conference on Environment and 1996): 4. 16 Dirk Bryant et al. The Last Frontier Development, Rio de Janeiro. Brazil, June 3 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Forests: Ecosystems & Economies on the 1992). Change. Working Group 1. Climate Change, 10 For almost all industrialized countries, Edge (Washington DC: World Resources United Nations. United Nations Convention 'lie IPCC Scientific Assessment. World 1990 is the base year from which they Institute, 1997). on Biological Diversity (United Nations Meteorological Organization and United calculate emissions limitations. However, Conference on Environment and Nations Environment Programme. J.T. some countries are allowed to use other base 17 Bryant et al., 'The Last Frontier Forests. Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June Houghton, G.J.Jenkins, andJ.J. Ephraums. years that result in higher emissions. For Frontier forests are defined as large tracts of 1992). eds. (New York: Cambridge University Press, example, Bulgaria may use 1989 as its base relatively intact forests that are large enough "Non-Legally Binding Authoritative 1990): xxxii. year, and Poland 1988. As stated earlier, the to support their biodiversity even in the event Statement of Principles on the Management, higher the base year emissions, the less of a natural disaster. The plant biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development 4 United Nations. United Nations onerous the reduction commitment during index was estimated by multiplying the of All Types of Forests" (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate the commitment period. country's total number of higher plant Conference on Environment and Change (New York: 1992). Available online species per unit area by the country's total Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June (http://www.unfccc.de/fccc/conv/conv.htm). 11 The division of Annex I and non-Annex frontier forest area. 1992). I countries was based on level of economic United Nations Commission on Sustainable 5 Framework Convention on Climate development and historical responsibility for 18 Mark Trexler and Christine Haugen. Development. Report of the Ad Hoc Change. .Article 4(l)d. the buildup of greenhouse gases in the Keeping It Green: Tropical Forestry Intergovernmental Panel on Forests on Its atmosphere. Annex I countries are largely Opportunities for Mitigating Climate Fourth Session (United Nations, New York, 6 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate responsible for the current buildup of gases, Change (Washington DC: World Resources 11-21 February 1997). While there are many Change (IPCC). Greenhouse Gas Inventory and as such are the first group of nations to Institute, 1995). The ranking is based on forest agreements, most recently the Reporting Instructions. IPCC Guidelines act towards reducing emissions. IPCC. Climate estimates of the highest net change in stored Intergovernmental Forum on Forests was for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Change 1995: The Science of Climate carbon through slowed deforestation and new formed to pursue a consensus and formulate United Nations Development Programme, Change, Summary for Policy Makers. Bert biomass interventions between 1990 and 2050. options consistent with the Forest Principles. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Bolin. John Houghton, and L. Gylvan Meira Development, International Energy Agency, Filho, eds. (Rome: December 1995). 20 Sandra Brown et al. "Management of and International Panel on Climate Change. Forests for Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Volumes 1 and 2 (United Kingdom: 1995). 12 These gases are carbon dioxide (C02), Emissions," in Climate Change 1995. nitrous oxide (N9O), methane (CH4), Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of 7 Hecht and Tirpak, "Framework hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Agreement on Climate Change." (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SFg). Analyses. Contribution of Working Group II to the Second .Assessment Report of the 8 Sierra Club and Sierra Club of Canada. 13 Michael A. Cairns and Richard A. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Risky Business: Why pint Implementation Meganck. "Carbon Sequestration, Biological Change. R.T. Watson, M.C. Zinyowera, and Is the Wrong Approach to Global Warming Diversity, and Sustainable Development: R.H. Moss, eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge Policy (Washington DC: Sierra Club, 1995). Integrated Forest Management." University Press, 1996): 773-97. A. Agarwal and S. Narain. Global Warming Environmental Management 18, no. in an Unequal World. A Case of 1(1994): 13-22. IPCC Working Group II. Environmental Colonialism (New Delhi: technologies, Policies and Measures for Centre for Science and Environment, 1991)' Mitigating Climate Change. R.T. Watson, Climate Network Europe. Joint M.C. Zinyowera, and R.H. Moss, eds. Implementation from a European NGO Technical Paper (November 1996). Perspective (Brussels: July 1994).

WORtD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 31 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE 21 Using data extrapolated from graphs on 27 Mark E. Harmon, William K. Ferrell, 39 World Bank. The Forest Sector. A World 49 T. P.KolchuginaandT S.Vinson. "Role page 57, Working Group II, 1996, and Jerry F. Franklin. "Effects on Carbon Bank Policy Paper (Washington DC: World of Russian Forests in the Global Carbon "Technologies, Policies and Measures," we Storage of Conversion of Old-Growth Forests Bank. 1991): 93. Balance." Ambio 24, no. 5 (1995): 258. estimated that between 2008 and 2012. to Young Forests." Science 247 (1990): 699. approximately 80.4 million tons of carbon 40 Jack K. Winjum, Sandra Brown, and 50 Kolchugina and Vinson, "Role of can be sequestered or conserved within the 28 John Grace et al. "Carbon Dioxide Bernhard Schlamadinger. "Forest Harvests Russian Forests." United States. Then, using projections from Uptake by an Undisturbed Tropical Rain and Wood Products: Sources and Sinks of International Energy Outlook 1998 for the Forest in Southwest .Amazonia 1992 to 1993." Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide." Forest Science 51 German Advisory Council on Global years 2008-2012. we estimated that to reach Science 270 (November 3.1995): 778-80. 44. no. 2 (May 1998): 281. Change, The Accounting of Biological Sinks, the 7 percent reduction from reference case 14. projections, the United States must reduce its 29 Paige Brown, Brace Cabarle, and Robert 41 Harmon et al., "Effects on Carbon carbon emissions by 477.69 million tons. In Livernash. Carbon Counts: Estimating Storage of Conversion," 701. 52 International Geosphere-Biosphere fact, this figure may be an underestimate, as Climate Change Mitigation in Forestry Programme Terrestrial Working Group, the emissions only estimate carbon, thus Projects (Washington DC, World Resources 42 Michelle A. Pinard and Francis E. Putz. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. "The omitting releases from the other five green- Institute, 1997). "Retaining Forest Biomass by Reducing Terrestrial Carbon Cycle: Implications for the house gases. Department of Energy. Logging Damage." Biotropica 28, no 3 Kyoto Protocol." Science 280 (May 29,1998): International Energy Outlook 1998. With 30 GJ. Nabuurs and G.M.J. Mohren. (1996): 5. 1393-94. Projections Through 2020. Energy Carbon Fixation through Forestation Information Administration. DOF7EA-0484(98) Activities. Commissioned by the Foundation 43 While there are some low-density, old- 53 Brown et al., Carbon Counts. (Washington DC: April 1998): 142. Table A9. RACK. IBM Research Report 93/4 (The growth forests where this may not be the Netherlands: 1993). case, older dense forests such as those of the 54 United Nations Conference on Trade 22 R.A. Houghton et al. "Changes in the Pacific Northwest have been shown to hold and Development. A Pilot Greenhouse Gas Carbon Content of Terrestrial Biota and Soils 31 Theodore Panayotou and Peter S. Ashton. more carbon than younger forests. This is Trading System: The Legal Issues. L'NC- Between I860 and 1980: A Net Release of CO2 Not by Timber Alone. The Economics and because older forests store large amounts of TAD/GDS/GFSB/Misc. 2 (Geneva: United to the Atmosphere." Ecological Monographs. Ecology for Sustaining Tropical Forests carbon in the soil and in older tree stems, Nations, I996). 53 (1983): 235-62. (Washington DC: Island Press, 1992): 199, which is lost when these areas are logged. Harmon et al., "Effects on Carbon Storage of 55 Paul Faeth. An Analysis of the 23 D. Schimel et al. "Radiative Forcing of 32 Dudley et al. Forests For Life. Conversion," 699. Potential for Water Quality Trading in Climate Change," in Climate Change 1995: Michigan: The Case ofSaginaw Bay. In The Science of Climate Change. The figure 33 These three bodies, the Intergovernmental 44 See for example, Sandra Brown, Andrew Press (Washington DC: World Resources represents the share of deforestation of the Panel on Climate Change, the Subsidiary J. Gillespie. and Ariel Lugo. "Biomass Institute, 1997). average annual carbon budget between 1980 Body for Scientific and Technical Advice Estimation Methods for Tropical Forests with and 1989. (SBSTA), and the Subsidiary Body for Applications to Forest Inventor;' Data." Forest 56 Framework Convention on Climate Implementation, provide advice and support Science 35, no. 4 (1989): 881-902. Change, Article 3(1). 24 Schimel et al., "Radiative Forcing." in to the Conference of the Parties on a range of Climate Change 1995. issues. While these are not the only advisory 45 German Advisory Council on Global 57 Bryant et al., The Last Frontier Forests. bodies, they are the primary ones. Change. The Accounting of Biological Sinks 25 Nigel Dudley, Don Gilmour and Jean- Throughout the remainder of the paper, they and Sources Under the Kyoto Protocol-A 58 Pinard and Putz, "Retaining Forest Paul Jeanrenaud. Forests for Life. The will be collectively referred to as "advisory Step Forwards or Backwards for Global Biomass." WWF/IUCN Forest Policy Book. World bodies" unless one is specifically referenced. Environmental Protection? Special Report Wildlife Fund and IUCN/The World Conservation 1998 (Bremenhaven: 1998). Available online 59 Pinard and Putz, "Retaining Forest Union (Switzerland: February 1996). 34 Daniel Lashof, Natural Resources Defense (http://www.awi-bremerhaven.de/WBGU). Biomass." Council, to Charles Rawls, United States 26 U.S. House of Representatives. House Department of Agriculture (February 12,1998). 46 HAO, The Slate of the World's Forests, 21. 60 Forest Stewardship Council. Manual Resolution 151. Regarding Management of for Evaluation and Accreditation of National Forests to Reduce Greenhouse 35 IPCC, Greenhouse Gas Inventory 47 Winjum et al., "Forest Harvests and Certification Bodies (Oaxaca, Mexico: Gases. October 21.1997. Reporting. Wood Products." 272-84. Forest Stewardship Council, 1995). Clark Row and Robert B. Phelps. "Wood 36 United Nations Framework Convention Carbon Flows and Storage After Timber 61 FUKDECOR. C.AEFIX Project Proposal on Climate Change. Methodological Issues Harvest," in Forests and Global Change for the Edison Electric Institute (Costa Rica: Synthesis of Information from National Volume 2: Forest Management FUNDF.COR, 1995). Communications of Annex I Parties on Opportunities for Mitigating Carbon Sources and Sinks in the Land-Use Change Emissions. R. Neil Sampson and Dwiglit 62 World Resources Institute. Forestry as and Forestry Sector. Technical Paper. Hair, eds. (Washington DC: American Forests, a Response to Global Warming. A November 20,1997. Available online 1996): 27-58. This study estimated that in Workshop Report (Washington D.C.: World (http://wwvv.unfccc.de/fccc/tp/1997/5). the United States 35 million tons of carbon Resources Institute, 1994). accumulate in wood products each year. 37 IPCC, Greenhouse Gas Inventory Reporting. 48 U.S. House of Representatives. Resolution 151. 38 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The State of the World's Forests (Rome: 1997): 174.

WORtD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 32 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE 63 D. Noack. "Making Better Use of 70 Brown et al.. Carbon Counts, 8. Faeth 76 R.A. Sedge. "Local Logging: Global 85 IPCC, Climate Change 1995, 26. Tropical Timber Resources." Tropical Forest et al., Evaluating the Carbon Sequestration Effects." Journal of Forestry 39, no. 7 (April Updated, no. 2 (June, 1995):12-13. A Benefits, 66. 1995): 25-28. 86 Daniel Lashof, Natural Resources newsletter from the International Tropical Defense Council, memo to Charles Rawls, Timber Organization. 71 For example, the Rio Bravo Carbon 77 Brown et al. Carbon Counts. United United States Department of Agriculture. Sequestration pilot project is using air pho- States Initiative on Joint Implementation, 64 Noack, "Making Better Use of Tropical tography, control sites, and satellite imagery. Activities Implemented Jointly. This report 87 United States Climate Action Plan Timber Resources." 13. Similarly, F.COLAKD, a forest preservation describes the measures taken by AIJ project (Washington DC: October, 1993): 105. project in Costa Rica, is using satellite and implementors to avoid and guard against 65 Trexler and Haugen, Keeping II Green. photographic imaging in conjunction with leakage of greenhouse gas benefits. 88 For information on additional meetings Brown et al., Carbon Counts. Cairns and contracting a local eco-tourist group to and fora, see the Framework Convention on Meganck, "Carbon Sequestration, Biological undertake on-the-ground monitoring. 78 Brown et al., Carbon Counts. Climate Change website, which maintains a Diversity, and Sustainable Development." CARFIX project implementors will undertake schedule (www.unfccc.de). Robert N. Stavins. The Costs of Carbon triennial remote sensing, and annual forest 79 Kenneth Chomitz. Baselines for Sequestration: A Revealed Preference growth measurements with LANDSAT Greenhouse Gas Reductions: Problems, Approach. CSIA Discussion Paper 95-06 imagery. United States Initiative on Joint Precedents, Solutions, prepared for the (Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Implementation. Activities Implemented Carbon Offsets Unit, Development Research University, 1995). Harmon et al., "Effects on Jointly: Second Report to the Secretariat of Group, World Bank (July 16,1998): 37-38. Carbon Storage of Conversion," 699. the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 80 IPCC Working Group II, Technologies, 66 Brown et al., Carbon Counts. Accomplishments and Descriptions of Policies and Measures. Paul Faeth, Cheryl Cort. and Robert Projects Accepted Under the U.S. Initiative on Livernash, Evaluating the Carbon Joint Implementation. Volume 2. EPA 236- 81 Brown et al., "Management of Forests Sequestration Benefits of Forestry Projects R-97-003 (Washington DC: U.S. for Mitigation," in Climate Change 1995. in Developing Countries (Washington DC: Environmental Protection Agency, 1998). Impacts, 775. World Resources Institute, 1994). 72 Mission to Planet Earth Science 82 IPCC, Climate Change 1995, x. 67 United Nations Environment Research Plan. Land-Cover and Land-Use Programme. Global Biodiversity Change Strategy. NASA Website 83 Richard A. Birdsey. "Carbon Storage for Assessment (Cambridge: Cambridge (http:/Aww.hq.nasa.gov/office/mtpe/ Major Forest Types and Regions in the University Press, 1995): 891. draftsciplan/mtpe-srp.htm). Coterminous United States," in Forests and Global Change. Volume 2: Forest 68 IPCC Working Group II, Technologies, 73 Pinard and Putz, "Retaining Forest Management Opportunities for Mitigating Policies and Measures. Biomass," 5. Carbon Emissions. R. Neil Sampson and Dwight Hair, eds. (Washington DC: American 69 Youba Sokona, Stephen Humphreys, 74 Markku Simula. "Economics of Forests, 1996). and Jean-Philippe Thomas. "What Prospects Certification," in Certification of Forest for Africa?" in Issues & Options: The Clean Products: Issues and Perspectives. Virgilio 84 Center for Sustainable Development in Development Mechanism. Jose Goldemberg, M. Viana, Jamison Ervin, Richard Z. the Americas. FOCADES, Tlx Central ed. (New York: L'nited Nations Development Donovan, Chris Elliott, and Henry Gholz, eds. American Environmental Fund. A pam- Programme, 1998): 111. (Washington DC: Island Press, 1996): 134. phlet (Washington DC: Center for Sustainable Development in the Americas, 75 Mission to Planet Earth. Remarks by 1998). Doreen Crompton. "The Proposed William Townsend. Acting Associate Guyana Rain Forest Foundation." A concept Administrator, September 17,1997. Earth paper prepared for the Carter Center (1997). Science Enterprise Website (http://wvw.hq.nasa.gov/office/mtpe/ \vhat_news/97accomps.htm).

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 33 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

William D. Ruckelshaus Manuel Arango C. Payne Lucas Jonathan Lash Chairman Frances G. Beinecke William F. Martin President Robert 0. Blake Julia Marton-Lefevre John Firor Bert Bolin Matthew Nimetz J. Alan Brewster Vice Chairman Robert N. Burt Paulo N'ogueira-Neto Senior Vice President David T. Buzzelli Ronald L. Olson Deb Callahan Peter H. Raven Donna W. Wise Michael R. Deland Florence T. Robinson Vice President for Policy Affairs Sylvia A. Earle Roger W.Sant Jose' Maria Figueres Stephan Schmidheiny Kenton R. Miller Shinji Fukukawa Bruce Smart Vice President, International Development John H. Gibbons James Gustave Speth and Conservation William M. Haney, III Maurice F. Strong Calestous Junta Meg Taylor Lucy Byrd Dorick Yolanda Kakabadse Mostafa K. Tolba Vice President for Development Jonathan Lash Alvaro Umana Jeffrey T. Leeds Victor L. L'rquidi Marjorie Beane Jane Lubchenco Pieter Winsemius Secretary-Treasurer Wren Wirth

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE

he World Resources Institute (WRI) is an independent center for policy research and technical assistance on global environmental and devel- T opment issues. WRI's mission is to move human society to live in ways that protect Earth's environment and its capacity to provide for the needs and aspirations of current and future generations.

Because people are inspired by ideas, empowered by knowledge, and moved to change by greater understanding, the Institute provides-and helps other institutions provide—objective information and practical proposals for policy and institutional change that will foster environmentally sound, socially equitable development. WRI's particular concerns are with globally significant environmental problems and their interaction with economic development and social equity at all levels.

The Institute's current areas of work include economics, forests, biodiversity, climate change, energy, sustainable agriculture, resource and environmental information, trade, technology, national strategies for environmental and resource management, business liaison, and human health.

In all of its policy research and work with institutions, WRI tries to build bridges between ideas and action, meshing the insights of scientific research, economic and institutional analyses, and practical experience with the need for open and participatory decision-making.

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 1709 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006, USA http://www.wri.org/wri

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 34 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE THE WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE

he World Resources Institute Forest Frontiers Initiative (FFI) is a multi-disciplinary effort to promote stewardship in and around the T world's last major frontier forests by influencing investment, policy, and public opinion. The FFI team is working with governments, citizens' groups, and the private sector in Amazonia, Central Africa, Indonesia, North America, and Russia. We also take part in pressing international discussions on forest policy.

We are motivated by the belief that there is a responsible way to use forests. We also see growing interest in finding alternatives to forest destruc- tion that take advantage of the full economic potential of forests, not just immediate revenue from logging and forest clearing.

For each frontier forest region, FFI builds a network of policy-makers, activists, investors, and researchers to promote policy reform. Efforts to minimize the negative impacts of road-building and forest-clearing for agriculture and to stop illegal logging are part of this work.

In collaboration with a variety of partners, WRI is creating Global Forest Watch-an independent, decentralized, global forest monitoring network - which will facilitate the collection of all relevant information on forests and how they are being used as well as provide mechanisms for making this information available to anyone with a stake in the forest.

Business has a leading role to play. WRI is working with the forest products industry and others to create greater production and demand for goods from well-managed forests. We are developing case studies with innovative firms to demonstrate to others the business impacts and opportunities that sustainability presents.

To get access to information about FFI findings and activities and to find out how to participate, visit our website at http://www.wri.org/wri/ffl/ or write to:

Forest Frontiers Initiative World Resources Institute 1709 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006, U.S.A. Telephone: 202/638-6300 Fax: 202/638-0036 Email: [email protected]

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 35 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE IUCN-THE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION

ounded in 1948, IUCN-The World Conservation Union brings together States, government agencies, and a diverse range of non-governmental F organizations (NGOs) in a unique membership: 895 members in all, spread across 138 countries. As a Union, IUCN seeks to influence, and encourage and assist societies throughout the world toconserv e the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. A global secretariat and 35 regional and country offices coordinate the IUCN Programme and serve the Union membership, rep- resenting their views on the world stage and providing them with the strategies, services, scientific knowledge, and technical support they need to achieve their goals. Through its six Commissions, IUCN draws together over 6,000 expert volunteers in project teams and action groups, focusing in particular on biodiversity conservation and the management of habitats and natural resources. The World Conservation Union builds on the strength of its members, networks and partners to enhance their capacity and to promote global alliances in support of conservation at the local, regional and global level. IUCN The World Conservation Union 28 Rue de Mauvemay C4-1196 Gland Switzerland http://www.iucn.org

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 36 FOREST FRONTIERS INITIATIVE WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE 1709 NEW YORK AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20006 USA http://ww.wri.org/wri

IN COLLABORATION WITH IUCN Tnc World Conssrvstiof) Union 28 RUE DE MAUVERNAY C4-1196 GLAND SWITZERLAND http://www.iucn.org

ISBNNo.:1-56973-285-x