We refine the information available through the IPCC AR5 with regard to recent trends in global GHG emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land uses (AFOLU), including global emission updates to 2012. Using all three available AFOLU datasets employed for analysis in the IPCC AR5, rather than just one as done in the IPCC AR5 WGIII Summary for Policy Makers, our analyses point to a down-revision of global AFOLU shares of total anthropogenic emissions, while providing important additional information on subsectoral trends. Our findings confirm that the share of AFOLU emissions to the anthropogenic total declined over time. They indicate a decadal average of 28.7 ± 1.5% in the 1990s and 23.6 ± 2.1% in the 2000s and an annual value of 21.2 ± 1.5% in 2010. The IPCC AR5 had indicated a 24% share in 2010. In contrast to previous decades, when emissions from land use (land use, land use change and forestry, including deforestation) were significantly larger than those from agriculture (crop and livestock production), in 2010 agriculture was the larger component, contributing 11.2 ± 0.4% of total GHG emissions, compared to 10.0 ± 1.2% of the land use sector. Deforestation was responsible for only 8% of total anthropogenic emissions in 2010, compared to 12% in the 1990s. Since 2010, the last year assessed by the IPCC AR5, new FAO estimates indicate that land use emissions have remained stable, at about 4.8 Gt CO eq yr in 2012. Emissions minus removals have also remained stable, at 3.2 Gt CO eq yr in 2012. By contrast, agriculture emissions have continued to grow, at roughly 1% annually, and remained larger than the land use sector, reaching 5.4 Gt CO eq yr in 2012. These results are useful to further inform the current climate policy debate on land use, suggesting that more efforts and resources should be directed to further explore options for mitigation in agriculture, much in line with the large efforts devoted to REDD+ in the past decade.

The Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED3) and the FAOSTAT Emissions database, containing estimates of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from biomass burning and peat fires, are compared. The two datasets formed the basis for several analyses in the fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR5), and thus represent a critical source of information for emissions inventories at national, regional and global level. The two databases differ in their level of computational complexity in estimating emissions. While both use the same burned area information from remote sensing, estimates of available biomass are computed in GFED3 at tier 3 using a complex dynamic vegetation model, while they are computed in FAOSTAT using default, tier 1 parameters from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Over the analysis period 1997-2011, the two methods were found to produce very similar global GHG emissions estimates for each of the five GFED aggregated biomass fire classes: i) Savanna; ii) Woodland; iii) Forest; iv) Deforestation; v) Peatlands; with total emissions ranging 6-8 Gt CO2eq yr -1 . The main differences between the two datasets were found with respect to peat fires, with FAOSTAT showing a lower 1997-1998 peak in emissions compared with GFED3, within an otherwise good agreement for the rest of the study period, when limited to the three tropical countries covered by GFED. Conversely, FAOSTAT global emissions from peat fires, including both boreal and tropical regions, were several times larger than those currently estimated by GFED3. Results Climatic Change (2016) 135:699-711

The Paris Agreement calls on parties to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change by engaging in appropriate policies and measures as put forward through Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), to strengthen transparency when reporting their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to increase their mitigation contributions to climate action from 2020. It also calls for regular and transparent monitoring and reporting of the GHG emissions and on the NDCs implementation efforts. Biomass fires significantly affect the GHG atmospheric balance, with fire emissions representing more than 5% of total emissions from agriculture, forestry, and other land use (AFOLU), according to recent estimates produced by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). We update previously published Tier 1 estimates of GHG emissions in FAOSTAT-which had been used in the IPCC AR5 analysis-by using new burned area activity data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) known as MCD64A1, Collection 6. The previous FAOSTAT estimates had used as input the Global Fire Emission Database v.4 (GFED4) burned area product, based on older MODIS Collection 5.1 burned area product. In line with differences between the input data used, the new FAOSTAT estimates indicate roughly 30% higher fire emissions globally than previously published. Our analysis also confirms that the FAOSTAT Tier 1 approach produces fire emissions estimates that are comparable to those computed at Tier 3 by GFED, and thus represent a useful complementary tool in support of country GHG reporting.

This paper draws on the results of a case study within the SoCo project and aims to assess the benefits and constraints in the application of conservation agriculture (CA) methods in Midi-Pyrénées, France, along with an evaluation of the coherence of the policy framework designed to improve the protection of soil resources.Inappropriate agricultural practices, under particular climate, terrain and soil conditions, have contributed to make erosion the main soil degradation phenomenon in Midi-Pyrénées, particularly under spring crops. The decrease of carbon stock is also a relevant issue.Among the various techniques applied by local farmers to reduce the impact of soil degradation on their land, CA appeared popular and was therefore analysed in detail.No specific legislation on soil protection is currently available in France, while the present agri-environmental policy, including the Rural Development Plan and the cross compliance measures, focuses mainly on water quality and biodiversity.A mixed methodological approach was used consisting of a literature review on the status of soils, of the characteristics of CA practices and of the soil-related policies in force. Semi-structured interviews with selected stakeholders on the use of soil conservation techniques and on soil legislation allowed a broader discussion of the study results.The research suggests that CA can effectively contribute to mitigate soil degradation in Midi-Pyrénées, although some implementation drawbacks seem to limit its wider use mainly due to lack of a specific support. Therefore, a better targeting of existing policies would be desirable for an improved protection of soil resources.

No abstract