Aboveground carbon of community-managed Chirpine (Pinus roxburghii Sarg.) forests of Nepal based on stand types and geographic aspects

Abstract

On a global scale, about 15.5% of forests are administered through community-based forestry programs that offer the opportunity for enhanced carbon sequestration while maintaining the supply of more traditional goods and services such as cooking fuels, animal fodder and bedding. A challenge in community forest (CF) management is to realize their carbon value without compromising their role in the provision of these traditional goods and services. In this study of CF dominated by Pinus roxburghii in the Phalebas region of Nepal, the impacts of stand composition and geographic aspect on aboveground forest carbon is investigated as a means to optimize CF management for both traditional values and for emerging carbon market values. The aboveground carbon of mixed and monospecific stands of Pinus roxburghii was estimated using a combination of destructive sampling and species-specific allometric equations. On average, monospecific stands contained 106.2 Mg C ha−1 in aboveground tree biomass, significantly more than mixed stands at 73.1 Mg C ha−1 (p = 0.022). Similarly, stands growing on northern aspects (northeast 124.8 Mg C ha−1, northwest 100.9 Mg C ha−1) stored significantly more carbon (p = 0.002) than southern aspects (southeast 75.3 Mg C ha−1, southwest 57.6 Mg C ha−1), reflecting the more favorable growing conditions of northern aspects. These results suggest monospecific stands planted on northern aspects may be best suited for management to achieve carbon benefits, whilst mixed-species stands on southern aspects may be better suited for biodiversity conservation and supporting livelihoods. To maintain and increase carbon value, community forestry may need to implement nutrient return practices to limit the impact of sustained nutrient removals on stand productivity.

Navigating the complexities of the forest land sharing vs sparing logging dilemma: analytical insights through the governance theory of social-ecological systems dynamics

“…The ultimate goal of sparing is to efficiently manage distinct, mono-specific stands, each dedicated to specific livelihood benefits. Examples can include different mono-specific stands of local timber species ( Lamb, 1998 ), parcels of fast-growing mono-specific carbon planting of mangrove or pinus ( Alongi, 2012 ; Pariyar et al, 2019 ), parcels of deciduous tree species for groundwater re/dis-charge and purification ( Schwaiger et al, 2018 ), and parcels of local species for food, firewood, medicine, or other non-timber forest products ( Wong, 2000 ), among others. By adopting a land-sparing logging approach, it is expected that actors can collectively agree to save the largest possible and most contiguous forest area for maximizing the conservation of biodiversity and other intangible ecosystem services outcomes.…”