Amazon forest biomass density maps: tackling the uncertainty in carbon emission estimates

Ometto, Jean Pierre; Aguiar, Ana Paula Dutra; Assis, Talita Oliveira; Soler, Luciana; Valle, Pedro F Del; Tejada, Graciela; Lapola, David M.; Meir, Patrick

doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1058-7

Cited by 46 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, our study did not include sites in the western and northwestern regions of the Brazilian Amazon. Although these areas are farther away from the arc of deforestation [e.g., Coe et al , ], thus less subject to anthropogenic disturbance, these areas also show large uncertainties in biomass and high disagreement in biomass estimates by different regional maps [ Ometto et al , ]. Third, inventory plots and lidar data in our study targeted terra firme Amazon forests; however, at least one sixth of the total Amazon lowland area are wetlands and half of the wetland regions are found in Brazil [ Hess et al , ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Aboveground biomass variability across intact and degraded forests in the Brazilian Amazon

Longo

Keller

dos-Santos

et al. 2016

Global Biogeochemical Cycles

138

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deforestation rates have declined in the Brazilian Amazon since 2005, yet degradation from logging, fire, and fragmentation has continued in frontier forests. In this study we quantified the aboveground carbon density (ACD) in intact and degraded forests using the largest data set of integrated forest inventory plots (n = 359) and airborne lidar data (18,000 ha) assembled to date for the Brazilian Amazon. We developed statistical models relating inventory ACD estimates to lidar metrics that explained 70% of the variance across forest types. Airborne lidar‐ACD estimates for intact forests ranged between 5.0 ± 2.5 and 31.9 ± 10.8 kg C m−2. Degradation carbon losses were large and persistent. Sites that burned multiple times within a decade lost up to 15.0 ± 0.7 kg C m−2 (94%) of ACD. Forests that burned nearly 15 years ago had between 4.1 ± 0.5 and 6.8 ± 0.3 kg C m−2 (22–40%) less ACD than intact forests. Even for low‐impact logging disturbances, ACD was between 0.7 ± 0.3 and 4.4 ± 0.4 kg C m−2 (4–21%) lower than unlogged forests. Comparing biomass estimates from airborne lidar to existing biomass maps, we found that regional and pantropical products consistently overestimated ACD in degraded forests, underestimated ACD in intact forests, and showed little sensitivity to fires and logging. Fine‐scale heterogeneity in ACD across intact and degraded forests highlights the benefits of airborne lidar for carbon mapping. Differences between airborne lidar and regional biomass maps underscore the need to improve and update biomass estimates for dynamic land use frontiers, to better characterize deforestation and degradation carbon emissions for regional carbon budgets and Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Aboveground biomass variability across intact and degraded forests in the Brazilian Amazon

Longo

Keller

dos-Santos

et al. 2016

Global Biogeochemical Cycles

138

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Estimates of aboveground carbon stocks vary by over 100% in African forests (Lewis et al ., ) and by 60% in Amazonian forests (Houghton et al ., ). Emission estimates calculated from land‐cover change in the Amazon remain markedly divergent and are largely due to differences among biomass maps (Aguiar et al ., ; Ometto et al ., ). Ometto et al .…”

Section: Evaluating Changes In Forests: Combination Of Field Inventormentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Most methods combine remote‐sensing analyses with field plots, which are limited (in number and spatial distribution) and possibly biased (Marvin et al ., ; Saatchi et al ., ), resulting in many divergent biomass maps in the literature (Houghton et al ., , ; GOFC‐GOLD, ; Mitchard et al ., ; Ometto et al ., ). Estimates of aboveground carbon stocks vary by over 100% in African forests (Lewis et al ., ) and by 60% in Amazonian forests (Houghton et al ., ).…”

Section: Evaluating Changes In Forests: Combination Of Field Inventormentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Toward an integrated monitoring framework to assess the effects of tropical forest degradation and recovery on carbon stocks and biodiversity

Bustamante

Roitman

Aide

et al. 2015

Global Change Biology

200

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tropical forests harbor a significant portion of global biodiversity and are a critical component of the climate system. Reducing deforestation and forest degradation contributes to global climate-change mitigation efforts, yet emissions and removals from forest dynamics are still poorly quantified. We reviewed the main challenges to estimate changes in carbon stocks and biodiversity due to degradation and recovery of tropical forests, focusing on three main areas: (1) the combination of field surveys and remote sensing; (2) evaluation of biodiversity and carbon values under a unified strategy; and (3) research efforts needed to understand and quantify forest degradation and recovery. The improvement of models and estimates of changes of forest carbon can foster process-oriented monitoring of forest dynamics, including different variables and using spatially explicit algorithms that account for regional and local differences, such as variation in climate, soil, nutrient content, topography, biodiversity, disturbance history, recovery pathways, and socioeconomic factors. Generating the data for these models requires affordable large-scale remote-sensing tools associated with a robust network of field plots that can generate spatially explicit information on a range of variables through time. By combining ecosystem models, multiscale remote sensing, and networks of field plots, we will be able to evaluate forest degradation and recovery and their interactions with biodiversity and carbon cycling. Improving monitoring strategies will allow a better understanding of the role of forest dynamics in climate-change mitigation, adaptation, and carbon cycle feedbacks, thereby reducing uncertainties in models of the key processes in the carbon cycle, including their impacts on biodiversity, which are fundamental to support forest governance policies, such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation.

show abstract

“…Key challenges to the quantification of deforestation emissions in general are high variations in the description of forest area changes, due to differing underlying forest definitions, and of biomass stocks, which involve uncertainties of up to 60% 46,54,55 . Another main limitation stems from a lack of quantified deforestation drivers; i.e., information about land uses replacing forest and the extent to which specific agricultural production systems induce deforestation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Trading Forests: Quantifying the Contribution of Global Commodity Markets to Emissions from Tropical Deforestation

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to improve our understanding of how and where global supply-chains link consumers of agricultural and forest commodities across the world to forest destruction in tropical countries. A better understanding of these linkages can help inform and support the design of demand-side interventions to reduce tropical deforestation. To that end, we map the link between deforestation for four commodities (beef, soybeans, palm oil, and wood products) in eight case countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Papua New Guinea) to consumption, through international trade. Although few, the studied countries comprise a large share of the internationally traded volumes of the analyzed commodities: 83% of beef and 99% of soybean exports from Latin America, 97% of global palm oil exports, and roughly half of (official) tropical wood products trade. The analysis covers the period 2000-2009. We find that roughly a third of tropical deforestation and associated carbon emissions (3.9 Mha and 1.7 GtCO2) in 2009 can be attributed to our four case commodities in our eight case countries. On average a third of analyzed deforestation was embodied in agricultural exports, mainly to the EU and China. However, in all countries but Bolivia and Brazil, export markets are dominant drivers of forest clearing for our case commodities. If one excludes Brazilian beef on average 57% of deforestation attributed to our case commodities was embodied in exports. The share of emissions that was embodied in exported commodities increased between 2000 and 2009 for every country in our study except Bolivia and Malaysia.JEL Codes: Q23, Q54, L73, Q02, Q17

show abstract

Amazon forest biomass density maps: tackling the uncertainty in carbon emission estimates

Cited by 46 publications

References 35 publications

Aboveground biomass variability across intact and degraded forests in the Brazilian Amazon

Aboveground biomass variability across intact and degraded forests in the Brazilian Amazon

Toward an integrated monitoring framework to assess the effects of tropical forest degradation and recovery on carbon stocks and biodiversity

Trading Forests: Quantifying the Contribution of Global Commodity Markets to Emissions from Tropical Deforestation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About