Historical analysis and modeling of the forest carbon dynamics using the Carbon Budget Model: an example for the Trento Province (NE, Italy)

Pilli, P; Grassi, Giacomo; Cescatti, C

doi:10.3832/efor1138-011

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For Lithuania we verified that our estimates are consistent with these independent data sources. Of course, as highlighted by Vanclacy and Skovsgaard [ 19 ], the effective evaluation of a forest growth model is a complex and ongoing process, that could include additional independent validations performed at the regional level [ 14 ], sensitivity analysis of the main input data, and further comparison of our estimates with other data sources, including the country-specific GHGI data (see also other comparisons reported in the Additional file: 1 for additional case studies). For Lithuania, the country’s GHGI reports some peaks between 2000 and 2008, not highlighted by our model (see Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inputs from biomass to DOM pools result from biomass litterfall and turnover as well as natural and human-caused disturbances. The DOM parameters were first calibrated in the Italian cases study (see [ 13 ], Appendix E for further details), then validated on a specific study at regional level [ 14 ] and, if necessary, further modified for specific countries, such as Finland and Sweden.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the CBM was successfully adapted to specific forest management conditions in Europe (e.g. uneven-aged forests, [ 13 ]), validated at regional level [ 14 ] and applied in one country case to estimate the C balance for FM [ 13 ] and AR [ 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Modelling forest carbon stock changes as affected by harvest and natural disturbances. I. Comparison with countries’ estimates for forest management

Pilli

Grassi

Kurz

et al. 2016

Carbon Balance Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAccording to the post-2012 rules under the Kyoto protocol, developed countries that are signatories to the protocol have to estimate and report the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals from forest management (FM), with the option to exclude the emissions associated to natural disturbances, following the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) guidelines. To increase confidence in GHG estimates, the IPCC recommends performing verification activities, i.e. comparing country data with independent estimates. However, countries currently conduct relatively few verification efforts. The aim of this study is to implement a consistent methodological approach using the Carbon Budget Model (CBM) to estimate the net CO2 emissions from FM in 26 European Union (EU) countries for the period 2000–2012, including the impacts of natural disturbances. We validated our results against a totally independent case study and then we compared the CBM results with the data reported by countries in their 2014 Greenhouse Gas Inventories (GHGIs) submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).ResultsThe match between the CBM results and the GHGIs was good in nine countries (i.e. the average of our results is within ±25 % compared to the GHGI and the correlation between CBM and GHGI is significant at P < 0.05) and partially good in ten countries. When the comparison was not satisfactory, in most cases we were able to identify possible reasons for these discrepancies, including: (1) a different representation of the interannual variability, e.g. where the GHGIs used the stock-change approach; (2) different assumptions for non-biomass pools, and for CO2 emissions from fires and harvest residues. In few cases, further analysis will be needed to identify any possible inappropriate data used by the CBM or problems in the GHGI. Finally, the frequent updates to data and methods used by countries to prepare GHGI makes the implementation of a consistent modeling methodology challenging.ConclusionsThis study indicates opportunities to use the CBM as tool to assist countries in estimating forest carbon dynamics, including the impact of natural disturbances, and to verify the country GHGIs at the EU level, consistent with the IPCC guidelines. A systematic comparison of the CBM with the GHGIs will certainly require additional efforts—including close cooperation between modelers and country experts. This approach should be seen as a necessary step in the process of continuous improvement of GHGIs, because it may help in identifying possible errors and ultimately in building confidence in the estimates reported by the countries.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13021-016-0047-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modelling forest carbon stock changes as affected by harvest and natural disturbances. I. Comparison with countries’ estimates for forest management

Pilli

Grassi

Kurz

et al. 2016

Carbon Balance Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We assumed that the harvest demand was entirely provided by the FM area, excluding potential harvest from deforestation. For AR we estimated the maximum potential (and theoretical) harvest from afforested areas, assuming a common set of silvicultural practices for all countries, with a single 15 % commercial thinning applied to broadleaved forests that are 15 years or older and a single 20 % commercial thinning applied to coniferous forests that are 20 years or older (Pilli et al, 2014b). Table 2 summarizes all the assumptions concerning (i) the forest area, assumed as constant FM area minus the annual rate of deforestation; (ii) the effect of natural disturbances, concentrated in the FM area; and (iii) the harvest demand, based on FAOSTAT statistics and concentrated in the FM area.…”

Section: Harvest Demand and Carbon Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%

The European forest sector: past and future carbon budget and fluxes under different management scenarios

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The comprehensive analysis of carbon stocks and fluxes of managed European forests is a prerequisite to quantify their role in biomass production and climate change mitigation. We applied the Carbon Budget Model (CBM) to 26 European countries, parameterized with country information on the historical forest age structure, management practices, harvest regimes and the main natural disturbances. We modeled the C stocks for the five forest pools plus harvested wood products (HWPs) and the fluxes among these pools from 2000 to 2030. The aim is to quantify, using a consistent modeling framework for all 26 countries, the main C fluxes as affected by land-use changes, natural disturbances and forest management and to assess the impact of specific harvest and afforestation scenarios after 2012 on the mitigation potential of the EU forest sector. Substitution effects and the possible impacts of climate are not included in this analysis. Results show that for the historical period from 2000 to 2012 the net primary productivity (NPP) of the forest pools at the EU level is on average equal to 639 Tg C yr−1. The losses are dominated by heterotrophic respiration (409 Tg C yr−1) and removals (110 Tg C yr−1), with direct fire emissions being only 1 Tg C yr−1, leading to a net carbon stock change (i.e., sink) of 110 Tg C yr−1. Fellings also transferred 28 Tg C yr−1 of harvest residues from biomass to dead organic matter pools. The average annual net sector exchange (NSE) of the forest system, i.e., the carbon stock changes in the forest pools including HWP, equals a sink of 122 Tg C yr−1 (i.e., about 19 % of the NPP) for the historical period, and in 2030 it reaches 126, 101 and 151 Tg C yr−1, assuming constant, increasing (+20 %) and decreasing (−20 %) scenarios, respectively, of both harvest and afforestation rates compared to the historical period. Under the constant harvest rate scenario, our findings show an incipient aging process of the forests existing in 1990: although NPP increases (+7 %), heterotrophic respiration increases at a greater rate (+13 %) and this leads to a decrease in the sink in the forest pools (−6 %) in 2030 compared to the historical period. By comparing the evolution of the biomass as a function of the NPP (i.e., the turnover time) for each country, we highlighted at least three groups of countries and turnover times. This means that, contrary to the assumptions proposed by other authors, this relationship cannot be assumed as a constant for all the EU countries, but specific conditions, such as the harvest rate, the current age structure and the forest composition, may contribute to the country-specific evolution of biomass stocks. The detailed picture of the C fluxes condensed in this study, and their evolution under different harvest scenarios, may represent both a benchmark for similar studies and a basis for broader analyses (e.g., including substitution effects of wood) on the mitigation potential of the EU forest sector.

show abstract

“…As such, the contents of the AIDB were partially modified to better correspond to the European context. This preliminary work provided elements for the parametrization of the model, which leads to the validation of the CBM-CFS3 at the regional and national levels in various countries (Pilli et al 2014(Pilli et al , 2016.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3): customization of the Archive Index Database for European Union countries

Pilli

Kull

Blujdea

et al. 2018

Annals of Forest Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract& Key message The purpose of this report is to increase the transparency of applications of the CBM-CFS3 model by climate-related policy-makers and researchers. The report provides explicit information on the parametrization of a new Archive Index Database used with this model to simulate forest carbon dynamics in 26 EU countries. The database can be accessed at https://data.europa.eu/89h/jrc-cbm-eu-aidb, primary metadata are available in Kull et al. (2017), and additional metadata are available at https://metadata-afs.nancy.inra.fr/geonetwork/srv/fre/catalog.search#/metadata/ df48155b-973f-4169-a722-100bb6bfc76c. The Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3) has been adapted, tested, and applied to forests of 26 EU countries over the last 7 years for EU policy making and scientific research. The overall purpose of this exercise is to increase the transparency of how the EU Archive Index Database (EU-AIDB) was parameterized while supporting both the policy making and research communities interested in applying the CBM-CFS3 with ecological parameters specific to the EU context. In addition to preparing model input data reflecting various management and disturbance scenarios for CBM-CFS3 projects, an essential step was to update the original AIDB with information specific to the EU context and create an EU-AIDB. The AIDB is the Microsoft Access database behind the CBM-CFS3 that stores default ecological information and parameters pertaining to the forest ecosystems of a country, among other functions. The EU-AIDB incorporates 1034 spatial units resulting from the intersection of 204 European administrative regions and ecological boundaries representing 35 climatic units. It also contains updated parameters for 192 of the main tree species reported by the National Forest Inventories of each EU country. The release of this database allows CBM-33 CFS3 users in the EU to apply European administrative and ecological units and tree species in forest carbon modeling projects.

show abstract

Historical analysis and modeling of the forest carbon dynamics using the Carbon Budget Model: an example for the Trento Province (NE, Italy)

Cited by 10 publications

References 27 publications

Modelling forest carbon stock changes as affected by harvest and natural disturbances. I. Comparison with countries’ estimates for forest management

Modelling forest carbon stock changes as affected by harvest and natural disturbances. I. Comparison with countries’ estimates for forest management

The European forest sector: past and future carbon budget and fluxes under different management scenarios

The Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3): customization of the Archive Index Database for European Union countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About