Spatial patterns of carbon, biodiversity, deforestation threat, and REDD+ projects in Indonesia

Abstract

There are concerns that Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) may fail to deliver potential biodiversity cobenefits if it is focused on high carbon areas. We explored the spatial overlaps between carbon stocks, biodiversity, projected deforestation threats, and the location of REDD+ projects in Indonesia, a tropical country at the forefront of REDD+ development. For biodiversity, we assembled data on the distribution of terrestrial vertebrates (ranges of amphibians, mammals, birds, reptiles) and plants (species distribution models for 8 families). We then investigated congruence between different measures of biodiversity richness and carbon stocks at the national and subnational scales. Finally, we mapped active REDD+ projects and investigated the carbon density and potential biodiversity richness and modeled deforestation pressures within these forests relative to protected areas and unprotected forests. There was little internal overlap among the different hotspots (richest 10% of cells) of species richness. There was also no consistent spatial congruence between carbon stocks and the biodiversity measures: a weak negative correlation at the national scale masked highly variable and nonlinear relationships island by island. Current REDD+ projects were preferentially located in areas with higher total species richness and threatened species richness but lower carbon densities than protected areas and unprotected forests. Although a quarter of the total area of these REDD+ projects is under relatively high deforestation pressure, the majority of the REDD+ area is not. In Indonesia at least, first-generation REDD+ projects are located where they are likely to deliver biodiversity benefits. However, if REDD+ is to deliver additional gains for climate and biodiversity, projects will need to focus on forests with the highest threat to deforestation, which will have cost implications for future REDD+ implementation.Los Patrones Espaciales del Carbono, la Biodiversidad, la Amenaza de Deforestación y los Proyectos REDD+ en IndonesiaResumenActualmente hay preocupación por que las Emisiones Reducidas de la Deforestación y Degradación del Bosque (REDD+, en inglés) puedan fallar en la entrega de co–beneficios potenciales de la biodiversidad si se enfocan en áreas de alto carbono. Exploramos los traslapes espaciales entre los stocks de carbono, la biodiversidad, las amenazas proyectadas de deforestación y la ubicación de proyectos REDD+ en Indonesia, un país tropical a la vanguardia del desarrollo REDD+. Para la biodiversidad, reunimos datos sobre la distribución de vertebrados terrestres (hábitats de anfibios, mamíferos, aves y reptiles) y plantas (modelos de distribución de especies para ocho familia). Después investigamos la congruencia entre las diferentes medidas de la riqueza de la biodiversidad y los stocks de carbono en la escala nacional y sub–nacional. Finalmente mapeamos proyectos REDD+ activos e investigamos la densidad de carbono y la riqueza potencial de la biodiversidad y modelamo...

Restoration planning of degraded tropical forests for biodiversity and ecosystem services

“…The lack of spatial congruence between priority areas for compensating carbon emissions and biodiversity loss suggests that win-win solutions are likely to be problematic. This finding mirrors similar situation in REDD+ policy implementations in Kalimantan where there is spatial mismatch between areas for climate change mitigation (by protecting carbon-rich sites such as peatlands) or biodiversity conservation (by focusing on species-rich areas) (Murray et al, 2015;Paoli et al, 2010). The oil-palm industry thus faces a difficult choice between offsetting targeting carbon or biodiversity.…”

“…Spatial distribution of biodiversity richness and endemism poorly overlap across taxa in Kalimantan (e.g. mammals, birds, plants; Murray et al, 2015), and the incorporation of a complete set of taxa along with their connectivity requirements will likely also increase the extent of offsetting areas and costs. We therefore further caution that an equal offset ratio indicated by our analysis represents a minimum value to compensate biodiversity values that have been lost due to oil-palm development in Kalimantan.…”

“…Despite the vital roles of Kalimantan for REDD+ policy implementation (e.g. Murray et al, 2015), a limited number of models have been developed to estimate the potential carbon sequestration benefits from forest restoration. In Chapter 3, I assessed the utility of the 3-PG (physiological principles for predicting growth) model to estimate the aboveground biomass (AGB) of Bornean forests.…”

“…In Kalimantan, however, most intact forests have been protected by existing policies including various regulations on protected areas and REDD+. Incorporating the protection of intact forests into offsetting analysis is possible, but to calculate additionality from offsets would need additional variables describing the effectiveness of protected areas management and REDD+ across Kalimantan Fuller et al, 2004;Murray et al, 2015;Santika et al, 2015b). Also, for offset schemes focused on habitat protection, the prediction of future land use dynamics would be required to calculate the offset benefits by assuming what would have occurred in the absence of offsets (e.g.…”

Analysis of National Forest Programs for REDD+ Implementation in six South and Southeast Asia countries

“…Although the primary issues for REDD+ implementation have largely focused on designing REDD+ (Strassburg et al, 2009;Angelsen & Rudel, 2013), addressing issues related to MRV (Goetz et al, 2015;Reimer et al, 2015), understanding process of forest degradation (Putz & Romero, 2012), evaluation of REDD+ impact assessments methodologies (Pasgaard, 2013) and assessment of one or more of the triple benefits Busch et al, 2010;Gardner et al, 2012;Phelps et al, 2012;Matthews et al, 2014;Murray et al, 2015;Magnago et al, 2015;Panfil & Harvey, 2015), other practical issues have also emerged. One emerging issue is identifying the form of national forest governance that produces triple benefits (Thompson et al, 2011).…”