“…A system perspective can integrate five major aspects, by: (i) including climate effects of biogenic carbon which are still mostly considered neutral (Røyne et al, 2016), that is, carbon sequestration via photosynthesis equals the eventual carbon emission along the life cycle (Head et al, 2019); (ii) accounting for substitution (energy substitution [ES], material substitution [MS]) effects of the wood use (Garcia et al, 2020), which is associated with great uncertainties, especially for emerging HWPs (Leskinen et al, 2018); (iii) cascading use of wood, which occurs when “wood is processed into a product and this product is used at least once more either for material or energy purpose” (EC, 2016a), making cascading a potential means to improve the climate performance of a HWP system (Thonemann & Schumann, 2018); (iv) including sufficient sensitivity analysis for the HWP system assessed, for example, in terms of changing substituted future marginal energy mixes (Hammar & Levihn, 2020); and (v) applying climate metrics appropriate for accounting for time dynamic effects of GHG emissions and sequestrations (Helin et al, 2013; Levasseur et al, 2010), to compensate for the shortcomings of commonly used static climate metrics such as global warming potential (GWP) in terms of time‐dependent accounting (Breton et al, 2018). Examples of such metrics are the GWP bio (Cherubini et al, 2011), the time‐dependent radiative forcing (RF) (Sathre & Gustavsson, 2012), or the absolute global temperature change potential (AGTP) (Myhre et al, 2013).…”