45 / 68
45
The technical potential for mitigating climate change through biological carbon manage-
ment, both through storage and sequestration is large. How well that potential can be
realised depends on having a suitable policy framework to enable it. This section consid-
ers how ecosystem carbon is treated within existing climate policy and some of the op-
portunities and challenges for increasing the role it can play.
OPPORTUNITIES AND
CHALLENGES
The potential of ecosystem carbon management is recognised
in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) and its Kyoto Protocol through the LU-
LUCF (Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry) sector. Un-
der the LULUCF, developed (Annex I) countries must report
on carbon stock changes from afforestation, reforestation and
deforestation (since 1990), and can also elect to report on the
additional activities of forest management, cropland manage-
ment, grazing land management, and revegetation (Robledo
and Blaser 2008). Developing countries have no requirement
or opportunity to account for emissions and sequestration ac-
tivities in the land use sector. Although developed countries
can gain credit for forestry projects in developing countries
through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the rules
are restrictive (Dutschke 2007; Schlamadinger
et al.
2007)
and at the time of writing only three CDM forestry projects
had been accepted.
The current policy framework for the land use sector has sever-
al shortcomings (Cowie
et al.
2007; Schlamadinger
et al.
2007;
Hohne
et al.
2007). One of these is the lack of involvement of de-
veloping countries, as described above. Another concern is the in-
complete coverage of carbon sources and sinks as Parties are only
required to account for forestry activities. All other activities are
voluntary and there is no option for wetland accounting (Schlama-
dinger
et al.
2007; Henschel
et al.
2008). Other issues include
the complex monitoring and reporting requirements, the require-
ment to account for managed lands only, and the difficulties in
factoring out anthropogenic from natural disturbances (Benndorf
et al.
2007). Perhaps the biggest criticism is that emissions re-
ductions from the land use sector were not taken into account in
the formulation of targets for developed countries, but can still be
used to meet them. This has led many to see LULUCF as an off-
set mechanism, rather than one that achieves overall emissions
reductions (Cowie
et al.
2007; Schlamadinger
et al.
2007).
ECOSYSTEM CARBON MANAGEMENT IN
INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE POLICY
International climate policy only partly addresses emissions from land use change and
does little to support biosequestration activities. The development of a comprehensive
policy framework under UNFCCC for addressing ecosystem carbon management would
be a very significant advance.