Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry

Other reports in this collection

3.2.1. Definitional Scenarios

From the definitions presented in Chapter 2, we assembled seven illustrative scenarios that reflect a range of possible approaches to implement Article 3.3 (see Table 3-4). This approach was selected to highlight the complexity of combining definition elements and the possible implications of these combinations. These seven scenarios are not intended to be exhaustive of all possible scenarios. We selected two scenarios that use definitions found in FAO publications and the IPCC Guidelines. These two scenarios are intended to capture the existing frameworks in which Article 3.3 could be viewed.

Table 3-4: Definitional scenarios related to Article 3.3 and defining forest, afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation.

FAO
Scenario
IPCC
Scenario
Land Use
Scenario
Land Cover
Scenario
Flexible Scenario
Degradation/
Aggradation Scenario
Biome
Scenario

Introduction
  • Definitions of forest and ARD from Forest Resource Assessment Programme [FRA 2000 (UN-ECE/FAO, 1992)].
  • Definitions do not distinguish direct human-induced changes, other than reforestation and afforestation that require "artificial establishment of forest..."-an action that may be interpreted as a direct human activity.
  • Planting of trees always qualifies as afforestation or reforestation, yet the site need not be deforested prior to being reforested.
  • Silvicultural planting following a harvest would qualify as reforestation, but the harvest would usually not count as deforestation (i.e., symmetry between deforestation and reforestation is not maintained).
  • Based on reporting guidelines established by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 1997).
  • Definitions for ARD (specific definitions below) are land use-based, with specific activity requirements (e.g., planting versus regeneration through silvicultural activities).
  • No ambiguity in definition of deforestation, reforestation, or afforestation in that each involves direct human-induced activity.
  • Symmetry between deforestation and reforestation.
  • Uses land use as basis for defining forest.
  • Determination of land-use status of a piece of land would need to be based on administrative procedures.
  • Based on a very simple structure and approach that would leave many decisions to national administrations.
  • Does not explicitly require symmetry between harvesting and replanting associated with forest management.
  • Would lead to most intensive forest harvesting being considered as deforestation, and most forest regeneration being considered as reforestation (creates large area of ARD lands).
  • Most forest management activities would create ARD lands.
  • Definitions of reforestation and afforestation use the phrase "Activities that lead to..." so that credit can be given for increase in carbon stocks associated with reforestation and afforestation prior to reaching the Y% cover threshold required to define an area of land as forest.
  • Allows countries to decide on the definition of a forest that they want to use, allowing maximum use of existing forest inventory data.
  • Selection of carbon-based definition is intended to give each country maximum flexibility in establishing its own criteria because it can convert cover or inventory data to a carbon per unit area basis. Countries may select threshold for crown cover, carbon, tree height, etc. Also, countries may select how long a land must have been non-forest to qualify as reforestation.
  • Degradation and aggradation of a forest results in the creation of ARD lands.
  • Uses FAO definition of forest along with a forest cover class transition definition of deforestation and reforestation, which will result in large areas being considered ARD lands.
  • Selection of cover classes is based on thresholds in widest usage.
  • nclusion of regenerating forest within definition of a forest means forest management will not result in creation of ARD lands unless there is long-term degradation or aggradation.
  • Adjusts definition of a forest based on the biome involved (e.g., a closed canopy temperate forest will be treated differently than a woodland savanna).
  • Allows deforestation to be captured more realistically across diverse forest ecosystems and ensures consistency among countries.
  • Could allow for adjustments for data availability differences among biomes, as well as ease of data collection, both remotely and through inventory.
  • Specific biome-based thresholds could also be set to ensure that deforestation and reforestation activities are effectively captured and that creation of ARD lands based on cover change types is closely correlated with land-use activities.

Forest
  • Land with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10% and area of more than 0.5 ha. Trees should be able to reach a minimum height of 5 m at maturity in situ. May consist of closed forest formations where trees of various storeys and undergrowth cover a high proportion of ground or open forest formations with a continuous vegetation cover in which tree crown cover exceeds 10%.a
  • Within the Guidelines there exists no specific definition of forest; definition is left to the discretion of reporting countries. Because evaluating a definitional scenario without specific language defining each term is impossible, we have assumed the FAO definition of forest for purposes of our analysis, but acknowledge that the IPCC approach leaves countries free to choose their own definition of forest.
  • An area that is being managed for forest values and/or forest products, or is designated as a forest by an appropriate governmental entity.
  • All ARD activities are assumed to be direct human-induced unless demonstrated not to be the case.
  • An area of land that has >Y% (Y between 10 and 70%) cover of woody vegetation of (e.g., between 0 and 5 m) height.
  • An area of land that has a minimum of Z (e.g., Z between 10 and 50) t C ha-1 aboveground living woody biomass (carbon threshold to be selected by each country) of woody vegetation, or would contain such at maturity of existing vegetation with continuation of current land use.
  • Same as in FAO scenario.
  • An area of land that has A% cover of woody vegetation with >B m in height, or would contain at maturity of existing vegetation with continuation of current land use. For each biome, a minimum crown cover and tree height would have to be established to determine what would qualify as a forest. Determination of biome types would have to be carried out systematically through the use of common criteria.

Deforestation
  • Refers to change of land cover with depletion of tree crown cover to less than 10%. Changes within the forest class (e.g., from closed to open forest) that negatively affect the stand or site—and, in particular, lower the production capacity—are termed forest degradation.
  • Conversion of forest to non-forest.
  • Note: No definition provided in the Glossary. However, the Reference Manual states on page 5.6 that “forest and grassland conversion”—that is, conversion of forests and grasslands to pasture, cropland, or other managed uses—is referred to as “deforestation” (see footnote 7 in Guidelines).
  • Conversion of forest to non-forest.
  • Conversion of forest to non-forest.
  • Conversion of forest to non-forest
  • Decrease in potential crown cover from one cover class to another (e.g., 0 to <10, 10 to <40, 40 to <70, >70% crown cover).
  • Potential crown cover refers to state of existing vegetation at maturity under continuation of current land use.
  • Conversion of forest to non-forest.

Afforestation
  • Artificial establishment of forest on lands that previously did not carry forest within living memory.
  • Note that “natural extension” (e.g., abandoning agricultural land without direct planting), which is not included under “afforestation,” also contributes to an increase in forest area (FAO, 1992). We have assumed such processes to be part of “afforestation;” their inclusion under Article 3.3 would be determined by the “direct human-induced” clause.
  • Glossary: Planting of new forests on lands that historically have not contained forests. These newly created forests are included in the category “Changes in Forest and Other Woody Biomass Stocks” in the “Land-Use Change and Forestry” module of emissions inventory calculations.
  • Activities that lead to conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that over the past X (e.g., 30, 50) years did not contain forest (30 years assumed throughout this report).
  • Conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that over the past X (e.g., 30, 50) years did not contain forest (30 years assumed throughout this report).
  • Conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that in 1990 [or over the past X (e.g., 10, 30, 50) years] did not contain forests.
  • Conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that did not contain forest in 1990 [or over the past X (e.g. 30, 50) years].
  • Conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that in 1990 [or over the past X (e.g., 10, 30, 50) years] did not contain forests.

Reforestation
  • Artificial establishment of forest on lands that carried forest before.
  • “Artificial establishment” does not necessarily include natural regeneration. However, we assume that activity to be included because the separation could later be made through the "direct human-induced" clause.
  • Glossary: Planting of forests on lands that have previously contained forests but that have been converted to some other use. Replanted forests are included in the category “Changes in Forest and Other Woody Biomass Stocks” in the “Land-Use Change and Forestry” module of the emissions inventory calculations.
  • Footnote 10 on page 5.14 of the Reference Manual implies a different definition of reforestation, but this definition has not been used here.
  • Activities that lead to conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that contained forest at some time during the past X (e.g., 30, 50) years (30 years assumed throughout this report).
  • Conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that contained forest at some time during the past X (e.g., 30, 50) years (30 years assumed throughout this report).
  • Conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that in 1990 [or over the past X (e.g., 10, 30, 50) years] did contain forests.
  • Increase in potential crown cover from one cover class to a higher cover class (e.g., 0 to <10, 10 to <40, 40 to <70, >70% crown cover) on lands that over the past X (e.g., 30, 50) years contained forest (30 years assumed throughout this report). Potential crown cover refers to the state of existing vegetation at maturity under continuation of current land use.
  • Conversion of non-forest to forest on lands that in 1990 [or over the past X (e.g., 10, 30, 50) years] did contain forests.

a Young natural stands and all plantations established for forestry purposes that have yet to reach a crown density of 10% or tree height of 5 m are included under forest, as are areas normally forming part of the forest area that are temporarily unstocked as a result of human intervention or natural causes but are expected to revert to forest. Definition includes forest nurseries and seed orchards that constitute an integral part of the forest; forest roads, cleared tracts, firebreaks, and other small open areas; forest in national parks, nature reserves, and other protected areas such as those of specific scientific, historical, cultural, or spiritual interest; windbreaks and shelter belts of trees with an area of more than 0.5 ha and width of more than 20 m; and plantations that are used primarily for forestry purposes, including rubberwood plantations and cork oak stands. Definition excludes land that is used predominantly for agricultural practices.

A key difference between the FAO and most of the other scenarios is that the FAO definition of reforestation includes artificial regeneration of tree cover after a clearing. The State of the World's Forests 1999 report (FAO, 1999) defines reforestation as "establishment of a tree crop on forest land." The Forest Resource Assessment Terms and Definitions (FAO, 1998) define reforestation as "artificial establishment of forest on lands which carried forest before" but gives this definition under the headings "forest cover changes" and "new plantations." TBFRA 2000 (UN, 1999, p. 157) explains regeneration of forest land as "reforestation of land that has recently been forested." Such regeneration includes natural regeneration, natural regeneration enhanced by planting, coppice sprouting, and planting or seeding. We interpret the FAO definition of reforestation to include regeneration after clearing.

The IPCC scenario is extracted from the Glossary of the IPCC Reporting Guidelines. These guidelines do not include a definition of a forest, however, which limits their direct applicability. For the purposes of the IPCC scenario, we have assumed the FAO definition of forests. Neither FAO nor IPCC designed their definitions of forest, afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation with the Kyoto Protocol in mind; thus, the definitions are not necessarily optimal for meeting the requirements of Article 3.3.

To ensure that a full range of possible definitional approaches was explored, we developed five additional scenarios on the basis of the definitional framework for the terms forest, afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation, as outlined in Chapter 2. The Land Use scenario employs a land-use definition of a forest and bases the definitions of afforestation and reforestation on activities undertaken on a piece of land. Three of the scenarios-Land Cover, Flexible, and Biome-use different definitions of a forest but similar definitions of afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation. The differences in carbon amounts associated with differences in the definition of what is and is not a forest are very large, reflecting fundamental differences about how Article 3.3 could be implemented and the amount of credits or debits it would create. The Land Cover scenario uses a fixed threshold for what is a forest; the Flexible scenario entails a country-based definition that utilizes carbon or crown-cover criteria; and the Biome scenario uses a biome-based fixed criterion. The remaining definitional scenario, Degradation/Aggradation, attempts to capture in the definitions of deforestation and reforestation the incremental nature of many deforestation and reforestation events.

The differences among these definitional scenarios are summarized in Table 3-5. Note that the definitional scenarios are not intended to be discrete but illustrative. It is possible to combine definitional elements from one scenario with those from another. In combining definitional elements, it is important to recognize that the implications are not always transparent.

Table 3-5: Main attributes of the seven definitional scenarios utilized to illustrate choices associated with implementing Article 3.3. Six criteria are examined, as is how each scenario does or does not address these issues.

Definitional
Scenario
Is Afforestation
a Land-Use
Change?
Is Reforestation
a Non-Forest/
Forest Change?
Is Deforestation
a Forest/
Non-Forest Change?
Does Clear-Cutting
Create ARD
Land?
Does Regeneration
after Clear-Cutting
Create ARD Lands?
Can Articles
3.3 and 3.7 be
Compatible?a

FAO
In most cases
Not if regenerating following harvest
Yes
No
Yes
Nob

IPCC
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes

Land Use
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes

Land Cover
In most cases
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Noc

Flexible
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes

Degradation/
Aggradatio
In most cases
Not always if change from one forest class to another
Not always if change from one forest class to another
No
No
Nod

Biome
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes

a See also Section 3.3.2.8.
b Reforestation is not always a land-use change, and comparability between Articles 3.3 and 3.7 is more difficult to achieve. For example, harvest/regeneration in the commitment period would create debits under land-based approaches, but would not be counted in the 1990 baseline because it is not a land-use change. Hence, more emissions would be included in the commitment period than in the baseline.
c For example, deforestation includes harvest activities in which the 40% crown-cover threshold is crossed. Emissions from such harvests are counted in the commitment period but not in the 1990 baseline, because harvest does not constitute a land-use change.
d For example, degradation counts fully in the commitment period. However, it does not enter the 1990 baseline if degradation is not a land-use change.

The definitional scenarios imply activities and conditions that invoke the creation of ARD lands under Article 3.3, as well as which activities are left for Article 3.4 if double-counting is to be avoided. For example, if ARD and forests are defined broadly to include the harvest/regeneration cycle (e.g., FAO or Land Cover scenarios), few if any forestry activities will be left for inclusion under Article 3.4. The Degradation/Aggradation scenario might also somewhat reduce the choice of activities under Article 3.4, though not as much. With the IPCC, Flexible, Biome, and Land Use scenarios, most forestry activities would fall outside Article 3.3 and thus would be candidates for Article 3.4.

In analyzing the implications of the definitional scenarios, the assumption has been made that all activities are DHI unless they have been demonstrated to be otherwise. The remainder of this chapter discusses how the definitional scenarios interact with a wide range of activities and conditions.



Other reports in this collection