 | |
Commonwealth
Forests | | |
 CARBON OFFSETS AND THE ROLE OF FORESTS IN AMELIORATING CLIMATE
CHANGE5
Provisions for the definition of carbon sequestration in national greenhouse gas accounting
have been made in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
and the Kyoto Protocol. The rules for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) are, however,
still to be agreed upon, so trade in forest based carbon services has therefore suffered from
uncertainty and, although there were in 2006 about 110 projects covering a total of about 5
million hectares, is still limited. The situation could soon change and carbon sequestration
would then be the most significant forest-based environmental service in terms of international
trade. New projects would relate to the two eligible activities, afforestation and reforestation.
Activities with regard to ‘Land use, land use change and forestry’ (LULUCF), if properly planned
and implemented under right conditions, can both store atmospheric carbon and provide other
environmental benefits, such as the conservation of biological diversity and watershed
protection. Carbon market could thus contribute to the promotion of sustainable forest
management. Unfortunately the Kyoto Protocol currently does not include natural forests
which are thus left out of an international carbon sequestration market. A review of the
economics of climate change, with some mentions of forestry, which has attracted
international notice, is the Stern Review Report on the Economics of Climate Change which
was made to the UK Treasury in October 20066. It makes a strong economic case for
international action, noting there is a 70% chance of temperatures increasing by 3°C if GHG
emissions are stabilized at 450 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent (ppm CO2e) and a
10% chance of temperatures exceeding 5°C if GHG emissions are stabilized at 550 ppm CO2.
Stern stated that the global community should aim to stabilize GHG emissions in the range of
450-550 ppm CO2 since 450 ppm CO2 would be difficult to achieve given the current
stock of
GHGs in the atmosphere. Furthermore, the risk of “very harmful impacts” increases
significantly at stabilization above 550 ppm CO2.
Deforestation, most of which occurs in the tropics, is responsible for about one-fifth of annual
emissions of greenhouse gases. By reducing deforestation that would otherwise occur in
developing countries, industrialized countries could effectively “offset” emissions limits set
under international agreements like the Kyoto Protocol. An analysis by Mongabay.com has
pointed out that payments could be made to developing countries via an “avoided deforestation”
fund financed by contributions from wealthy countries. This could help fight climate change
while helping to improve living standards for some of the world’s poorest people, and
conserving biodiversity. Using the FAO data on deforestation, Mongabay.com suggests that
an avoided deforestation initiative could be worth $30-346 million per year to Ghana, depending
on how much deforestation it could “avoid” and the market price for carbon offsets, while
Uganda could benefit by $10.4-172.8 million per year.7
A “Permanent Forest Sink Initiative” has been announced by the New Zealand Government,
which will apply to native forests planted since 1990 and some more recent exotic forests in
which selective harvesting will be allowed. This “carbon farming” would create an economic
use for some of New Zealand’s more isolated and erosion-prone land because it does not
require roads or harvesting. Land owners are to be given the right to sell “carbon-credits”
generated by certain so-called permanent forests so this initiative may resolve a dispute which
led to a halt in the establishment of plantations when the government retained the carbon
credits8. There is also a European Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) which covers only carbon
dioxide emissions, although other GHG emissions may be included in the scheme in future.
5 See some recent IIED publications: “Climate change and forest resilience”
http://www.iied.org/pubs/displayphp?o=11054IIED
“Is tackling deforestation a cost-effective mitigation
approach?” http://www.iied.org/pubs/display.php?o=11058IIED
* “Carbon capture and storage: legal issues” http://www.iied.org/pubs/display.php?o=11066IIED
6 http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm
7 See mongabay.com article: Avoided deforestation could help fight third world
poverty under global warming pact
| 
