What causes differences between national estimates of forest management carbon emissions and removals compared to estimates of large - scale models?

T.A. Groen, P.J. Verkerk, H. Böttcher, G. Grassi, E. Cienciala, K.G. Black, M. Fortin, M. Köthke, A. Lehtonen, G.J Nabuurs, L. Petrova, V. Blujdea

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Under the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change all Parties have to report on carbon emissions and removals from the forestry sector. Each Party can use its own approach and country specific data for this. Independently, large-scale models exist (e.g. EFISCEN and G4M as used in this study) that assess emissions and removals from this sector by applying a unified approach to each country, still often based on country specific data. Differences exist between the national reported values and the calculations from the large scale models. This study compares these models with national reporting efforts for 24 EU countries for the period 2000–2008, and identifies the most likely causes for differences. There are no directly identifiable single input parameters that could be targeted to fully close the gap between country and model estimates. We found that the method applied by the country (i.e. stock-difference or gain-loss) contributes significantly to differences for EFISCEN and was the best explaining variable for G4M, although for the latter it was not significant. Other variables (biomass expansion factors, harvest volumes and the way harvest losses are treated) were not found to provide a conclusive explanation for the differences between the model estimations and the country submissions in an over-all analysis. However, at the level of individual countries several different causes for differences were identified. This suggests that to really close the gap between country submissions and large scale models, close collaboration between modellers and country experts is needed, calling for openness and willingness to share relevant data and to compare GHG inventories with independent estimates. This would enable to improve the confidence both in historical GHG inventories and in the models which are needed to project the future forest sink for several policy issues.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)222-232
JournalEnvironmental science & policy
Volume33
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

carbon emission
forest management
cause
management
United Nations
removal
forestry
UNO
climate change
EU
confidence
expert
biomass
Values

Keywords

  • METIS-297251
  • IR-90316

Cite this

Groen, T.A. ; Verkerk, P.J. ; Böttcher, H. ; Grassi, G. ; Cienciala, E. ; Black, K.G. ; Fortin, M. ; Köthke, M. ; Lehtonen, A. ; Nabuurs, G.J ; Petrova, L. ; Blujdea, V. / What causes differences between national estimates of forest management carbon emissions and removals compared to estimates of large - scale models?. In: Environmental science & policy. 2013 ; Vol. 33. pp. 222-232.
@article{7cc02deeb33c484e83fe822ef904a5db,
title = "What causes differences between national estimates of forest management carbon emissions and removals compared to estimates of large - scale models?",
abstract = "Under the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change all Parties have to report on carbon emissions and removals from the forestry sector. Each Party can use its own approach and country specific data for this. Independently, large-scale models exist (e.g. EFISCEN and G4M as used in this study) that assess emissions and removals from this sector by applying a unified approach to each country, still often based on country specific data. Differences exist between the national reported values and the calculations from the large scale models. This study compares these models with national reporting efforts for 24 EU countries for the period 2000–2008, and identifies the most likely causes for differences. There are no directly identifiable single input parameters that could be targeted to fully close the gap between country and model estimates. We found that the method applied by the country (i.e. stock-difference or gain-loss) contributes significantly to differences for EFISCEN and was the best explaining variable for G4M, although for the latter it was not significant. Other variables (biomass expansion factors, harvest volumes and the way harvest losses are treated) were not found to provide a conclusive explanation for the differences between the model estimations and the country submissions in an over-all analysis. However, at the level of individual countries several different causes for differences were identified. This suggests that to really close the gap between country submissions and large scale models, close collaboration between modellers and country experts is needed, calling for openness and willingness to share relevant data and to compare GHG inventories with independent estimates. This would enable to improve the confidence both in historical GHG inventories and in the models which are needed to project the future forest sink for several policy issues.",
keywords = "METIS-297251, IR-90316",
author = "T.A. Groen and P.J. Verkerk and H. B{\"o}ttcher and G. Grassi and E. Cienciala and K.G. Black and M. Fortin and M. K{\"o}thke and A. Lehtonen and G.J Nabuurs and L. Petrova and V. Blujdea",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1016/j.envsci.2013.06.005",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "222--232",
journal = "Environmental science & policy",
issn = "1462-9011",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Groen, TA, Verkerk, PJ, Böttcher, H, Grassi, G, Cienciala, E, Black, KG, Fortin, M, Köthke, M, Lehtonen, A, Nabuurs, GJ, Petrova, L & Blujdea, V 2013, 'What causes differences between national estimates of forest management carbon emissions and removals compared to estimates of large - scale models?', Environmental science & policy, vol. 33, pp. 222-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.06.005

What causes differences between national estimates of forest management carbon emissions and removals compared to estimates of large - scale models? / Groen, T.A.; Verkerk, P.J.; Böttcher, H.; Grassi, G.; Cienciala, E.; Black, K.G.; Fortin, M.; Köthke, M.; Lehtonen, A.; Nabuurs, G.J; Petrova, L.; Blujdea, V.

In: Environmental science & policy, Vol. 33, 2013, p. 222-232.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - What causes differences between national estimates of forest management carbon emissions and removals compared to estimates of large - scale models?

AU - Groen, T.A.

AU - Verkerk, P.J.

AU - Böttcher, H.

AU - Grassi, G.

AU - Cienciala, E.

AU - Black, K.G.

AU - Fortin, M.

AU - Köthke, M.

AU - Lehtonen, A.

AU - Nabuurs, G.J

AU - Petrova, L.

AU - Blujdea, V.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Under the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change all Parties have to report on carbon emissions and removals from the forestry sector. Each Party can use its own approach and country specific data for this. Independently, large-scale models exist (e.g. EFISCEN and G4M as used in this study) that assess emissions and removals from this sector by applying a unified approach to each country, still often based on country specific data. Differences exist between the national reported values and the calculations from the large scale models. This study compares these models with national reporting efforts for 24 EU countries for the period 2000–2008, and identifies the most likely causes for differences. There are no directly identifiable single input parameters that could be targeted to fully close the gap between country and model estimates. We found that the method applied by the country (i.e. stock-difference or gain-loss) contributes significantly to differences for EFISCEN and was the best explaining variable for G4M, although for the latter it was not significant. Other variables (biomass expansion factors, harvest volumes and the way harvest losses are treated) were not found to provide a conclusive explanation for the differences between the model estimations and the country submissions in an over-all analysis. However, at the level of individual countries several different causes for differences were identified. This suggests that to really close the gap between country submissions and large scale models, close collaboration between modellers and country experts is needed, calling for openness and willingness to share relevant data and to compare GHG inventories with independent estimates. This would enable to improve the confidence both in historical GHG inventories and in the models which are needed to project the future forest sink for several policy issues.

AB - Under the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change all Parties have to report on carbon emissions and removals from the forestry sector. Each Party can use its own approach and country specific data for this. Independently, large-scale models exist (e.g. EFISCEN and G4M as used in this study) that assess emissions and removals from this sector by applying a unified approach to each country, still often based on country specific data. Differences exist between the national reported values and the calculations from the large scale models. This study compares these models with national reporting efforts for 24 EU countries for the period 2000–2008, and identifies the most likely causes for differences. There are no directly identifiable single input parameters that could be targeted to fully close the gap between country and model estimates. We found that the method applied by the country (i.e. stock-difference or gain-loss) contributes significantly to differences for EFISCEN and was the best explaining variable for G4M, although for the latter it was not significant. Other variables (biomass expansion factors, harvest volumes and the way harvest losses are treated) were not found to provide a conclusive explanation for the differences between the model estimations and the country submissions in an over-all analysis. However, at the level of individual countries several different causes for differences were identified. This suggests that to really close the gap between country submissions and large scale models, close collaboration between modellers and country experts is needed, calling for openness and willingness to share relevant data and to compare GHG inventories with independent estimates. This would enable to improve the confidence both in historical GHG inventories and in the models which are needed to project the future forest sink for several policy issues.

KW - METIS-297251

KW - IR-90316

UR - https://ezproxy2.utwente.nl/login?url=https://webapps.itc.utwente.nl/library/2013/isi/groen_wha.pdf

U2 - 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.06.005

DO - 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.06.005

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 222

EP - 232

JO - Environmental science & policy

JF - Environmental science & policy

SN - 1462-9011

ER -