Developing Cost-Effective Field Assessments of Carbon Stocks in Human-Modified Tropical Forests.
Developing Cost-Effective Field Assessments of Carbon Stocks in Human-Modified Tropical Forests.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0133139
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Barlow J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Berenguer E;Gardner TA;Ferreira J;Aragão LE;Camargo PB;Cerri CE;Durigan M;Oliveira Junior RC;Vieira IC;Barlow J
在整个热带地区，对旨在减少毁林和森林退化所致排放量的活动（如REDD+）的财政投资不断增加。然而，大多数热带国家缺乏对森林碳储量进行可靠和可复制评估的实地能力，这削弱了它们为森林保护计划获得长期碳融资的能力。就如何减少森林碳实地评估的资金和时间成本提供明确指导，可帮助热带国家克服这一能力差距。在这里，我们提供这样的指导，具有成本效益的一次性实地评估森林碳储量。我们从四个不同的碳池（即地上，枯木，凋落物和土壤）在224个研究地块分布在亚马逊东部的两个地区，共8个组件。对于每个组成部分，我们估计调查成本，对森林碳储量的贡献和对干扰的敏感性。采样成本变化之间的最昂贵的组成部分，土壤，和最少，落叶31倍。大型活茎（直径≥10 cm）仅占总取样成本的15%，是迄今为止评估的最重要组成部分，因为它储存了最多的碳，对干扰高度敏感。如果没有对大树干进行分类识别，成本可以进一步降低51%，而在地上碳估计中，原始森林的误差仅为5%，而次生林为31%。对于快速评估，有必要帮助确定碳保护活动的优先位置，在没有分类鉴定的情况下对直径≥ 20 cm的树干进行采样可以有信心地预测（R2 = 0.85）一个地区是相对富碳还是贫碳-这种方法比采样和鉴定所有直径≥ 10 cm的树干便宜74%。我们使用这些结果来评估IPCC和粮农组织提供的森林碳储量估计值在应用于人类改造森林时的可靠性，并强调碳储量评估中最容易节省成本的领域。
Across the tropics, there is a growing financial investment in activities that aim to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, such as REDD+. However, most tropical countries lack on-the-ground capacity to conduct reliable and replicable assessments of forest carbon stocks, undermining their ability to secure long-term carbon finance for forest conservation programs. Clear guidance on how to reduce the monetary and time costs of field assessments of forest carbon can help tropical countries to overcome this capacity gap. Here we provide such guidance for cost-effective one-off field assessments of forest carbon stocks. We sampled a total of eight components from four different carbon pools (i.e. aboveground, dead wood, litter and soil) in 224 study plots distributed across two regions of eastern Amazon. For each component we estimated survey costs, contribution to total forest carbon stocks and sensitivity to disturbance. Sampling costs varied thirty-one-fold between the most expensive component, soil, and the least, leaf litter. Large live stems (≥10 cm DBH), which represented only 15% of the overall sampling costs, was by far the most important component to be assessed, as it stores the largest amount of carbon and is highly sensitive to disturbance. If large stems are not taxonomically identified, costs can be reduced by a further 51%, while incurring an error in aboveground carbon estimates of only 5% in primary forests, but 31% in secondary forests. For rapid assessments, necessary to help prioritize locations for carbon- conservation activities, sampling of stems ≥20cm DBH without taxonomic identification can predict with confidence (R2 = 0.85) whether an area is relatively carbon-rich or carbon-poor—an approach that is 74% cheaper than sampling and identifying all the stems ≥10cm DBH. We use these results to evaluate the reliability of forest carbon stock estimates provided by the IPCC and FAO when applied to human-modified forests, and to highlight areas where cost savings in carbon stock assessments could be most easily made.