Carbon outcomes of major land‐cover transitions in SE Asia: great uncertainties and REDD+ policy implications
Top Cited Papers
- 21 May 2012
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wiley in Global Change Biology
- Vol. 18 (10), 3087-3099
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02747.x
Abstract
Policy makers across the tropics propose that carbon finance could provide incentives for forest frontier communities to transition away from swidden agriculture (slash-and-burn or shifting cultivation) to other systems that potentially reduce emissions and/or increase carbon sequestration. However, there is little certainty regarding the carbon outcomes of many key land-use transitions at the center of current policy debates. Our meta-analysis of over 250 studies reporting above- and below-ground carbon estimates for different land-use types indicates great uncertainty in the net total ecosystem carbon changes that can be expected from many transitions, including the replacement of various types of swidden agriculture with oil palm, rubber, or some other types of agroforestry systems. These transitions are underway throughout Southeast Asia, and are at the heart of REDD+ debates. Exceptions of unambiguous carbon outcomes are the abandonment of any type of agriculture to allow forest regeneration (a certain positive carbon outcome) and expansion of agriculture into mature forest (a certain negative carbon outcome). With respect to swiddening, our meta-analysis supports a reassessment of policies that encourage land-cover conversion away from these [especially long-fallow] systems to other more cash-crop-oriented systems producing ambiguous carbon stock changes – including oil palm and rubber. In some instances, lengthening fallow periods of an existing swidden system may produce substantial carbon benefits, as would conversion from intensely cultivated lands to high-biomass plantations and some other types of agroforestry. More field studies are needed to provide better data of above- and below-ground carbon stocks before informed recommendations or policy decisions can be made regarding which land-use regimes optimize or increase carbon sequestration. As some transitions may negatively impact other ecosystem services, food security, and local livelihoods, the entire carbon and noncarbon benefit stream should also be taken into account before prescribing transitions with ambiguous carbon benefits.Keywords
Funding Information
- NASA (NNG04GH59G, NNX08AL90G)
- APN (ARCP2007-01CMY, ARCP2008-01CMY)
- NUS (R-109-000-092-133, R-109-000-092-646)
This publication has 71 references indexed in Scilit:
- Win–win REDD+ approaches belie carbon–biodiversity trade-offsBiological Conservation, 2012
- Changes in above- and belowground biomass in early successional tropical secondary forests after shifting cultivation in Sarawak, MalaysiaForest Ecology and Management, 2010
- The agroecological matrix as alternative to the land-sparing/agriculture intensification modelProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2010
- Agricultural intensification and changes in cultivated areas, 1970–2005Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009
- Loss of carbon sequestration potential after several decades of shifting cultivation in the Southern YucatánForest Ecology and Management, 2009
- Finding Homogeneity in Heterogeneity—A New Approach to Quantifying Landscape Mosaics Developed for the Lao PDRHuman Ecology, 2009
- Policies, Political-Economy, and Swidden in Southeast AsiaHuman Ecology, 2009
- Soil organic carbon prediction by hyperspectral remote sensing and field vis-NIR spectroscopy: An Australian case studyGeoderma, 2008
- Relationships between forest structure and vegetation indices in Atlantic RainforestForest Ecology and Management, 2005
- Geographical distributions of carbon in biomass and soils of tropical Asian forestsGeocarto International, 1993