Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 31.2.
The pros and cons of the arguments for inclusion of soil carbon stocks in subnational and
project-scale C accounting efforts.
Arguments in favour
Arguments against
Soil carbon stocks have longer residence times, and
cumulative changes with time are less vulnerable to
change than aboveground C stocks
Small annual changes in a pool that has high
spatial variability which is only partially attributable
to easily measurable covariates (Don
et al
., 2011;
World Bank, 2012)
Beyond peat and wetlands, the case for recovery of
C
org
in overgrazed and degraded drylands is
sufficiently strong to warrant action, as the areas
involved are large (Wang
et al
., 2011)
Evidence of changes in relative C
org
distribution
with depth that are uncorrelated with the more
readily observable change in topsoil C
org
; this
relates to changes in soil tillage (VandenBygaart
and Angers 2006) and shifts between grasslands
and tree-based vegetation (Jobbágy and
Jackson, 2000)
Dynamic process-based models of C
org
continue to
improve and can be used for refined and
downscales of national estimates (van Wesemael
et al
., 2011; Smith
et al
., 2012)
Sample bias in current published data of paired-plot
comparisons as explored by Powers
et al
. (2011)
and internal contradictions (both forest =>
grassland and grassland =>forest changes are
reported to increase C
org
)
New methods based on spectral analysis reduce the
costs of analysis, and correlations with standard
(wet chemistry or dry combustion) analysis are
fairly good (
no peer-reviewed use for C
org
temporal monitoring, though
)
Costs of sample analysis with the required levels of
replication that can overcome spatial variability
can take up >100% of the economic value of
increased certainty about C stock changes over
short time intervals
Enhancing C
org
has co-benefits for agricultural
productivity and climate change adaptation,
so there are win-win opportunities
Soil C stocks have been shown to recover spontan-
eously with agricultural intensification (Minasny
et al
., 2011), undermining 'additionality'
Are there better ways to provide
effective performance-based incentives?
other organic products in society corres-
ponded to 2.2-3.4% of global fossil fuel-
related carbon emissions for the period;
although this is not negligible, the growth
over time is not a major climate change
mitigation option and there is only modest
potential to mitigate climate change by the
increase of carbon stocks in society held in
wood and other organic products. As quan-
tified by Larson
et al
. (2012), the significant
carbon stocks in harvested wood products
in society are associated with substantial
fossil fuel-based emissions as well.
Where the importing countries use the
imported organic substrate to reduce their
fossil fuel use and associated emissions, the
integrity of the global C accounting system
is at stake if stock change in the exporting
country is not properly accounted for. The
'emission transfer' that can cross the boundar-
ies of the part of the world with accountability
for net emissions is the basis for seeking
'footprint' numbers that can be associated
with international trade.
The basic market proposition is that self-
interest can generate public goods through
Smith's invisible hands (Rothschild, 1994).
Current debate on the application of mar-
ket concepts in REDD+ shows a range of
opinions.
On one hand, Venter and Koh (2012)
conclude that REDD+ currently is the most
promising mechanism driving the conser-
vation of tropical forests, but that if it is
to emerge as a true game changer, REDD+
must still demonstrate that it can access
low transaction cost and high-volume car-
bon markets or funds. It will have to do this
while also providing or complementing a
suite of non-monetary incentives to encour-
age a developing nation's transition from
forest losing to forest gaining, and align
with, not undermine, a globally cohesive
attempt to mitigate anthropogenic climate
change.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search