Search

National forest inventories (NFI) provide essential forest-related biomass and carbon information for country greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting systems. Several tropical countries struggle to execute their NFIs while the extent to which space-based global information on aboveground biomass (AGB) can support national GHG accounting is under investigation. We assess whether the use of a global AGB map as auxiliary information produces a gain in precision of subnational AGB estimates for the Peruvian Amazonia. We used model-assisted estimators with data from the country’s NFI and explored hybrid inferential techniques to account for the sources of uncertainty associated with the integration of remote sensing-based products and NFI plot data.Our results show that the selected global biomass map tends to overestimate AGB values across the Peruvian Amazonia. For most strata, directly using the map in its published form did not reduce the precision of AGB estimates. However, after calibrating the map using the NFI data, the precision of our map-assisted AGB estimates increased by up to 50% at stratum level and 20% at Amazonia level. We further demonstrate how different sources of uncertainties can be incorporated in the map-NFI integrated estimates. With the hybrid inferential analysis, we found that the small spatial support of the NFI plots compared to the remote sensing-based sample units of aggregated pixels (within block variability) contributed the most to the total uncertainty associated with the AGB estimates from our map-NFI integration. Uncertainties caused by measurement variability and allometric model prediction uncertainty were the second largest contributors. When these uncertainties were incorporated, the increase in precision of our calibrated map-assisted AGB estimates was negligible, probably hindered by the great contribution of the within block variability to our map-plot assessment. We developed a reproducible method that countries can build upon and further improve while the global biomass products continue to evolve and better characterize the AGB distribution under large biomass conditions. We encourage further cross-country case studies that reflect a wider range of AGB distributions, especially within humid tropical forests, to further assess the contribution of global biomass maps to (sub)national AGB estimates and finally GHG monitoring and reporting. National forest inventories (NFI) provide essential forest-related biomass and carbon information for country greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting systems. Several tropical countries struggle to execute their NFIs while the extent to which space-based global information on aboveground biomass (AGB) can support national GHG accounting is under investigation. We assess whether the use of a global AGB map as auxiliary information produces a gain in precision of subnational AGB estimates for the Peruvian Amazonia. We used model-assisted estimators with data from the country’s NFI and explored hybrid inferential techniques to account for the sources of uncertainty associated with the integration of remote sensing-based products and NFI plot data. Our results show that the selected global biomass map tends to overestimate AGB values across the Peruvian Amazonia. For most strata, directly using the map in its published form did not reduce the precision of AGB estimates. However, after calibrating the map using the NFI data, the precision of our map-assisted AGB estimates increased by up to 50% at stratum level and 20% at Amazonia level. We further demonstrate how different sources of uncertainties can be incorporated in the map-NFI integrated estimates. With the hybrid inferential analysis, we found that the small spatial support of the NFI plots compared to the remote sensing-based sample units of aggregated pixels (within block variability) contributed the most to the total uncertainty associated with the AGB estimates from our map-NFI integration. Uncertainties caused by measurement variability and allometric model prediction uncertainty were the second largest contributors. When these uncertainties were incorporated, the increase in precision of our calibrated map-assisted AGB estimates was negligible, probably hindered by the great contribution of the within block variability to our map-plot assessment. We developed a reproducible method that countries can build upon and further improve while the global biomass products continue to evolve and better characterize the AGB distribution under large biomass conditions. We encourage further cross-country case studies that reflect a wider range of AGB distributions, especially within humid tropical forests, to further assess the contribution of global biomass maps to (sub)national AGB estimates and finally GHG monitoring and reporting.

Maps of above-ground biomass (AGB) maps derived from Earth Observation (EO) have been increasing as a reflection of their importance in global and national applications such as global climate modelling and carbon accounting, respectively. Here we present Plot-To-Map, a tool to validate the accuracy of AGB maps using plot data from freely available global plot networks or own user data. The tool consists of five main steps starting from quality checking and harmonizing plot data to address the spatial (e.g., forest area) and temporal gaps between plots and maps. Uncertainties of plots are assessed before map comparison so plots with high uncertainty will have less impact on the comparisons. The comparison is initiated at a coarse spatial scale e.g., 10 km to eliminate random errors and enable systematic errors (bias) to be revealed and eventually be modelled. Bias predictions from decision tree-based regression model and other ecological EO products are key for producing bias-reduced maps and estimates of country AGB with associated uncertainties. The tool can be used locally and interactively via https://github.com/arnanaraza/PlotToMap. Its access and use are also possible through the Multi-Mission Algorithm Platform (MAAP), a joint project of ESA and NASA to revolutionize AGB research.

Mapping of environmental variables often relies on map accuracy assessment through cross-validation with the data used for calibrating the underlying mapping model. When the data points are spatially clustered, conventional cross-validation leads to optimistically biased estimates of map accuracy. Several papers have promoted spatial cross-validation as a means to tackle this over-optimism. Many of these papers blame spatial autocorrelation as the cause of the bias and propagate the widespread misconception that spatial proximity of calibration points to validation points invalidates classical statistical validation of maps. We present and evaluate alternative cross-validation approaches for assessing map accuracy from clustered sample data. The first method uses inverse sampling-intensity weighting to correct for selection bias. Sampling-intensity is estimated by a two-dimensional kernel approach. The two other approaches are model-based methods rooted in geostatistics, where the first assumes homogeneity of residual variance over the study area whilst the second accounts for heteroscedasticity as a function of the sampling intensity. The methods were tested and compared against conventional k-fold cross-validation and blocked spatial cross-validation to estimate map accuracy metrics of above-ground biomass and soil organic carbon stock maps covering western Europe. Results acquired over 100 realizations of five sampling designs ranging from non-clustered to strongly clustered confirmed that inverse sampling-intensity weighting and the heteroscedastic model-based method had smaller bias than conventional and spatial cross-validation for all but the most strongly clustered design. For the strongly clustered design where large portions of the maps were predicted by extrapolation, blocked spatial cross-validation was closest to the reference map accuracy metrics, but still biased. For such cases, extrapolation is best avoided by additional sampling or limitation of the prediction area. Weighted cross-validation is recommended for moderately clustered samples, while conventional random cross-validation suits fairly regularly spread samples.

This report presents descriptive results from a recent survey conducted with the objective of assessing the use of Controlled Traffic Farming (CTF) practices and associated precision farming technologies among farmers in eight European countries. About 26 % of the surveyed farmers use some CTF systems of which 45 % apply CTF on their entire farm. For the CTF users, the major motives to use CTF are to reduce soil structure damage and to improve efficiency (reduce cost) followed by a desire to make more profit. Concern about heavy machinery – induced soil compaction and perceptions about the potentials of CTF are considerably high. However, adoption appears to be constrained mainly by: high cost of machinery modification and RTK purchase, lack of compatibility of equipment and also GPS systems from different manufacturers, and lack of decision support systems. Issues about evidence on demonstrated benefits under local conditions and availability of contractors are also mentioned as limiting factors.

The Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector contributes with ca. 20–25% of global anthropogenic emissions (2010), making it a key component of any climate change mitigation strategy. AFOLU estimates, however, remain highly uncertain, jeopardizing the mitigation effectiveness of this sector. Comparisons of global AFOLU emissions have shown divergences of up to 25 %, urging for improved understanding of the reasons behind these differences. Here we compare a variety of AFOLU emission datasets and estimates given in the Fifth Assessment Report for the tropics (2000–2005) to identify plausible explanations for the differences in (i) aggregated gross AFOLU emissions, and (ii) disaggregated emissions by sources and gases (CO$_{2}$, CH$_{4}$, N$_{2}$O). We also aim to (iii) identify countries with low agreement among AFOLU datasets to navigate research efforts. The datasets are FAOSTAT (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Statistics Division), EDGAR (Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research), the newly developed AFOLU “Hotspots”, “Houghton”, “Baccini”, and EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) datasets. Aggregated gross emissions were similar for all databases for the AFOLU sector: 8.2 (5.5–12.2), 8.4, and 8.0 PgCO$_{2}$ eq. yr$^{-1}$ (for Hotspots, FAOSTAT, and EDGAR respectively), forests reached 6.0 (3.8–10), 5.9, 5.9, and 5.4 PgCO$_{2}$ eq. yr$^{-1}$ (Hotspots, FAOSTAT, EDGAR, and Houghton), and agricultural sectors were with 1.9 (1.5–2.5), 2.5, 2.1, and 2.0 PgCO$_{2}$ eq. yr$^{-1}$ (Hotspots, FAOSTAT, Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. 5800 R. M. Roman-Cuesta et al.: AFOLU dataset comparisons EDGAR, and EPA). However, this agreement was lost when disaggregating the emissions by sources, continents, and gases, particularly for the forest sector, with fire leading the differences. Agricultural emissions were more homogeneous, especially from livestock, while those from croplands were the most diverse. CO$_{2}$ showed the largest differences among the datasets. Cropland soils and enteric fermentation led to the smaller N$_{2}$O and CH$_{4}$ differences. Disagreements are explained by differences in conceptual frameworks (carbon-only vs. multi-gas assessments, definitions, land use vs. land cover, etc.), in methods (tiers, scales, compliance with Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) guidelines, legacies, etc.) and in assumptions (carbon neutrality of certain emissions, instantaneous emissions release, etc.) which call for more complete and transparent documentation for all the available datasets. An enhanced dialogue between the carbon (CO$_{2}$/ and the AFOLU (multi-gas) communities is needed to reduce discrepancies of land use estimates.

Forests dominate carbon (C) exchanges between the terrestrial biosphere and the atmosphere on land. In the long term, the net carbon flux between forests and the atmosphere has been significantly impacted by changes in forest cover area and structure due to ecological disturbances and management activities. Current empirical approaches for estimating net ecosystem productivity (NEP) rarely consider forest age as a predictor, which represents variation in physiological processes that can respond differently to environmental drivers, and regrowth following disturbance. Here, we conduct an observational synthesis to empirically determine to what extent climate, soil properties, nitrogen deposition, forest age and management influence the spatial and interannual variability of forest NEP across 126 forest eddy-covariance flux sites worldwide. The empirical models explained up to 62% and 71% of spatio-temporal and across-site variability of annual NEP, respectively. An investigation of model structures revealed that forest age was a dominant factor of NEP spatio-temporal variability in both space and time at the global scale as compared to abiotic factors, such as nutrient availability, soil characteristics and climate. These findings emphasize the importance of forest age in quantifying spatio-temporal variation in NEP using empirical approaches., Environmental Research Letters, 13 (12), ISSN:1748-9326, ISSN:1748-9318