Search

Forests are a substantial terrestrial carbon sink, but anthropogenic changes in land use and climate have considerably reduced the scale of this system1. Remote-sensing estimates to quantify carbon losses from global forests2–5 are characterized by considerable uncertainty and we lack a comprehensive ground-sourced evaluation to benchmark these estimates. Here we combine several ground-sourced6 and satellite-derived approaches2,7,8 to evaluate the scale of the global forest carbon potential outside agricultural and urban lands. Despite regional variation, the predictions demonstrated remarkable consistency at a global scale, with only a 12% difference between the ground-sourced and satellite-derived estimates. At present, global forest carbon storage is markedly under the natural potential, with a total deficit of 226 Gt (model range = 151–363 Gt) in areas with low human footprint. Most (61%, 139 Gt C) of this potential is in areas with existing forests, in which ecosystem protection can allow forests to recover to maturity. The remaining 39% (87 Gt C) of potential lies in regions in which forests have been removed or fragmented. Although forests cannot be a substitute for emissions reductions, our results support the idea2,3,9 that the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of diverse forests offer valuable contributions to meeting global climate and biodiversity targets.Analysis of ground-sourced and satellite-derived models reveals a global forest carbon potential of 226 Gt outside agricultural and urban lands, with a difference of only 12% across these modelling approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Countries have pledged to different national and international environmental agreements, most prominently the climate change mitigation targets of the Paris Agreement. Accounting for carbon stocks and flows (fluxes) is essential for countries that have recently adopted the United Nations System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - ecosystem accounting framework (UNSEEA) as a global statistical standard. In this paper, we analyze how spatial carbon fluxes can be used in support of the UNSEEA carbon accounts in five case countries with available in-situ data. Using global multi-date biomass map products and other remotely sensed data, we mapped the 2010–2018 carbon fluxes in Brazil, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Sweden and the USA using National Forest Inventory (NFI) and local biomass maps from airborne LiDAR as reference data. We identified areas that are unsupported by the reference data within environmental feature space (6–47% of vegetated country area); cross-validated an ensemble machine learning (RMSE=9–39 Mg C ha - 1 and R 2 =0.16–0.71) used to map carbon fluxes with prediction intervals; and assessed spatially correlated residuals (<5 km) before aggregating carbon fluxes from 1-ha pixels to UNSEEA forest classes. The resulting carbon accounting tables revealed the net carbon sequestration in natural broadleaved forests. Both in plantations and in other woody vegetation ecosystems, emissions exceeded sequestration. Overall, our estimates align with FAO-Forest Resource Assessment and national studies with the largest deviations in Brazil and USA. These two countries used highly clustered reference data, where clustering caused uncertainty given the need to extrapolate to under-sampled areas. We finally provide recommendations to mitigate the effect of under-sampling and to better account for the uncertainties once carbon stocks and flows need to be aggregated in relatively smaller countries. These actions are timely given the global initiatives that aim to upscale UNSEEA carbon accounting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the main impact areas of climate change (CC), and land use and land cover change (LULCC) is the hydrology of watersheds, which have negative implications to the water resources. Their impact can be indicated by changes on streamflow, which is quantifiable using process-based streamflow modelling of baseline and future scenarios. Here we include the uncertainty and associated risk of the streamflow changes for a robust impact assessment to agriculture. We created a baseline model and models of CC and LULCC "impact scenarios" that use: (1) the new climate projections until 2070 and (2) land cover scenarios worsened by forest loss, in a critical watershed in the Philippines. Simulations of peak flows by 26% and low flows by 63% from the baseline model improved after calibrating runoff, soil evaporation, and groundwater parameters. Using the calibrated model, impacts of both CC and LULCC in 2070 were indicated by water deficit (− 18.65%) from May to August and water surplus (12.79%) from November to December. Both CC and LULCC contributed almost equally to the deficit, but the surplus was more LULCC-driven. Risk from CC may affect 9.10% of the croplands equivalent to 0.31 million dollars, while both CC and LULCC doubled the croplands at risk (19.13%, 0.60 million dollars) in one cropping season. The findings warn for the inevitable cropping schedule adjustments in the coming decades, which both apply to irrigated and rainfed crops, and may have implications to crop yields. This study calls for better watershed management to mitigate the risk to crop production and even potential flood risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]