Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia

Adoption of reduced‐impact logging (RIL) methods could reduce CO2 emissions by 30–50% across at least 20% of remaining tropical forests. We developed two cost effective and robust indices for comparing the climate benefits (reduced CO2 emissions) due to RIL. The indices correct for variability in th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Griscom, B, Ellis, C., Putz, F.E.
Formato: Journal Article
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Wiley 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/95582
_version_ 1855515107512025088
author Griscom, B
Ellis, C.
Putz, F.E.
author_browse Ellis, C.
Griscom, B
Putz, F.E.
author_facet Griscom, B
Ellis, C.
Putz, F.E.
author_sort Griscom, B
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Adoption of reduced‐impact logging (RIL) methods could reduce CO2 emissions by 30–50% across at least 20% of remaining tropical forests. We developed two cost effective and robust indices for comparing the climate benefits (reduced CO2 emissions) due to RIL. The indices correct for variability in the volume of commercial timber among concessions. We determined that a correction for variability in terrain slope was not needed. We found that concessions certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC, N = 3), when compared with noncertified concessions (N = 6), did not have lower overall CO2 emissions from logging activity (felling, skidding, and hauling). On the other hand, FSC certified concessions did have lower emissions from one type of logging impact (skidding), and we found evidence of a range of improved practices using other field metrics. One explanation of these results may be that FSC criteria and indicators, and associated RIL practices, were not designed to achieve overall emissions reductions. Also, commonly used field metrics are not reliable proxies for overall logging emissions performance. Furthermore, the simple distinction between certified and noncertified concessions does not fully represent the complex history of investments in improved logging practices. To clarify the relationship between RIL and emissions reductions, we propose the more explicit term ‘RIL‐C’ to refer to the subset of RIL practices that can be defined by quantified thresholds and that result in measurable emissions reductions. If tropical forest certification is to be linked with CO2 emissions reductions, certification standards need to explicitly require RIL‐C practices.
format Journal Article
id CGSpace95582
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2014
publishDateRange 2014
publishDateSort 2014
publisher Wiley
publisherStr Wiley
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace955822025-06-17T08:23:17Z Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia Griscom, B Ellis, C. Putz, F.E. reduced impact logging emission tropical forests ecology Adoption of reduced‐impact logging (RIL) methods could reduce CO2 emissions by 30–50% across at least 20% of remaining tropical forests. We developed two cost effective and robust indices for comparing the climate benefits (reduced CO2 emissions) due to RIL. The indices correct for variability in the volume of commercial timber among concessions. We determined that a correction for variability in terrain slope was not needed. We found that concessions certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC, N = 3), when compared with noncertified concessions (N = 6), did not have lower overall CO2 emissions from logging activity (felling, skidding, and hauling). On the other hand, FSC certified concessions did have lower emissions from one type of logging impact (skidding), and we found evidence of a range of improved practices using other field metrics. One explanation of these results may be that FSC criteria and indicators, and associated RIL practices, were not designed to achieve overall emissions reductions. Also, commonly used field metrics are not reliable proxies for overall logging emissions performance. Furthermore, the simple distinction between certified and noncertified concessions does not fully represent the complex history of investments in improved logging practices. To clarify the relationship between RIL and emissions reductions, we propose the more explicit term ‘RIL‐C’ to refer to the subset of RIL practices that can be defined by quantified thresholds and that result in measurable emissions reductions. If tropical forest certification is to be linked with CO2 emissions reductions, certification standards need to explicitly require RIL‐C practices. 2014-03 2018-07-03T11:03:14Z 2018-07-03T11:03:14Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/95582 en Limited Access Wiley Griscom, B., Ellis, C., Putz, F. E. . 2013. Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia Global Change Biology, 20 (3) : 923-937. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12386
spellingShingle reduced impact logging
emission
tropical forests
ecology
Griscom, B
Ellis, C.
Putz, F.E.
Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia
title Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia
title_full Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia
title_fullStr Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia
title_full_unstemmed Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia
title_short Carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia
title_sort carbon emissions performance of commercial logging in east kalimantan indonesia
topic reduced impact logging
emission
tropical forests
ecology
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/95582
work_keys_str_mv AT griscomb carbonemissionsperformanceofcommercialloggingineastkalimantanindonesia
AT ellisc carbonemissionsperformanceofcommercialloggingineastkalimantanindonesia
AT putzfe carbonemissionsperformanceofcommercialloggingineastkalimantanindonesia