Uncertainty in REDD+ carbon accounting: a survey of experts involved in REDD+ reporting

IF 3.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Carbon Balance and Management Pub Date : 2024-07-27 DOI:10.1186/s13021-024-00267-z
Brett J. Butler, Emma M. Sass, Javier G. P. Gamarra, John L. Campbell, Craig Wayson, Marcela Olguín, Oswaldo Carrillo, Ruth D. Yanai
{"title":"Uncertainty in REDD+ carbon accounting: a survey of experts involved in REDD+ reporting","authors":"Brett J. Butler,&nbsp;Emma M. Sass,&nbsp;Javier G. P. Gamarra,&nbsp;John L. Campbell,&nbsp;Craig Wayson,&nbsp;Marcela Olguín,&nbsp;Oswaldo Carrillo,&nbsp;Ruth D. Yanai","doi":"10.1186/s13021-024-00267-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) is a program established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to reduce carbon emissions from forests in developing countries. REDD+ uses an incentive-based approach whereby participating countries are paid to reduce forest carbon loss and increase carbon storage. Country-level carbon accounting is challenging, and estimates of uncertainty in emission reductions are increasingly required in REDD+ reports. This requirement is hard to meet if countries lack the necessary resources, tools, and capabilities. Some REDD+ programs adjust their payments for the uncertainty reported, which presents a perverse incentive because uncertainties are larger if more sources of uncertainty are reported. We surveyed people involved in REDD+ reporting to assess current capacities and barriers to improving estimates of uncertainty.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Representatives from 27 countries (44% of REDD+ countries at the time of survey implementation) responded to the survey. Nearly all respondents thought it important to include uncertainty in REDD+ reports, but most felt that the uncertainty reporting by their countries was inadequate. Our independent assessment of reports by these countries to the UNFCCC supported this opinion: Most countries reported uncertainty in activity data (91%) but not in emission factors (4–14%). Few countries use more advanced approaches to estimate uncertainty, such as Monte Carlo and Bayesian techniques, and many respondents indicated that they lack expertise, knowledge, or technical assistance. Other barriers include lack of financial resources and appropriate data. Despite these limitations, nearly all respondents indicated a strong desire to improve estimates of uncertainty in REDD+ reports.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The survey indicated that people involved in REDD+ reporting think it highly important to improve estimates of uncertainty in forest carbon accounting. To meet this challenge, it is essential to understand the obstacles countries face in quantifying uncertainty so we can identify where best to allocate efforts and funds. Investments in training and resources are clearly needed to better quantify uncertainty and would likely have successful outcomes given the strong desire for improvement. Tracking the efficacy of programs implemented to improve estimates of uncertainty would be useful for making further refinements.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":505,"journal":{"name":"Carbon Balance and Management","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://cbmjournal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13021-024-00267-z","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Carbon Balance and Management","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13021-024-00267-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) is a program established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to reduce carbon emissions from forests in developing countries. REDD+ uses an incentive-based approach whereby participating countries are paid to reduce forest carbon loss and increase carbon storage. Country-level carbon accounting is challenging, and estimates of uncertainty in emission reductions are increasingly required in REDD+ reports. This requirement is hard to meet if countries lack the necessary resources, tools, and capabilities. Some REDD+ programs adjust their payments for the uncertainty reported, which presents a perverse incentive because uncertainties are larger if more sources of uncertainty are reported. We surveyed people involved in REDD+ reporting to assess current capacities and barriers to improving estimates of uncertainty.

Results

Representatives from 27 countries (44% of REDD+ countries at the time of survey implementation) responded to the survey. Nearly all respondents thought it important to include uncertainty in REDD+ reports, but most felt that the uncertainty reporting by their countries was inadequate. Our independent assessment of reports by these countries to the UNFCCC supported this opinion: Most countries reported uncertainty in activity data (91%) but not in emission factors (4–14%). Few countries use more advanced approaches to estimate uncertainty, such as Monte Carlo and Bayesian techniques, and many respondents indicated that they lack expertise, knowledge, or technical assistance. Other barriers include lack of financial resources and appropriate data. Despite these limitations, nearly all respondents indicated a strong desire to improve estimates of uncertainty in REDD+ reports.

Conclusions

The survey indicated that people involved in REDD+ reporting think it highly important to improve estimates of uncertainty in forest carbon accounting. To meet this challenge, it is essential to understand the obstacles countries face in quantifying uncertainty so we can identify where best to allocate efforts and funds. Investments in training and resources are clearly needed to better quantify uncertainty and would likely have successful outcomes given the strong desire for improvement. Tracking the efficacy of programs implemented to improve estimates of uncertainty would be useful for making further refinements.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
REDD+ 碳核算的不确定性:对参与 REDD+ 报告的专家的调查
降低因森林砍伐和退化所产生的排放(REDD+)是根据《联合国气候变化框架公约》(UNFCCC)制定的一项计划,旨在减少发展中国家森林的碳排放。REDD+ 采用以激励为基础的方法,向参与国支付报酬,以减少森林碳损失并增加碳储存。国家级碳核算具有挑战性,REDD+ 报告越来越多地要求对减排量的不确定性进行估计。如果国家缺乏必要的资源、工具和能力,就很难达到这一要求。一些 REDD+ 项目会根据所报告的不确定性调整其付款,这就产生了一种反向激励,因为如果报告的不确定性来源越多,不确定性就越大。我们对参与 REDD+ 报告的人员进行了调查,以评估当前的能力和改善不确定性估计的障碍。来自 27 个国家(调查实施时占 REDD+ 国家的 44%)的代表对调查做出了回应。几乎所有受访者都认为将不确定性纳入 REDD+ 报告非常重要,但大多数人认为他们国家的不确定性报告不够充分。我们对这些国家提交给《联合国气候变化框架公约》的报告进行的独立评估也支持这一观点:大多数国家报告了活动数据的不确定性(91%),但没有报告排放因子的不确定性(4-14%)。很少有国家使用更先进的方法来估计不确定性,如蒙特卡洛和贝叶斯技术,许多受访者表示他们缺乏专业技能、知识或技术援助。其他障碍包括缺乏财政资源和适当的数据。尽管存在这些限制,几乎所有受访者都表示强烈希望改进 REDD+ 报告中对不确定性的估计。调查显示,参与 REDD+ 报告的人员认为改进森林碳核算中不确定性的估计非常重要。为了应对这一挑战,了解各国在量化不确定性方面所面临的障碍至关重要,这样我们才能确定在哪些方面分配工作和资金最为合适。为了更好地量化不确定性,显然需要在培训和资源方面进行投资,而且鉴于各国对改进的强烈愿望,投资很可能会取得成功。跟踪为改进不确定性估计而实施的计划的效果将有助于进一步完善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Carbon Balance and Management
Carbon Balance and Management Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Carbon Balance and Management is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal that encompasses all aspects of research aimed at developing a comprehensive policy relevant to the understanding of the global carbon cycle. The global carbon cycle involves important couplings between climate, atmospheric CO2 and the terrestrial and oceanic biospheres. The current transformation of the carbon cycle due to changes in climate and atmospheric composition is widely recognized as potentially dangerous for the biosphere and for the well-being of humankind, and therefore monitoring, understanding and predicting the evolution of the carbon cycle in the context of the whole biosphere (both terrestrial and marine) is a challenge to the scientific community. This demands interdisciplinary research and new approaches for studying geographical and temporal distributions of carbon pools and fluxes, control and feedback mechanisms of the carbon-climate system, points of intervention and windows of opportunity for managing the carbon-climate-human system. Carbon Balance and Management is a medium for researchers in the field to convey the results of their research across disciplinary boundaries. Through this dissemination of research, the journal aims to support the work of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and to provide governmental and non-governmental organizations with instantaneous access to continually emerging knowledge, including paradigm shifts and consensual views.
期刊最新文献
Urban land use optimization prediction considering carbon neutral development goals: a case study of Taihu Bay Core area in China Slowly getting there: a review of country experience on estimating emissions and removals from forest degradation Methane cycling in temperate forests Stand structure and Brazilian pine as key determinants of carbon stock in a subtropical Atlantic forest Carbon, climate, and natural disturbance: a review of mechanisms, challenges, and tools for understanding forest carbon stability in an uncertain future
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1