1990-2018 年期间农业、林业及其他土地利用部门的泛热带二氧化碳排放量和清除量

IF 2.5 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Pub Date : 2024-02-20 DOI:10.1007/s11027-023-10096-z
Sylvia S. Nyawira, Martin Herold, Kalkidan Ayele Mulatu, Rosa Maria Roman-Cuesta, Richard A. Houghton, Giacomo Grassi, Julia Pongratz, Thomas Gasser, Louis Verchot
{"title":"1990-2018 年期间农业、林业及其他土地利用部门的泛热带二氧化碳排放量和清除量","authors":"Sylvia S. Nyawira, Martin Herold, Kalkidan Ayele Mulatu, Rosa Maria Roman-Cuesta, Richard A. Houghton, Giacomo Grassi, Julia Pongratz, Thomas Gasser, Louis Verchot","doi":"10.1007/s11027-023-10096-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Transparent, accurate, comparable, and complete estimates of greenhouse gas emissions and removals are needed to support mitigation goals and performance assessments under the Paris Agreement. Here, we present a comparative analysis of the agriculture forestry and other land use (AFOLU) emission estimates from different datasets, including National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (NGHGIs), FAOSTAT, the BLUE, OSCAR, and Houghton (here after updated H&amp;N2017) bookkeeping models; Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR); and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We disaggregate the fluxes for the forestry and other land use (FOLU) sector into forest land, deforestation, and other land uses (including non-forest land uses), while agricultural emissions are disaggregated according to the sources (i.e., livestock, croplands, rice cultivation, and agricultural fires). Considering different time periods (1990–1999, 2000–2010, and 2011–2018), we analyse the trend of the fluxes with a key focus on the tropical regions (i.e., Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and South and Southeast Asia). Three of the five data sources indicated a decline in the net emissions over the tropics over the period 1990–2018. The net FOLU emissions for the tropics varied with values of 5.47, 5.22, 4.28, 3.21, and 1.17 GtCO<sub>2</sub> year<sup>−1</sup> (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&amp;N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs, respectively) over the recent period (2011–2018). Gross deforestation emissions over the same period were 5.87, 7.16, 5.48, 3.96, and 3.74 GtCO<sub>2</sub> year<sup>−1</sup> (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&amp;N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs). The net forestland sink was −1.97, −3.08, −2.09, −0.53, and −3.00 GtCO<sub>2</sub> year<sup>−1</sup> (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&amp;N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs). Continental analysis indicated that the differences between the data sources are much large in sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia than in Latin America. Disagreements in the FOLU emission estimates are mainly explained by differences in the managed land areas and the processes considered (i.e., direct vs indirect effects of land use change, and gross vs net accounting for deforestation). Net agricultural emissions from cropland, livestock, and rice cultivation were more homogenous across the FAOSTAT, EDGAR, and EPA datasets, with all the data sources indicating an increase in the emissions over the tropics. However, there were notable differences in the emission from agricultural fires. This study highlights the importance of investing and improving data sources for key fluxes to achieve a more robust and transparent global stocktake.</p>","PeriodicalId":54387,"journal":{"name":"Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pantropical CO2 emissions and removals for the AFOLU sector in the period 1990–2018\",\"authors\":\"Sylvia S. Nyawira, Martin Herold, Kalkidan Ayele Mulatu, Rosa Maria Roman-Cuesta, Richard A. Houghton, Giacomo Grassi, Julia Pongratz, Thomas Gasser, Louis Verchot\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11027-023-10096-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Transparent, accurate, comparable, and complete estimates of greenhouse gas emissions and removals are needed to support mitigation goals and performance assessments under the Paris Agreement. Here, we present a comparative analysis of the agriculture forestry and other land use (AFOLU) emission estimates from different datasets, including National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (NGHGIs), FAOSTAT, the BLUE, OSCAR, and Houghton (here after updated H&amp;N2017) bookkeeping models; Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR); and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We disaggregate the fluxes for the forestry and other land use (FOLU) sector into forest land, deforestation, and other land uses (including non-forest land uses), while agricultural emissions are disaggregated according to the sources (i.e., livestock, croplands, rice cultivation, and agricultural fires). Considering different time periods (1990–1999, 2000–2010, and 2011–2018), we analyse the trend of the fluxes with a key focus on the tropical regions (i.e., Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and South and Southeast Asia). Three of the five data sources indicated a decline in the net emissions over the tropics over the period 1990–2018. The net FOLU emissions for the tropics varied with values of 5.47, 5.22, 4.28, 3.21, and 1.17 GtCO<sub>2</sub> year<sup>−1</sup> (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&amp;N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs, respectively) over the recent period (2011–2018). Gross deforestation emissions over the same period were 5.87, 7.16, 5.48, 3.96, and 3.74 GtCO<sub>2</sub> year<sup>−1</sup> (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&amp;N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs). The net forestland sink was −1.97, −3.08, −2.09, −0.53, and −3.00 GtCO<sub>2</sub> year<sup>−1</sup> (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&amp;N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs). Continental analysis indicated that the differences between the data sources are much large in sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia than in Latin America. Disagreements in the FOLU emission estimates are mainly explained by differences in the managed land areas and the processes considered (i.e., direct vs indirect effects of land use change, and gross vs net accounting for deforestation). Net agricultural emissions from cropland, livestock, and rice cultivation were more homogenous across the FAOSTAT, EDGAR, and EPA datasets, with all the data sources indicating an increase in the emissions over the tropics. However, there were notable differences in the emission from agricultural fires. This study highlights the importance of investing and improving data sources for key fluxes to achieve a more robust and transparent global stocktake.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-023-10096-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-023-10096-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

需要对温室气体排放量和清除量进行透明、准确、可比和完整的估算,以支持《巴黎协定》下的减排目标和绩效评估。在此,我们对来自不同数据集的农业、林业和其他土地利用(AFOLU)排放估算进行了比较分析,这些数据集包括国家温室气体清单(NGHGIs)、粮农组织统计数据库(FAOSTAT)、BLUE、OSCAR 和 Houghton(此处更新为 H&N2017)记账模型、全球大气研究排放数据库(EDGAR)和美国环境保护署(EPA)。我们将林业和其他土地利用(FOLU)部门的通量分解为林地、毁林和其他土地利用(包括非林业土地利用),而农业排放则根据排放源(即牲畜、耕地、水稻种植和农业火灾)进行分解。考虑到不同时期(1990-1999 年、2000-2010 年和 2011-2018 年),我们分析了通量的趋势,重点关注热带地区(即拉丁美洲、撒哈拉以南非洲、南亚和东南亚)。五个数据源中有三个表明,1990-2018 年期间热带地区的净排放量有所下降。在最近一段时期(2011-2018 年),热带地区的净FOLU 排放分别为 5.47、5.22、4.28、3.21 和 1.17 GtCO2 year-1(BLUE、OSCAR、更新的 H&N2017、FAOSTAT 和 NGHGIs)。同期毁林总排放量分别为 5.87、7.16、5.48、3.96 和 3.74 GtCO2 year-1(BLUE、OSCAR、更新的 H&N2017、FAOSTAT 和 NGHGIs)。林地净汇分别为-1.97、-3.08、-2.09、-0.53 和-3.00 GtCO2 year-1(针对 BLUE、OSCAR、更新的 H&N2017、FAOSTAT 和 NGHGIs)。大陆分析表明,撒哈拉以南非洲、南亚和东南亚的数据源之间的差异比拉丁美洲大得多。土地利用变化和林业单位排放量估算的差异主要是由于管理的土地面积和考虑的过程不同(即土地利用变化的直接影响和间接影响,以及毁林的总核算和净核算)。在 FAOSTAT、EDGAR 和 EPA 数据集中,来自耕地、牲畜和水稻种植的农业净排放量较为一致,所有数据源都表明热带地区的排放量有所增加。然而,农业火灾的排放量存在明显差异。本研究强调了投资和改进关键通量数据源以实现更可靠、更透明的全球评估的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Pantropical CO2 emissions and removals for the AFOLU sector in the period 1990–2018

Transparent, accurate, comparable, and complete estimates of greenhouse gas emissions and removals are needed to support mitigation goals and performance assessments under the Paris Agreement. Here, we present a comparative analysis of the agriculture forestry and other land use (AFOLU) emission estimates from different datasets, including National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (NGHGIs), FAOSTAT, the BLUE, OSCAR, and Houghton (here after updated H&N2017) bookkeeping models; Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR); and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We disaggregate the fluxes for the forestry and other land use (FOLU) sector into forest land, deforestation, and other land uses (including non-forest land uses), while agricultural emissions are disaggregated according to the sources (i.e., livestock, croplands, rice cultivation, and agricultural fires). Considering different time periods (1990–1999, 2000–2010, and 2011–2018), we analyse the trend of the fluxes with a key focus on the tropical regions (i.e., Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and South and Southeast Asia). Three of the five data sources indicated a decline in the net emissions over the tropics over the period 1990–2018. The net FOLU emissions for the tropics varied with values of 5.47, 5.22, 4.28, 3.21, and 1.17 GtCO2 year−1 (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs, respectively) over the recent period (2011–2018). Gross deforestation emissions over the same period were 5.87, 7.16, 5.48, 3.96, and 3.74 GtCO2 year−1 (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs). The net forestland sink was −1.97, −3.08, −2.09, −0.53, and −3.00 GtCO2 year−1 (for BLUE, OSCAR, updated H&N2017, FAOSTAT, and NGHGIs). Continental analysis indicated that the differences between the data sources are much large in sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia than in Latin America. Disagreements in the FOLU emission estimates are mainly explained by differences in the managed land areas and the processes considered (i.e., direct vs indirect effects of land use change, and gross vs net accounting for deforestation). Net agricultural emissions from cropland, livestock, and rice cultivation were more homogenous across the FAOSTAT, EDGAR, and EPA datasets, with all the data sources indicating an increase in the emissions over the tropics. However, there were notable differences in the emission from agricultural fires. This study highlights the importance of investing and improving data sources for key fluxes to achieve a more robust and transparent global stocktake.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
50
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Earth''s biosphere is being transformed by various anthropogenic activities. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change addresses a wide range of environment, economic and energy topics and timely issues including global climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, acid deposition, eutrophication of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, species extinction and loss of biological diversity, deforestation and forest degradation, desertification, soil resource degradation, land-use change, sea level rise, destruction of coastal zones, depletion of fresh water and marine fisheries, loss of wetlands and riparian zones and hazardous waste management. Response options to mitigate these threats or to adapt to changing environs are needed to ensure a sustainable biosphere for all forms of life. To that end, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change provides a forum to encourage the conceptualization, critical examination and debate regarding response options. The aim of this journal is to provide a forum to review, analyze and stimulate the development, testing and implementation of mitigation and adaptation strategies at regional, national and global scales. One of the primary goals of this journal is to contribute to real-time policy analysis and development as national and international policies and agreements are discussed and promulgated.
期刊最新文献
Trends in climate adaptation solutions for mountain regions Social networks can mitigate climate change-related food insecurity risks in dryland farming systems in Ghana Biochar-enhanced soilless farming: a sustainable solution for modern agriculture Exploiting time zone differences to harmonize electricity supplies: case study of the Central Asian Region Russia on the pathways to carbon neutrality: forks on roadmaps
×
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