Abstract

Article 3 paragraph 3 and paragraph 4 of the Kyoto Protocol (KP) allow parties to use credits from land-based activities for offsetting their emission reduction/limitation target committed in the KP. Forest management (FM) is the dominant activity accounted by Annex I parties of the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change in the first commitment period of KP (2008–2012). Data reported for 2008 and 2009 indicate that over half of the emission reduction target of 24 Annex I parties that expect to use FM removals can be offset by FM credits in the first commitment period. Especially the majority of the emission reduction target of Slovenia, Sweden, Latvia, Finland, Japan, and Croatia may be achieved through FM credits. The total FM CAP as contained in decision 16/CMP.1 in the first commitment period was over-estimated significantly by 50% for all KP parties and 36% for parties that elected FM. Some parties such as Russia, Japan, Italy, Germany, and Switzerland that elected FM activity may benefit largely from the over-estimated CAP. Presuming a significant increase of the harvest rate, the FM reference level (FMRL) for 2013–2020 is only 1/5 of the historical mean value of FM removals even though most parties show an increasing or a steady trend of net removals from 1990 to 2009. As a result Annex I parties would be able to use FM credits in the future that are over 4 times of FM CAP in the first commitment period. This potential FM credit would account for 7.7% of total emissions by sources without land use, land-use change and forestry activities (LULUCF) in the base year or 1990, and more Annex I parties would share the “benefit” from the FMRL accounting approach. Zhang, X., 2011: Contribution of forest management credits in Kyoto Protocol compliance and future perspectives. Adv. Clim. Change Res., 2 (4), doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1248.2011.00171.

Abstract

Geosimulation is a form of microsimulation that seeks to understand geographical patterns and dynamics as the outcome of micro level geographical processes. Geosimulation has been applied to understand such diverse systems as lake ecology, traffic congestion and urban growth. A crucial task common to these applications is to express the agreement between model and reality and hence the confidence one can have in the model results. Such evaluation requires a geospatial perspective; it is not sufficient if the micro-level interactions are realistic. Importantly the interactions should be such that the meso and macro level patterns that emerge from the model are realistic. In recent years, a host of map comparison methods have been developed that address different aspects of the agreement between model and reality. This paper places such methods in a framework to systematically assess the breadth and width of model performance. The framework expresses agreement at the continuum of spatial scales ranging from local to the whole landscape and separately addresses agreement in structure and presence. A common reference level makes different performance metrics mutually comparable and guides the interpretation of results. The framework is applied for the evaluation of a constrained cellular automata model of the Netherlands. The case demonstrates that a performance assessment lacking either a multi-criteria and multi-scale perspective or a reference level would result in an unbalanced account and ultimately false conclusions. Document type: Part of book or chapter of book