Next Article in Journal
The Value of Forest Conservation for Water Quality Protection
Next Article in Special Issue
The Application of Stem Analysis Methods to Estimate Carbon Sequestration in Arboreal Shrubs from a Single Measurement of Field Plots
Previous Article in Journal
Interactions between Fine Wood Decomposition and Flammability
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impacts of Frequent Burning on Live Tree Carbon Biomass and Demography in Post-Harvest Regrowth Forest
Forests 2014, 5(4), 847-861; doi:10.3390/f5040847
Communication

Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands

1,* , 1
, 2
 and 1,2
Received: 20 January 2014; in revised form: 4 April 2014 / Accepted: 11 April 2014 / Published: 23 April 2014
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Forest and Wood Vegetation Carbon Stores and Sequestration)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [729 KB, uploaded 23 April 2014]   |   Browse Figures
Abstract: Substantial discussion exists concerning the best land use options for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on marginal land. Emissions-mitigating land use options include displacement of fossil fuels via biofuel production and afforestation. Comparing C recovery dynamics under these different options is crucial to assessing the efficacy of offset programs. In this paper, we focus on forest recovery on marginal land, and show that there is substantial inaccuracy and discrepancy in the literature concerning carbon accumulation. We find that uncertainty in carbon accumulation occurs in estimations of carbon stocks and models of carbon dynamics over time. We suggest that analyses to date have been largely unsuccessful at determining reliable trends in site recovery due to broad land use categories, a failure to consider the effect of current and post-restoration management, and problems with meta-analysis. Understanding of C recovery could be greatly improved with increased data collection on pre-restoration site quality, prior land use history, and management practices as well as increased methodological standardization. Finally, given the current and likely future uncertainty in C dynamics, we recommend carbon mitigation potential should not be the only environmental service driving land use decisions on marginal lands.
Keywords: forest carbon sequestration; carbon dynamics; land-use change; forest recovery; afforestation forest carbon sequestration; carbon dynamics; land-use change; forest recovery; afforestation
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Export to BibTeX |
EndNote


MDPI and ACS Style

DiRocco, T.L.; Ramage, B.S.; Evans, S.G.; Potts, M.D. Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands. Forests 2014, 5, 847-861.

AMA Style

DiRocco TL, Ramage BS, Evans SG, Potts MD. Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands. Forests. 2014; 5(4):847-861.

Chicago/Turabian Style

DiRocco, Tara L.; Ramage, Benjamin S.; Evans, Samuel G.; Potts, Matthew D. 2014. "Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands." Forests 5, no. 4: 847-861.


Forests EISSN 1999-4907 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert