2019
Quijas, Sandra; Boit, Alice; Thonicke, Kirsten; Murray-Tortarolo, Guillermo; Mwampamba, Tuyeni; Skutsch, Margaret; Simoes, Margareth; Ascarrunz, Nataly; Peña-Claros, Marielos; Jones, Laurence; Arets, Eric; Jaramillo, Víctor J; Lazos, Elena; Toledo, Marisol; Martorano, Lucieta G; Ferraz, Rodrigo; Balvanera, Patricia
Modelling carbon stock and carbon sequestration ecosystem services for policy design: a comprehensive approach using a dynamic vegetation model Journal Article
In: Ecosystems and People, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 42–60, 2019, ISSN: 26395916.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: decision-makers, DGVMs, ecosystem services
@article{Quijas2019,
title = {Modelling carbon stock and carbon sequestration ecosystem services for policy design: a comprehensive approach using a dynamic vegetation model},
author = {Sandra Quijas and Alice Boit and Kirsten Thonicke and Guillermo Murray-Tortarolo and Tuyeni Mwampamba and Margaret Skutsch and Margareth Simoes and Nataly Ascarrunz and Marielos Pe{ñ}a-Claros and Laurence Jones and Eric Arets and Víctor J Jaramillo and Elena Lazos and Marisol Toledo and Lucieta G Martorano and Rodrigo Ferraz and Patricia Balvanera},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/26395908.2018.1542413},
doi = {10.1080/26395908.2018.1542413},
issn = {26395916},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-01-01},
journal = {Ecosystems and People},
volume = {15},
number = {1},
pages = {42--60},
publisher = {Taylor & Francis},
abstract = {ABSTRACTEcosystem service (ES) models can only inform policy design adequately if they incorporate ecological processes. We used the Lund-Potsdam-Jena managed Land (LPJmL) model, to address following questions for Mexico, Bolivia and Brazilian Amazon: (i) How different are C stocks and C sequestration quantifications under standard (when soil and litter C and heterotrophic respiration are not considered) and comprehensive (including all C stock and heterotrophic respiration) approach? and (ii) How does the valuation of C stock and C sequestration differ in national payments for ES and global C funds or markets when comparing both approach? We found that up to 65% of C stocks have not been taken into account by neglecting to include C stored in soil and litter, resulting in gross underpayments (up to 500 times lower). Since emissions from heterotrophic respiration of organic material offset a large proportion of C gained through growth of living matter, we found that markets and decision-makers are inadvertently overestimating up to 100 times C sequestrated. New approaches for modelling C services relevant ecological process-based can help accounting for C in soil, litter and heterotrophic respiration and become important for the operationalization of agreements on climate change mitigation following the COP21 in 2015.},
keywords = {decision-makers, DGVMs, ecosystem services},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
ABSTRACTEcosystem service (ES) models can only inform policy design adequately if they incorporate ecological processes. We used the Lund-Potsdam-Jena managed Land (LPJmL) model, to address following questions for Mexico, Bolivia and Brazilian Amazon: (i) How different are C stocks and C sequestration quantifications under standard (when soil and litter C and heterotrophic respiration are not considered) and comprehensive (including all C stock and heterotrophic respiration) approach? and (ii) How does the valuation of C stock and C sequestration differ in national payments for ES and global C funds or markets when comparing both approach? We found that up to 65% of C stocks have not been taken into account by neglecting to include C stored in soil and litter, resulting in gross underpayments (up to 500 times lower). Since emissions from heterotrophic respiration of organic material offset a large proportion of C gained through growth of living matter, we found that markets and decision-makers are inadvertently overestimating up to 100 times C sequestrated. New approaches for modelling C services relevant ecological process-based can help accounting for C in soil, litter and heterotrophic respiration and become important for the operationalization of agreements on climate change mitigation following the COP21 in 2015.
