Cowie,
A.L., Kirschbaum, M.U.F., Ward, M. (2007). Options for including all lands in a
future greenhouse gas accounting framework. Environmental
Science and Policy 10: 306-321.
Abstract. The current framework through which
greenhouse gas emissions and removals in the land use sector are accounted
under the Kyoto Protocol has several problems. They include a complex structure,
onerous monitoring and reporting requirements, and potential for omission of
some important fluxes. One solution that may overcome some of these problems is
to include all lands and associated processes within a country’s jurisdiction,
rather than restrict accounting to specific nominated land categories or
activities. Ideally, the accounting approach should cover all significant
biospheric sources and sinks, avoid biased or unbalanced accounting, avoid
leakage and require no arbitrary adjustments to remedy unintended consequences.
Furthermore, accounting should focus on the direct human-induced component of
biospheric emissions/removals so that debits/credits can be allocated equitably
and provide appropriate incentives to adopt land-use management options with
beneficial outcomes for the atmosphere.
This paper focuses on biospheric
emissions and removals resulting from carbon stock changes. It considers four
alternative accounting options that include all land areas: Gross-Net
Accounting, Net-Net Accounting, Net Accounting with Negotiated Baselines and
the Average Carbon Stocks approach. Each option is described, and assessed with
respect to defined criteria for effectiveness. Gross-Net Accounting and Net-Net
Accounting do not adequately distinguish the anthropogenic component of
carbon-stock changes from indirect and natural effects, so large undeserved
credits or debits could be created. Under Net Accounting with Negotiated
Baselines, countries’ projected emissions and removals during the commitment
period would be taken into account in the negotiation of emissions targets. In
the commitment period, countries would then gain credits/debits for biospheric
removals/emissions. Difficulties with this approach would lie in reaching
agreed baselines for emissions and removals for individual countries, and, if
desired, in factoring out residual effects of natural variability on
emissions/removals. Under the Average Carbon Stocks approach, debits/credits
for changes in land use or management practices would be based on the changes
in long-term average carbon stocks associated with changes in specific land use
and management regimes. This approach thereby directly identifies the
anthropogenic component, and assigns debits and credits accordingly. It may prove
problematic, however, for countries to accept long-term averages rather than
observable realised carbon-stock changes as the basis for accounting. Thus,
none of the options is without its drawbacks, but Net Accounting with
Negotiated Baselines and the Average Carbon Stocks approach could potentially
be used as the basis of developing a future ‘all lands’ accounting framework
Keywords: Net-Net Accounting,
Average Carbon Stocks, Kyoto Protocol, LULUCF, AFOLU, Carbon credit, Climate
change
[Miko Kirschbaum’s home page] [Back to Climate Change Studies]