Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222105979
Afforestationandreforestationwiththecleandevelopmentmechanism:Potentials,problems,andfuturedirections
ArticleinForestScienceandTechnology·December2009
DOI:10.1080/21580103.2009.9656347
CITATION
1
READS
46
5authors,including:
SarahAbdulRazak
UniversityofMalaya
4PUBLICATIONS6CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
Woo-KyunLee
KoreaUniversity
130PUBLICATIONS617CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
NamJinNoh
MichiganTechnologicalUniversity
44PUBLICATIONS293CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
AllcontentfollowingthispagewasuploadedbySarahAbdulRazakon19May2015.
Theuserhasrequestedenhancementofthedownloadedfile.
This article was downloaded by: [University of Malaya]On: 19 May 2015, At: 11:21Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Forest Science and TechnologyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tfst20
Afforestation and reforestation with the cleandevelopment mechanism: Potentials, problems, andfuture directionsSarah Abdul Razak a , Yowhan Son b , Woo‐Kyun Lee a , Yongsung Cho c & Nam Jin Noh a
a Division of Environmental Science and Ecological Engineering , Korea University , Seoul,136–713, South Koreab Division of Environmental Science and Ecological Engineering , Korea University ,Seoul, 136–713, South Korea E-mail:c Department of Food and Resource Economics , Korea University , Seoul, 136–713, SouthKoreaPublished online: 13 Dec 2010.
To cite this article: Sarah Abdul Razak , Yowhan Son , Woo‐Kyun Lee , Yongsung Cho & Nam Jin Noh (2009) Afforestationand reforestation with the clean development mechanism: Potentials, problems, and future directions, Forest Science andTechnology, 5:2, 45-56, DOI: 10.1080/21580103.2009.9656347
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2009.9656347
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose ofthe Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shallnot be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Forest Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 45~56 (2009)
45
Forest Science andTechnology
Afforestation and Reforestation with the Clean DevelopmentMechanism: Potentials, Problems, and Future Directions
Sarah Abdul Razak1, Yowhan Son1*, Woo-Kyun Lee1, Yongsung Cho2 and Nam Jin Noh1
1Division of Environmental Science and Ecological Engineering, Korea University, Seoul 136-713, South Korea2Department of Food and Resource Economics, Korea University, Seoul 136-713, South Korea
(Received October 30, 2009; Accepted December 19, 2009)
The Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC) has introduced the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) as ascheme for greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction through cooperation betweenAnnex 1 Parties (investing countries), which are committed to certain GHG emissionreduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol, and non-Annex 1 Parties (hostcountries), which do not have any commitments to reduce GHG emissions. Theeligibility of forestry projects under the CDM is limited to afforestation/reforestation(A/R) projects. A/R CDM allows Certified Emissions Reduction Units (CERs) to bepurchased through carbon sequestration by afforestation or reforestation projectsin developing countries. A total of 17 methodologies have been approved by theExecutive Board of the UNFCCC. Out of these, 11 approved methodologies arefor large-scale A/R CDM project activities and 6 are for small-scale A/R CDMproject activities. This study identifies some potential land use changes for thedevelopment of new and approved methodologies of A/R CDM project activities.These suggested land use changes with high potential are pasture lands, land-fills, mountainous areas, and mined lands. The suggested future land uses in A/RCDM project activities are due to their good potential in sequestering carbon, suc-cess in the establishment of plantation, and unavailability of the approved method-ologies of A/R CDM project activities that are applicable to these suggested landuses. A total of 8 project design documents (PDD) of A/R CDM project activitieshave been accepted by the Executive Board and registered under the Kyoto Pro-tocol of the UNFCCC. Some of the problems with A/R CDM project activitiesinclude the planting of large scale monoculture plantations, the planting of exoticspecies, and impact on the hydrology of the project areas. Future directions of A/RCDM project activities are here suggested, which are implementing mixed spe-cies in a plantation, using native species during reforestation activities, and count-ing the soil organic carbon pools among the carbon pools measured for carbonsequestration.
Key words: clean development mechanism, afforestation, reforestation, A/R CDM,
methodology, project design document
INTRODUCTION
In light of the global climate crisis, international
negotiations led to the adoption of the first
legally binding environmental treaty in the world
in 1997: the Kyoto Protocol (Lutzeyer, 2008).
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)
under the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) is a scheme for greenhouse gas
(GHG) emission reduction through cooperation
between Annex 1 Parties (investing countries),
which are committed to certain GHG emission
reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol, and
non-Annex 1 Parties (host countries), which do
not have any commitments to reduce GHG
emissions. The Kyoto Protocol introduced the*Corresponding author
E-mail: [email protected]
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
46 Forest Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 2 (2009)
CDM as one of three market mechanisms (the
other two being Joint Implementation and Emissions
Trading) to make climate change mitigation more
cost-effective (Jindal et al., 2008). As stated in
article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol, the CDM has
two objectives: to offset GHG emissions pro-
duced in developed countries, and to promote
sustainable development in developing countries
(Nussbaumer, 2009).
Forests can act as a carbon source or sink,
depending on the balance between uptake of car-
bon through photosynthesis and release of carbon
through respiration, decomposition, fires, or removal
by harvesting activities (Nabuurs et al., 2008). The
eligibility of forestry projects under the CDM is,
however, limited to afforestation/reforestation (A/
R) projects (Streck et al., 2009). Projects are
limited to these two activities because of initial
concerns about the potential scale of the impact of
additional activities on the previously established
Kyoto targets (Schlamadinger et al., 2007). Affor-
estation and reforestation comprise human-induced
conversion of nonforest land uses to forest, through
planting, seeding, and or human-induced promo-
tion of natural seed sources. Afforestation differs
from reforestation only in that afforestation takes
place on land that has not been forested for at
least 50 years, while reforestation refers to land
that did not contain forest before 1990 (Smith and
Scherr, 2003).
A/R CDM allows for carbon sequestration offsets
to meet emission reduction obligations for developed
countries through the purchase of ‘carbon credits’
(Certified Emissions Reduction Units (CERs)) from
afforestation or reforestation projects in developing
countries (Trabucco et al., 2008). CDM ‘sink’ projects
require that carbon be sequestered into semi-
permanent ‘sinks’, primarily by growing trees through
afforestation and reforestation (Zomer et al., 2008).
While much attention is being given internationally
to opportunities for carbon sequestration to miti-
gate climate change, little attention is being paid
to the environmental tradeoffs that are associated
with these types of schemes (Trabucco et al.,
2008).
The primary objectives of the current study are
(i) to enhance the development of new or approved
methodologies of A/R CDM project activities by
signifying some potentials land use changes, and
(ii) to examine the possible feasibility problems of
A/R CDM project activities, and (iii) to suggest
possible future directions in A/R CDM project
activities as of the 1st of October, 2009.
PROCEDURES AND PROGRESS
Project cycle
Afforestation and reforestation activities must
undergo the CDM project cycle and apply an
approved methodology in order to qualify under
the CDM. Figure 1 shows a simplified schematic
of the project cycle of CDM activities. For A/R
CDM project activities, a project participant should
first determine whether it is a large scale or a
small scale A/R CDM project, based on the size
and types of activity undertaken.
Subsequently, project participants should apply
one of the methodologies approved by the Execu-
tive Board (EB) of UNFCCC. If an approved meth-
odology (AR-AM) is applicable, the Designated
Operational Entities (DOE) may proceed with the
validation of the A/R CDM project activity and sub-
mit the CDM-AR-PDD for registration.
However, if none of the approved methodolo-
gies are applicable to the project activity, the
project participants should submit a new method-
ology (AR-NM). Then, the proposed AR-NM will
be publicized on the UNFCCC CDM website by
the secretariat, and public inputs will be invited for
a period of 15 working days. Next, project partici-
pants need to prepare the A/R methodologies
form for the new proposed baseline and monitor-
ing methodology (CDM-AR-NM). Subsequently,
Figure 1. CDM project cycle.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
Sarah Abdul Razak et al. 47
the DOE will independently evaluate the proposed
A/R project activity through the validation pro-
cess. Lastly, a validated project activity will be reg-
istered if it is accepted formally by the EB. The
verification, certification, and issuance of tCERs or
ICERs related to the A/R project activity is the
next step after the registration of the A/R CDM
project so that they can enter the carbon market
for compliance with reduction targets. Figure 2
summarizes the potentials, problems, and future
directions of A/R CDM project activities.
Methodologies
There are two types of methodologies in the
context of A/R CDM: baseline methodologies and
monitoring methodologies. Both the baseline meth-
odology and the monitoring methodology must be
included in the project design document of A/R
CDM project activities. Currently, a total of 17
methodologies have been approved by the EB.
Out of these, 11 are for large-scale and 6 are for
small-scale A/R CDM project activities. Table 1
lists all of the approved methodologies for A/R
CDM project activities available as of 1st October
2009.
Potential land use change for A/R CDM project
activities
There are many types of land use changes that
have the potential to be A/R CDM project activi-
ties. Some examples of types of lands that are
suitable to be implemented for A/R CDM project
activities are pasture lands, landfills, mountainous
areas, and mined lands.
Pasture lands
Pasture lands, or pastoral lands, are lands with
low-growing vegetation cover used for grazing of
livestock such as cattle and horses. Areas con-
verted to pastures are often unmanaged and are
subject to varying degrees of degradation. Only
about 5% of tropical pastures are well managed
and, under such degraded conditions, soil organic
matter levels can be much lower than those found
under native vegetation (Fearnside and Barbosa,
1998). However, González and Fisher (1994)
evaluated the growth of 11 species of plants planted
on pasture land, and found out that the species
studied had a high survival in spite of the degraded
conditions of the site and prevalence of pasture
grasses. Pastures converted to plantation forests
can result in an increase in the rate of carbon
sequestration from the atmosphere, thus, reduc-
ing the net GHG from human activities. Afforesta-
tion of degraded pastures can potentially enhance
carbon sequestration through afforestation of
degraded pastures with short-rotation eucalyptus
(Lima et al., 2006).
Currently, the approved methodology for large
scale A/R CDM project activities, AR-AM0009,
and the approved methodology for small scale A/
R CDM project activities, AR-AMS0006, involves
the establishment of forest in a silvopastoral sys-
tem resulting in production of pasture rather than
restoration of pasture lands. Meanwhile, only one
methodology, AR-AM0007, is applicable for A/R
Figure 2. Potentials, problems, and future directions of A/R CDM project activities.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
48 Forest Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 2 (2009)
CDM project activities undertaken on agricultural
or pastoral lands. However, this approved meth-
odology is only applicable to large scale A/R CDM
project activities. Thus, there is need for a new
approved methodology that is specifically applica-
ble to small scale A/R CDM project activities involv-
ing the restoration of forest plantations undertaken
on pasture or pastoral lands.
Landfills
Landfills, which are also known as wastelands,
are the disposal site of waste materials by burial,
and are the oldest method of waste treatment. A
short-rotation plantation can be established suc-
cessfully on sanitary landfills. 5 species of tree
plantations on 6 sanitary landfills in Finland have
showed that most of the stands developed well, in
a manner suitable for landscaping, and with a high
value of biomass production through leachate irri-
gation (Ettala, 1988). Construction of barriers, includ-
ing layers of clay, plastic, or placement of soil
deep below plant roots to prevent gas migration,
can also be advantageous in establishing cover
crops over refuse landfills (Lisk, 1991). Problems
that often affect plantations in landfill areas could
be solved by correct placement and handling of
Table 1. Lists of approved methodologies for A/R CDM project activities (as of 1st October 2009).
Reference Scope Title of the Methodology Ver. No.
LARGE SCALE*
AR-AM0001 14 Reforestation of degraded land 3
AR-AM0002 14 Restoration of degraded lands through afforestation/reforestation 2
AR-AM0004 14 Reforestation or afforestation of land currently under agricultural use 3
AR-AM0005 14Afforestation and reforestation project activities implemented for industrialand/or commercial uses
3
AR-AM0006 14 Afforestation/reforestation with trees supported by shrubs on degraded land 2
AR-AM0007 14Afforestation and reforestation of land currently under agricultural or pastoral use
5
AR-AM0008 14Afforestation or reforestation on degraded land for sustainable wood production
3
AR-AM0009 14Afforestation or reforestation on degraded land allowing for silvopastoralactivities
4
AR-AM0010 14Afforestation and reforestation project activities implemented on unmanaged grassland in reserve/protected areas
3
AR-ACM0001 14 Afforestation and reforestation of degraded land 3
AR-ACM0002 14Afforestation or reforestation of degraded land without displacement of pre-project activities
1
SMALL SCALE**
AR-AMS0001 14Simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for small-scale afforestation and reforestation project activities under the clean development mechanism implemented on grasslands or croplands
5
AR-AMS0002 14Simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for small-scale afforestation and reforestation project activities under the CDM implemented on settlements
2
AR-AMS0003 14Simplified baseline and monitoring methodology for small-scale CDM afforestation and reforestation project activities implemented on wetlands
1
AR-AMS0004 14Simplified baseline and monitoring methodology for small-scale agroforestry-afforestation and reforestation project activities underthe clean development mechanism
2
AR-AMS0005 14
Simplified baseline and monitoring methodology for small-scale afforestation and reforestation project activities under the clean development mechanism implemented on lands having low inherent potential to support living biomass
2
AR-AMS0006 14Simplified baseline and monitoring methodology for small-scalesilvopastoral-afforestation and reforestation project activities under theclean development mechanism
1
Notes: *Large scale methodology is for large scale A/R CDM project activity**Small scale methodology is for small scale A/R CDM project activity
Source from http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/index.html
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
Sarah Abdul Razak et al. 49
agricultural cap material, soil amelioration using
tillage and addition of organic matter (such as
sewage sludge), irrigation (possibly using landfill
leachate), the installation of drainage and the
application of inorganic fertilizers, and selection of
the appropriate species and clones (Nixon et al.,
2001). Balooni and Singh (2007) have empha-
sized the need for more investments in afforesta-
tion of wastelands, but, there is no methodology of
A/R CDM project activities that is applicable to
landfill area. Currently, approved methodologies,
such as AR-AMS0005, for small scale A/R CDM
project activities on lands having low inherent
potential to support living biomass is applicable to
sand dunes, bare lands, contaminated or mine
spoils lands, or highly alkaline or saline soils, but
not to landfill areas. Thus, there is need for a new
approved methodology that is specifically applica-
ble to landfill areas.
Mountainous areas
The uplands in mountainous areas are affected
by extensive slash-and-burn systems by farmers.
Land degradation is a common phenomenon in
mountainous regions (Shresta and Zinck, 2001).
Land use changes in mountainous areas could
stop the degradation of the areas due to upland
cultivation. Upland cultivation that is currently con-
tinuing is characterized by decreasing yields and
deteriorating forest and soil quality, signs of land
degradation are already apparent in villages in
which this type of household is in the majority
(Castella et al., 2006).
The establishment of plantations for A/R CDM
project activities would be beneficial in solving the
degradation of the mountainous areas. Further-
more, there is no methodology of A/R CDM project
activities that is applicable to mountainous areas
or uplands. Thus, there is need for a new approved
methodology for large scale or small scale A/R
CDM project activities that is specifically applica-
ble to mountainous areas or uplands.
Reclamation of mined lands
Mining is the extraction or removal of minerals
and metals such as manganese, tantalum, cop-
per, tin, nickel, aluminum ore, iron ore, gold, silver,
and diamonds from the earth. Mining and the
associated subsequent processing could cause
land degradation. Degraded mine lands are often
characterized by acidic pH, low level of key nutri-
ents, poor soil structure, and limited moisture
retention capacity (Barnhisel et al., 2000).
However, mine lands show good potential for
sequestering carbon despite their negative soil
characteristics. Studies of surface mine revegetation
with trees began in the 1920s, and reports on
planting and success began in the 1940s (Zeleznik
and Skousen, 1996). The reclamation of mined
land could lead to carbon sequestration by restor-
ing the soil and reestablishing plantations on the
land. Most large-scale surface coal operators in
southern West Virginia have reclaimed their mined
areas with grasses and legumes, and a smaller
number of operations have established tree plantings
or wildlife habitat plantings (Skousen et al., 2006).
Reclamation of mine land using an integrated bio-
technological approach is a potential option for
enhancing the process of restoration of vegetation
and soil organic carbon (Juwarkar et al., 2009).
The establishment and growth of 5 hardwood tree
species on a reclaimed West Virginia surface mine
with compacted soils and a heavy grass groundcover
has showed that remedial ripping of compacted
mine soils improves survival and growth of most
species regardless of site type (Skousen et al.,
2009).
Besides its high potential for sequestering GHG,
the reclamation of mined land with forest area
brings other advantages. Forests have a number
of advantages for postmining land use because it
is long-term stable, resistant to invasion of less
desirable weedy species, eventual economic returns,
development wildlife habitat, and promotion of
hydrologic balance in watersheds (Zeleznik and
Skousen, 1996). Reclaimed land can sequester
more carbon than agricultural land, and thus, the
afforestation of degraded mine spoil can also be
initiated as a CDM activity under the Kyoto Proto-
col (Juwarkar et al., 2009).
Currently, AR-AMS0005, the approved method-
ology for small scale A/R CDM project activities
on lands having a low inherent potential to support
living biomass is the only methodology approved
by the EB that is sufficiently applicable to activities
in the reclamation of mined areas. However, this
methodology is also applicable to sand dunes,
bare lands, or highly alkaline or saline soils. Due
to the large area of mined lands in the world, and
the importance of the reforestation of mined lands
for reducing GHG, a new methodology is needed
for large scale or small scale A/R CDM project
activities that are applicable specifically to the rec-
lamation of mined lands.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
50 Forest Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 2 (2009)
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT
The project design document (PDD) describes
the A/R CDM project activity as well as a baseline
and monitoring methodology for the project activ-
ity. Project participants should prepare a com-
pleted PDD and submit it for validation and
registration toward developing the A/R CDM
project activity. Currently, a total of 8 PDDs of A/R
CDM project activities have been accepted by the
EB and registered under the Kyoto Protocol. Table
2 lists all the registered PDDs (as of 1st October
2009) with information on each project’s host,
date registered, methodology used, area of the
project, annual average of estimated GHG reduc-
tions, duration and starting date of the crediting
period, and total estimated net anthropogenic
GHG removal by sinks.
Problems
Large-scale plantations
Large-scale monoculture plantations are typi-
cally composed of fast-growing eucalyptus and pine
trees. Afforestation with fast-growing tree species
such as Eucalyptus spp. and Pinus spp. is an
important economic activity in many tropical coun-
tries. Plantation areas, which are often large, sup-
ply wood for industry, energy, and farm purposes
(Zinn et al., 2002). These types of plantations are
usually monocultures, use invasive and non-native
species as their plant, and involve intensive and
destructive practices. An industrial plantation is
also planted as a large scale plantation. Industrial
forest plantations are defined as those stands
established by planting and/or seeding in the pro-
cess of afforestation or reforestation (Bull et al.,
2006). By the 1960s, the launching of large-scale
plantation programs began in many tropical and
subtropical countries, and by 2000 there was a
significant increase in the area of plantations for
industrial purposes, with global estimates of 4.5
million ha per year being reported (Cossalter and
Pye-Smith, 2003).
The current rules of A/R CDM have not pre-
vented the planting of destructive large-scale
monoculture plantations in project areas. Conse-
quently, this type of plantation has been con-
structed in some A/R CDM projects. A/R CDM
rules do not currently encourage, nor make it easy,
to promote small-scale, small-holder, less inten-
sive approaches such as agroforestry practices,
and it is more likely that much of A/R CDM
projects will be in the form of fast-growing timber
plantations (Zomer et al., 2008). Licata et al.
(2008) emphasize a need for caution when plan-
ning afforestation projects on large scales. The
fast-growing species of this type of plantation con-
sumes huge volumes of water, and threaten biological
diversity and local sustainable livelihoods. The most
common ecological issues with large scale indus-
trial plantations include loss of biodiversity, soil
erosion and fertility, excessive water consumption,
and the destruction of natural forests (Bull et al.,
2006).
Exotic species
Exotic species, also known as alien or non-
native species, are usually fast-growing, have
been introduced as a sustainable economic alter-
native to reduce the harvest of native forests.
However, the introduction of exotic species in A/R
CDM project activities could lead to a complex
array of negative consequences. All plantations
that replace native forest may have negative con-
sequences on biodiversity (Lindenmayer and
Hobbs, 2004). An example of a negative conse-
quence of using exotic species is that it may
deplete water resources. The increase in evapo-
transpiration due to conversion of native forests to
high-density ponderosa pine plantations could
have a large impact on water resources. (Licata et
al., 2008).
Besides that, an exotic species will also affect
the diversity and community composition of a for-
est. Studies conducted in other Australian ecosys-
tems have shown that exotic pine plantations
provide relatively poor quality habitat for many for-
est-dependent animals, especially hollow-depen-
dent, nectivorous, and frugivorous vertebrates,
and many types of invertebrates (Lindenmayer
and Hobbs, 2004). Pine plantations generally sup-
port more species than grazing land or pastures,
although they support substantially fewer bird spe-
cies than native forest (Luck and Korodaj, 2008).
Hydrology
Despite the numerous statements in the regis-
tered PDDs about the ability of their project areas
to improve watershed management and reduce
surface runoff and erosion, further information on
the particulars of these situations is lacking. In
fact, A/R CDMs project activities may pose many
problems to the hydrology of an ecosystem. Land
use changes resulting from the adoption of A/R
CDM involve alterations of the hydrological cycle,
both on flows of water and sediment, and levels of
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
Sarah Abdul Razak
et al.
51
Table 2. List of registered project design documents for A/R CDM project activities (as of 1st October 2009).
Project title HostDate
registeredMethodology Area (ha)
Annual averageof estimated reductions (tonnes)
Duration of crediting period
Starting dateof crediting
period
Total estimated net GHG(tonnes)
LARGE SCALE
Facilitating reforestation for Guangxi Watershed Management in Pearl River Basin
China 10-Nov-06 AR-AM0001 4,000 25, 795 30 years (Fixed) 1-Apr-06 773,842
Moldova soil conservation project Moldova 30-Jan-09 AR-AM0002 20,289.91 179, 242 20 years (Renewable) 1-Oct-02 3,584,846
Reforestation of severely degraded landmass inKhammam district of Andhra Pradesh
India 5-Jun-09 AR-AM0001 3,070.19 57, 792 30 years (Fixed) 2-Jul-01 1,733,753
SMALL SCALE
Small scale cooperative afforestation CDM pilotproject activity on private lands affected by shift-ing sand dunes in Sirsa, Haryana
India 23-Mar-09 AR-AMS0001 369.87 11, 596 20 years (Renewable) 1-Jul-08 231,920
Cao Phong reforestation project Viet Nam 28-Apr-09 AR-AMS0001 365 2, 665 16 years (Renewable) 1-May-09 42,645
Carbon sequestration through reforestation inthe Bolivian tropics by smallholders
Bolivia 11-Jun-09 AR-AMS0001 247 4, 341 21 years (Fixed) 12-Feb-08 91,165
Uganda Nile Basin reforestation project No. 3 Uganda 21-Aug-09 AR-AMS0001 341.9 5,564 20 years (Renewable) 1-Apr-07 111,798
Reforestation of croplands and grasslands inlow income communities of Paraguarí department,Paraguay
Paraguay 6-Sep-09 AR-AMS0001 215.2 1,523 20 years (Fixed) 25-Jul-07 30, 468
Note: Source from http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/projsearch.html
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
52 Forest Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 2 (2009)
actual evapotranspiration (AET) or vapor flows
(Trabucco et al., 2008).
Activities during the planting of forest could also
affect the hydrology of a reforested area. Nitrate
increases have been attributed to biological miner-
alization of organic matter, combined with reduced
nutrient uptake due to the killing of root systems
as a consequence of tree harvesting, and is asso-
ciated with other losses, including those of organic
nitrogen, ammonium, and potassium (Cummins
and Farrell, 2003). Different degrees of human dis-
turbance, including improper mechanical cultivation
and land shaping, have brought about differences
in vegetation structure and soil properties, which
have a further impact on soil and water loss
(Zheng et al., 2008).
The size of the catchment areas contributes
greatly to their vulnerability during reforestation. It
is predicted that reforestation can only benefit to
small catchment areas rather than large ones.
Paired-watershed research has traditionally focused
on very small basins and studied sudden changes;
thus, we believe that the time has come to study
larger watersheds, which undergo more diffuse
and gradual changes, because the results of such
will be directly usable by water resource manag-
ers (Andréassian, 2004). Future plantation expan-
sion would not be expected to importantly influence
the flow regime in large catchments, but can have
local impacts in affected catchments smaller than
2000 km2 in particular, by increasing the fre-
quency of low flow conditions, and even more so if
most of the area is already under forest (Van Dijk
et al., 2007). Impacts of A/R CDM on the hydro-
logical cycle are not evident on a regional or glo-
bal scale under the current rules, because the
land area that is potentially affected is not signifi-
cant (Trabucco et al., 2008).
Reforestation is well-known to significantly reduce
the amount of surface runoff, but the amount of
salt entering the reservoir that results in an
increase in the salinity of a reservoir is still poorly
studied. Reforestation can still help to reduce
stream salt exports from smaller catchments, but
reductions in average stream salinity and high
salinity events may well be difficult to achieve (Van
Dijk et al., 2007). Many of the current registered
A/R CDM project activities only mentioned the
benefits of their project area in reducing the sur-
face runoff or stream flow but not their drawbacks
regarding water or stream salinity. Thus, A/R CDM
project activities may not be an appropriate strat-
egy to alleviate salinity problems.
Another factor that may contravene the positive
effects of an A/R CDM hydrology project is the
choice of species for plantations. Ilstedt et al.
(2007) found an increase in infiltrability after tropi-
cal afforestation and tree planting for agroforestry,
but the level of knowledge currently available
about rates of infiltration under different edaphic
conditions and the effects of species and tech-
niques is severely lacking. Furthermore, Dierick
and Holscher (2009) have added to this point by
suggesting that water use and transpiration rates
found in 10 co-occurring tropical angiosperm tree
species showed considerable variation across
species; thus, species selection may indeed be an
effective tool to control water use of reforested
stands and optimize the balance between wood
production or carbon sequestration and the use of
water resources applying to little-structured refor-
estation stands.
Currently, PDDs only assess the positive aspects
of A/R CDM project activities towards the hydrol-
ogy of the project areas, for instance, in reducing
recurrent flooding or sediment transfer, but not on
the negative aspects of A/R CDM project activi-
ties. Thus, further research on a large number of
observed watershed areas is needed in order to
assess the successful of A/R CDM project activi-
ties in mitigating greenhouse gas reduction.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Mixed-species plantation
The problems created by large-scale plantations
may be solved by using mixed-species planta-
tions. One of the benefits of using mixed-species
plantations are the reduced incidence of disease
and insect attack (Nichols et al., 2006). This could
be due to the fact that species mixtures have a
varied genetic composition as compared to the
uniform genetic composition of monoculture plan-
tations. The potential risk of monocultures is that
because of the uniform genetic composition, the
invasion of a pest would affect all or most of the
trees (Kelty, 2006).
Furthermore, mixed-species plantations have an
excellent ability to restore degraded land, and
could be used in A/R CDM project activities. Eco-
logical restoration of degraded land requires a
moderate to very large number of planted species
in order to firmly reestablish part of the native
diversity of tree vegetation, and to foster the
establishment of additional native plant species in
the plantation understory (Kelty, 2006). Mixed-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
Sarah Abdul Razak et al. 53
species plantations also have the potential to
sequester more carbon than monocultures (For-
rester et al., 2006), so the plantation of mixed spe-
cies in a degraded land could also contribute to
GHG reduction.
Bristow et al. (2006) showed that by growing E.
pellita and A. peregrina in mixed-species stands,
significantly larger individual trees, and presum-
ably higher value stems, of both species can be
grown. The high total productivity in a plantation of
mixed species increases the supply of nutrients.
Furthermore, stratification of species mixtures
could contribute to more-efficient use of available
soil moisture. Species mixtures, due to their
higher productivity and more efficient use of avail-
able water and nutrient resources, could provide
an alternative to monocultures for growing Euca-
lyptus wood (Forrester et al., 2009).
Although there are many forest plantations that
are established as monocultures, research has
shown species mixtures to have many potential
advantages. Thus, it is suggested that every
project should have a mixed-species plantation in
its A/R CDM project activities toward better mitiga-
tion of the GHG emission.
Native species
The complex problems created by exotic spe-
cies may be solved by using native species instead.
Carpenter et al. (2004) studied the potential of 2
exotic and 5 native tree species in reestablishing
trees in tropical overgrazed pastures, and found
that native species are the outstanding performer
in terms of growth and survival, and that a system
of crop rotation may also be sustainable. The fast
growing native species appeared to be well
adapted to the low input forestry practiced by
farmers in the lowland humid tropics and were
characterized by high survival and good adaptabil-
ity to the low-intensity site preparation and mainte-
nance characteristic of the region (Haggar et al.,
1998).
Native tree plantations have become an exten-
sively used land use management option in Costa
Rica during the last 20 years, as a restorative tool
for degraded lands and also because of their
potential use as providers of ecosystem services
(FAO, 2006). The benefits of selecting excellent
native species to control soil erosion should not
be overlooked (Zheng et al., 2008). Increasing
attention is being placed on increasingly complex
rehabilitation designs involving mixtures of native
species, which are expected to deliver greater
benefits in terms of ecosystem services such as
watershed protection, biodiversity conservation,
and resilience to a variety of environmental stresses
(McNamara et al., 2006).
Soil organic carbon pools
Soil organic carbon (SOC) is a sink for the
anthropogenic atmospheric excess of GHG, and
in regards to global warming it is very important
for every region to estimate their current SOC. It is
vitally important that any SOC stock estimates are
as accurate as possible in order to correctly quan-
tify the emission reductions required (Bell and
Worrall, 2009).
However, most of the registered A/R CDM
project activities have only dealt with aboveground
biomass, which represent about 90% of the total
tree biomass, whereas belowground biomass rep-
resent between 2% and 10% of the total tree bio-
mass. Out of the 8 PDDs of A/R CDM project
activities that have been registered, only one
project, the Moldova Soil Conservation Project,
included the SOC as one of the carbon pools
measured. Thus, since the soil carbon pool has a
huge role in mitigating GHG emissions, it is rec-
ommended that more projects account for it.
The size of the organic carbon pool in the soil is
largely affected by soil conditions. The SOC stock
of a soil can be affected by specific tillage prac-
tices, which can expose the soil organic matter to
the oxidation processes that result in SOC
removal as carbon dioxide, to more rapid decom-
position of crop residues into carbon dioxide, and
to disruption of aggregates that exposes SOC to
microbial and enzyme activity (Olson et al., 2005).
Quantifying the potential of cropland soils to
restore the prior SOC will help to evaluate the
contribution of cropland soils as a carbon source
or sink to the global carbon balance (Liang et al.,
2009). Erosion has a great impact on SOC, and
affects the proper accounting of the carbon flux
that indirectly influences management of climate
change. Thus, in order to effectively reduce car-
bon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere, SOCs
should be efficiently maintained. Crop type, crop
rotation, tillage type, fertilizer used, and organic
amendments all influence the amount and distri-
bution of the organic matter within the soil (Bell
and Worrall, 2009).
The SOC pool is quite large, and a change in
the SOC pool size will have a great impact on the
carbon budget. Thus, it is suggested that all
projects should measure the change of soil car-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
54 Forest Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 2 (2009)
bon pools of the project area in their A/R CDM
project activities. The measuring and monitoring
of the changes in SOC pools together with above-
ground biomass and belowground biomass could
be a significant asset in carbon sequestration
toward mitigating global warming. Since only few
works providing information on the subject exist
as yet, more studies on SOC pools are needed for
better mitigation of GHG emissions.
CONCLUSION
This study identified some specific types of land
that have a positive potential in land use changes
to enhance the development of new or approved
methodologies of A/R CDM project activities. Those
lands are pasture lands, landfills, mountainous
areas, and mined lands. The suggested land uses
have potential benefits for future land use in A/R
CDM project activities such as good potential in
sequestering carbon and success in the establish-
ment of plantations. However, approved method-
ologies of A/R CDM project activities that are
specifically applicable to these suggested land
uses are very scarce. Contributing to this is the
fact that deforestation, soil carbon management,
and revegetation are not included in the A/R CDM
project activities.
Problems analyzed in this study include those of
large scale monoculture plantations, the planting
of exotic species, and impacts on hydrology. Destruc-
tive large scale monoculture plantations consume
huge volumes of water, change the native planta-
tion, threaten biological diversity and local sustain-
able livelihoods, and require intensive nutrient
management. The current A/R CDM rules have
the serious fault of not excluding just such use of
large scale monoculture plantations. Procedures
such as an environmental and social assessment
process must be established to ensure sufficient
environmental impact assessments so as to
successfully screen out large-scale plantations.
The current A/R CDM rules also fail to clearly
exclude the plantation of exotic species, which
threaten ecosystems, habitats, and other native
species by their introduction.
The future directions of A/R CDM project activi-
ties suggested include implementing mixed-spe-
cies in a plantation, using native species during
reforestation activities, and counting the SOC into
the carbon pools measured for carbon sequestra-
tion. The A/R CDM rules should at least prevent
subsidies to environmentally damaging projects. A
mandatory process to assess environmental impacts
of sinks projects is also seriously needed. Further-
more, the afforestation and reforestation project
activities that have the maximum potential to deliver
environmental services and contribute to the
restoration of ecological connectivity and ecological
corridors should be promoted and given full attention.
Destructive land use and forest management
practices that occur as a result of A/R CDM
implementation should be strongly opposed. Lastly,
the development of suitable policies assisted by
worldwide scientific studies should be supported
toward better understanding of the potential of A/R
CDM project activities for climate change mitigation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study was carried out with the support of
the ‘Forest Science & Technology projects (Project
No. S210909L010130)’ grant provided by the Korea
Forest Service. The author is grateful to anony-
mous colleagues for their direct or indirect involve-
ment in this study.
LITERATURE CITED
Andréassian, V. 2004. Waters and forests: from his-
torical controversy to scientific debate. Journal
of Hydrology 291: 1-27.
Balooni, K. and Singh, K. 2007. Prospects and prob-
lems of afforestation of wastelands in India: A
synthesis of macro- and micro-perspectives.
Geoforum 38: 1276-1289.
Barnhisel, R. I., Darmody, R.G.. and Daniels, W.L.
2000. Reclamation of drastically disturbed lands.
Agronomy monograph pp.1082.
Bell, M.J. and Worrall, F. 2009. Estimating a region's
soil organic carbon baseline: The undervalued
role of land-management. Geoderma 152: 74-
84.
Bristow, M., Vanclay, J.K., Brooks, L. and Hunt, M.
2006. Growth and species interactions of Euca-
lyptus pellita in a mixed and monoculture planta-
tion in the humid tropics of north Queensland.
Forest Ecology and Management 233: 285-294.
Bull, G.Q., Bazett, M., Schwab, O., Nilsson, S., White,
A. and Maginnis, S. 2006. Industrial forest plan-
tation subsidies: Impacts and implications. For-
est Policy and Economics 9: 13-31.
Carpenter, F.L, Nichols, J.D. and Sandi, E. 2004.
Early growth of native and exotic trees planted
on degraded tropical pasture. Forest Ecology
and Management 196: 367-378.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
Sarah Abdul Razak et al. 55
Castella, J.C., Boissau, S., Thanh, N.H. and Novosad,
P. 2006. Impact of forestland allocation on land
use in a mountainous province of Vietnam. Land
Use Policy 23: 147-160.
Cossalter, C. and Pye-Smith, C. 2003. Fast-Wood
Forestry-Myths and Realities. Center for Interna-
tional Forestry Research, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Cummins, T. and Farrell, E.P. 2003. Biogeochemi-
cal impacts of clearfelling and reforestation on
blanket-peatland streams II. major ions and dis-
solved organic carbon. Forest Ecology and
Management 180: 557-570.
Dierick, D. and Holscher, D. 2009. Species-specific tree
water use characteristics in reforestation stands
in the Philippines. Agricultural and Forest Mete-
orology 149: 1317-1326.
Ettala, M.O. 1988. Short-rotation tree plantations at
sanitary landfills. Waste Management and
Research 6: 291-302.
FAO, 2006. Global Forest Resources Assessment
2005. Progress Towards sustainable forest man-
agement. FAO For. Paper 147, 320 pp. In: Jime-
nez, J.J., R. Lal., H.A. Leblanc and R.O. Russo.
2007. Soil organic carbon pool under native tree
plantations in the Caribbean lowlands of Costa
Rica. Forest Ecology and Management 241:
134-144.
Fearnside, P.M. and Barbosa, R.I. 1998. Soil car-
bon changes from conversion of forest to pas-
ture in Brazilian Amazonia. Forest Ecolology
and Management 108: 147-166.
Forrester, D.I., Theiveyanathan, S., Collopy, J.J. and
Marcar, N.E. 2009. Enhanced water use effi-
ciency in a mixed Eucalyptus globulus and Acacia
mearnsii plantation. Forest Ecology Management
doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2009.07.036.
Forrester, D.I., Bauhus, J. and Cowie, A.L. 2006.
Carbon allocation in a mixed-species plantation
of Eucalyptus globulus and Acacia mearnsii.
Forest Ecology and Management 233: 275-284.
González J.E. and Fisher, R.F. 1994. Growth of native
forest species planted on abandoned pasture
land in Costa Rica. Forest Ecology and Man-
agement 70: 159-167.
Haggar, J.P., Briscoe, C.B. and Butterfield, R.P.
1998. Native species: a resource for the diversi-
fication of forestry production in the lowland
humid tropics. Forest Ecology and Manage-
ment 106: 195-203.
Ilstedt, U., Malmer, A., Verbeeten, E. and Murdiyarso,
D. 2007. The effect of afforestation on water infil-
tration in the tropics: A systematic review and
meta-analysis. Forest Ecology and Manage-
ment 251: 45-51.
Jindal, R., Swallow, B. and Kerr, J. 2008. Forestry-
based carbon sequestration projects in Africa:
Potential benefits and challenges. Natural
Resources Forum 32: 116-130.
Juwarkar, A.A., Mehrotraa, K.L., Nair, R., Wanjari, T.,
Singh, S.K. and Chakrabarti, T. 2009. Environ-
mental Monitoring and Assesment DOI 10.1007/
s10661-008-0710-y.
Kelty, M.J. 2006. The role of species mixtures in
plantation forestry. Forest Ecology and Manage-
ment 233: 195-204.
Liang, A., Yang, X., Zhang, X., McLaughlin, N., Shen,
Y. and Li, W. 2009. Soil organic carbon changes
in particle-size fractions following cultivation of
Black soils in China. Soil and Tillage Research
105: 21-26.
Licata, J.A., Gyenge, J.E., Fernández, M.E., Schlich-
ter, T.M. and Bond, B.J. 2008. Increased water
use by ponderosa pine plantations in northwest-
ern Patagonia, Argentina compared with native
forest vegetation. Forest Ecology and Manage-
ment 255: 753-764.
Lima, A.M.N., Silva, I.R., Neves, J.C.L., Novais, R.F.,
Barros, N.F., Mendonc, E.S., Smyth, T.J., Mor-
eira, M.S. and Leite, F.P. 2006. Soil organic car-
bon dynamics following afforestation of degraded
pastures with Eucalyptus in southeastern Brazil.
Forest Ecology and Management 235: 219-231.
Lindenmayer, D.B. and Hobbs, R.J. 2004. Fauna
conservation in Australian plantation forests-a
review. Biology Conservation 119: 151-168.
Lisk, D.J. 1991. Environmental effects of landfills.
Science of the Total Environment 100: 415-468.
Luck, G.W. and Korodaj, T.N. 2008. Stand and land-
scape-level factors related to bird assemblages
in exotic pine plantations: Implications for forest
management. Forest Ecology and Management
255: 2688–2697.
Lutzeyer, S. 2008. Climate trading The Clean Devel-
opment Mechanism and Africa. Stellenbosch
Economic Working Papers.
McNamara, S., Tinh, D.V., Erskine, P.D., Lamb, D.,
Yates, D. and Brown, S. 2006. Rehabilitating
degraded forest land in central Vietnam with
mixed native species plantings. Forest Ecology
and Management 233: 358-365.
Nabuurs, G.J., Thurig, E., Heidema, N., Armolaitis,
K., Biber, P., Cienciala, E., Kaufmann, E., Maki-
paa, R., Nilsen, P., Petritsch, R, Pristova, T.,
Rock, J., Schelhaas, M.J., Sievanen, R., Somo-
gyi, Z. and Vallet, P. 2008. Hotspots of the Euro-
pean forests carbon cycle. Forest Ecology and
Management 256: 194-200.
Nichols, J.D., Bristow, M. and Vanclay, J.K. 2006.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
56 Forest Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 2 (2009)
Mixed-species plantations: Prospects and chal-
lenges. Forest Ecology and Management 233:
383-390.
Nixon, D.J, Stephens, W., Tyrrel, S.F. and Brierley,
E.D.R. 2001. The potential for short rotation
energy forestry on restored landfill caps. Biore-
source Technology 77: 237-245.
Nussbaumer, P. 2009. On the contribution of labelled
Certified Emission Reductions to sustainable
development: A multi-criteria evaluation of CDM
projects. Energy Policy 37: 91-101.
Olson, K.R., Lang, J.M., and Ebelhar, S.A. 2005.
Soil organic carbon changes after 12 years of
no-tillage and tillage of Grantsburg soils in
southern Illinois. Soil and Tillage Research 81:
217-225.
Schlamadinger, B., Johns, T., Ciccarese, L., Braun,
M., Sato, A., Senyaz, A., Stephens, P., Takahashi,
M. and Zhang, X. 2007. Options for including land
use in a climate agreement post-2012: improving
the Kyoto Protocol approach. Environmental
Science and Policy 10: 295-305.
Shresta, D.P. and Zinck, J.A. 2001. Land use classi-
fication in mountainous areas: integration of
image processing, digital elevation data and field
knowledge (application to Nepal). International
Journal of Applied Eath Observ˙ ation and Geoin-
formation 3: 78-85.
Skousen, J., Gorman, J., Pena-Yewtukhiw, E., King, J.,
Stewart, J., Emerson, P. and DeLong, C. 2009.
Hardwood tree survival in heavy ground cover
on reclaimed land in West Virginia: Mowing and
ripping effects. Journal of Environmental Quality
38: 1400-1409.
Skousen, J., Ziemkiewicz, P. and Venable, C. 2006.
Tree recruitment and growth on 20-year-old,
unreclaimed surface mined lands in West Vir-
ginia. International Journal of Mining, Reclama-
tion and Environment 20: 142-154.
Smith, J. and Scherr, S.J. 2003. Capturing the value
of forest carbon for local livelihoods. World
Development 31: 2143-2160.
Streck, C., Tuerk, A. and Schlamadinger, B. 2009.
Foresty offsets in emissions trading systems: a
link between systems? Mitigation Adaptation
Strategic Global Change 14: 455-463.
Trabucco, A., Zomer, R.J., Bossio, D.A., Straaten,
O.V. and Verchot, L.V. 2008. Climate change
mitigation through afforestation/reforestation: A
global analysis of hydrologic impacts with four case
studies. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment
126: 81-97.
Van Dijk, A.I.J.M., Hairsine, P.B., Arancibia, J.P. and
Dowling, T.I. 2007. Reforestation, water avail-
ability and stream salinity: A multi-scale analy-
sis in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Forest
Ecology and Management 251: 94-109.
Zeleznik, J.D. and Skousen, J.G.. 1996. Survival of
three tree species on old reclaimed surface
mines in Ohio. Journal of Environmental Quality
25: 1429-1435.
Zheng, H., Chen, F., Ouyang, Z., Tu, N., Xu, W.,
Wang, X., Miao, H., Li, X. and Tian, Y. 2008.
Impacts of reforestation approaches on runoff
control in the hilly red soil region of Southern
China. Journal of Hydrology 356: 174-184.
Zinn, Y.L., Resck, D.V.S. and da Silva, J.E. 2002.
Soil organic carbon as affected by afforestation
with Eucalyptus and Pinus in the Cerrado region
of Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management 166:
285-294.
Zomer, R.J, Trabucco, A, Bossio, D.A. and Verchot,
L.V. 2008. Climate change mitigation: A spatial
analysis of global land suitability for clean develo-
pment mechanism afforestation and reforestation.
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 126:
67-80.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
alay
a] a
t 11:
21 1
9 M
ay 2
015
View publication statsView publication stats