Forests, Agriculture, and Climate:
Economics and Policy Issues
Figures and Tables
By Jonathan M. Harris
and Maliheh Birjandi Feriz
Copyright © 2011 Jonathan M. Harris
Figure 1. Forestry and Agriculture as a Percent of
Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Fossil fuel supply
5%
Waste
3%
Building
8%
Power Supply
21%
Power Supply
Industry
Forestry
Transport
13%
Agriculture
Transport
Industry
19%
Agriculture
14%
Building
Fossil fuel supply
Waste
Forestry
17%
Source: Figure adapted from UN Framework Convention on Climate Change , UNFCCC 2007
Figure 2. Sources and Flows of Greenhouse Gases
Figure source: World Resource Institute (WRI), can be accessed at http://cait.wri.org/figures.php?page=/World-FlowChart
Figure 3. Designated Functions of Forests, 2010
Unknown
16%
Other
7%
Production
29%
Production
Protection of soil and water
Conservation of biodiversity
Social services
Multiple use
Other
Multiple use
24%
Unknown
Conservation of
biodiversity
12%
Protection of soil
and water
8%
Social services
4%
Source: Global Forest Resources Assessment, by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO 2010
Figure 4. Forests as Carbon Stocks and Carbon Fluxes
Source: CIFOR, World Agroforestry Centre and USAID 2009 Forest and climate change toolbox [PowerPoint presentation].
Available fromhttp://www.cifor.cgiar.org/fctoolbox/.
Figure 5a. Annual Net Flux of Carbon to the
Atmosphere from Land Use Change,
South America, Africa, and Asia: 1850-2005
1000.0
800.0
Flux (Tg C/Year)
600.0
S+C America
400.0
Trop.Africa
S+SE Asia
200.0
1850
1856
1862
1868
1874
1880
1886
1892
1898
1904
1910
1916
1922
1928
1934
1940
1946
1952
1958
1964
1970
1976
1982
1988
1994
2000
0.0
-200.0
Year
Source: Houghton, R. A. 2008. “Carbon flux to the atmosphere from land-use changes: 1850-2005”. Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Data are accessible at http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html
Figure 5b. Annual Net Flux of Carbon to the
Atmosphere from Land Use Change,
Europe, China, Former USSR, and USA: 1850-2005
1000.0
800.0
Flux (Tg C/Year)
600.0
Europe
400.0
China
Frmr USSR
USA
200.0
1850
1856
1862
1868
1874
1880
1886
1892
1898
1904
1910
1916
1922
1928
1934
1940
1946
1952
1958
1964
1970
1976
1982
1988
1994
2000
0.0
-200.0
Year
Houghton, R. A. 2008. “Carbon flux to the atmosphere from land-use changes: 1850-2005”. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Data
are accessible at http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html
Social and Ecological Functions of Forests
Tropical
forests,
Cambodia
Unsustainable timber harvest
Traditional forest use
Mangrove
forests,
Thailand
Shrimp farming
Intact ecosystem
Tropical
forests,
Cameroon
Farming
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Sustainable
forestry
3000
3500
4000
Value in dollars per hectare
Source: Costanza, R., et. Al., 1997, “The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital” Nature 387.
Figure 6. Top Countries with the Largest Forest Area
Source: Global Forest Resources Assessment, by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO 2010
Figure 7. The World's Forest Coverage
Source: Global Forest Resources Assessment, by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO 2010
Figure 8. Annual Change in Forest Area by Region,
1990-2010
Source: Global Forest Resources Assessment, by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO 2010
Figure 9. Annual Change in Forest Area by Country,
2005- 2010
Source: Global Forest Resources Assessment, by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO 2010
Figure 10. Causes of Forest Decline
Causes of Forest Decline
Direct
Natural Causes
• Hurricanes
• Natural fires
• Pests
• Flood
Resulting from human activity
• Agricultural expansion
• Cattle ranching
• Logging
• Mining and oil extraction
• Construction of dams
• Roads …
Agents
• Slash and burn farmers
• Agribusiness
• Cattle ranchers
• Miners
• Oil corporations
• Loggers
• Non timber commercial corporations
Underlying
Market Failure
• Unpriced forest goods and services
• Monopolies and Monopsonistic forces
Mistaken Policy Interventions
• Wrong incentives
• Regulatory mechanisms
• Government investment
Governance Weaknesses
• Concentration of land ownership
• Weak or non-existing land ownership
and land tenure arrangements
• Illegal activities and corruption
Broader Socio-economic and political
causes
• Population growth and density
• Economic growth
• Distribution of economic and political
power
• Excessive consumption
• Toxification
• Global warming
• War…
Source: Contreras- Hermosilla, A. 2000. The underlying causes of forest
decline, Citeseer
Figure 11. Regional Breakdown of Drivers of
Deforestation
Source: Project Catalyst 2009 Towards the inclusion of forest-based mitigation in a global climate agreement (Working Draft),
accessible at: http://www.projectcatalyst.info/Publications/Working%20Group%20papers/Towards%20the%20inclusion%20of%20forestbased%20mitigation%20in%20a%20global%20climate%20agreement%2014%20May%2009..pdf
Graph Source: Rhett A. Butler / mongabay.com, http://www.mongabay.com/
Figure 12. Annual REDD Economic Mitigation
Potential, 2030
Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007, Accessible at
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch9s9-4-4.html
Table 1: Potential for Carbon Emissions Reduction in
Forested Lands
Fraction of total
(technical) potential in
Economic potential in 2040
(MtCO2/yr) low
Economic potential in 2040
(MtCO2/yr) high
cost class <20 US$/tCO2
North America
400
820
0.2
Europe
90
180
0.2
Russian Federation
150
300
0.3
Africa
300
875
0.6
OECD Pacific
85
255
0.35
Caribbean, Central and
South America
500
1750
0.6
Non Annex I East Asia
150
400
0.3
Non Annex I South Asia
300
875
0.6
1,975
5,455
Total
Source: Metz et al. 2007a, available at http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch9s9-4-4.html#table-9-6
Current carbon stocks for the Pan-Amazon and Brazilian
Amazon (left bar); estimates of cumulative emission by 2050
under BAU (business-as-usual) and governance scenarios.
Sources: Sathaye et al. 2006, Soares-Filho et al. 2006, 520-523and IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007, accessible at
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch9s9-4-3-1.html
Figure 13. REDD supply curve
Price
[$/tCO2]
Quantity
[MMtCO2/Year]
Source: Adapted from Estimating the Costs of Reducing Forest Emissions by Wertz-Kanounnikoff , 2008
Figure 14. Supply curves from global models
100
90
90
80
80
70
70
60
60
Carbon Price [$ /tCO2]
Carbon Price [$ /tCO2]
100
50
40
30
20
10
50
40
30
20
10
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1000
3000
4000
5000
Emission reduction from AD [Mt CO2/yr]
Emission reduction from AD [Mt CO2/yr]
Supply curves in 2010
REDD cost: $20/tCO2 can abate on average 3000
Mt CO2/Yr
2000
Supply curves in 2030
REDD becomes more expensive: $20/tCO2 can
abate on average 2200 Mt CO2/Yr
Source: Adapted from Kindermann et al. 2008 and Wertz- Kanounnikoff 2008
Figure 15. Illustration of Baseline Credit System
Forest
Emissions
Historical level carried forward
Baseline
Credits awarded on the basis of
difference between baseline and
actual
Actual
Time
Source: Adapted from Eliasch Review, 2008
Price
Price
Price
Figure 16. Market Phenomenon Causing Leakage
P1
P0
Quantity of timber
Internal response
Withdrawal
(a) Country A supply:
Reduces deforestation
and commodity supply
Quantity of timber
External response
Quantity of timbe
Net supply response
Withdrawal
(b) Country B supply:
Increases deforestation
and commodity supply
(c) Global market:
Net effect of country A
and B responses
Murray, B. C. 2008. Leakage from an avoided deforestation compensation policy: Concepts, empirical evidence, and corrective policy
options. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University, Durham, NC
Gain-loss approach vs. Stock-difference approach
2. Gain- loss approach
C Uptake via
growth
1. Stock- difference approach
Carbon stock in
year 1
Carbon stock in
year 2
Disturbance
Source: Adapted from Wertz-Kanounnikoff et al. 2008
Land use type
Harvest
Figure 17. Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions from
Agriculture
Source: World Resource Institute (WRI), accessed 2011
Figure 18. Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions by
Region Projected to 2020: Developed Nations
GHG emissions in Agriculture (Mt CO2eq./yr)
2000
OECD NA
W Eur
1000
FSU
C&U Eur
OECD Pac
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
Source: Smith et al. 2007, 6-28.
Note: ME&NA: Middle East and North Africa; SS Africa: Sub-Saharan Africa; S. Asia: developing countries of South Asia; LA&C:
Latin America and The Caribbean; E Asia: developing countries of East Asia; OECD Pac: OECD countries of the Pacific Region; C&E
Eur: Central and Eastern Europe; FSU: Former Soviet Union; W Eur: Western Europe; OECD NA, OECD countries of North America
Figure 18. Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions by
Region, Projected to 2020: Developing Nations
GHG emissions in Agriculture (Mt CO2eq./yr)
6000
5000
4000
ME&NA
SSAfrica
3000
S Asia
LA&C
E Asia
2000
1000
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
Source: Smith et al. 2007, 6-28.
Note: ME&NA: Middle East and North Africa; SS Africa: Sub-Saharan Africa; S. Asia: developing countries of South Asia; LA&C:
Latin America and The Caribbean; E Asia: developing countries of East Asia; OECD Pac: OECD countries of the Pacific Region; C&E
Eur: Central and Eastern Europe; FSU: Former Soviet Union; W Eur: Western Europe; OECD NA, OECD countries of North America
Figure 19. Global GHG Mitigation Potential from
Agriculture
1600
GHG Emission Potential- Mt CO2-eq/yr
1400
1200
1000
800
600
N2O
CH4
400
CO2
200
0
-200
Source: Adapted from Metz et al. 2007a and Smith et al. 2008, available at
http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/ar4-wg3/jpg/fig-8-4.jpg
Figure 20: Global Mitigation Potential from
Agriculture by CO2 price
1400
Mitigation Potential (Mt CO2-eq. yr−1)
1200
1000
800
Up to 20 US$/tCO2-eq
600
Up to 50 US$/tCO2-eq
Up to 100 US$/tCO2-eq
400
200
0
Restore
Cropland Grazing land Restore
Rice
cultivated management management degraded management
organic soil
land
Livestock
Set-aside,
Manure
LUC &
management
agroforestry
Source: Adapted from (Metz et al. 2007a) and (Smith et al. 2008), available at
http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/ar4-wg3/jpg/fig-8-9.jpg
Figure 21: Global Biofuel Production
Source: World Bank, World Development Report 2008, Biofuels: the promise and the risks, available at
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2008/Resources/2795087-1191440805557/42491011191956789635/Brief_BiofuelPrmsRisk_web.pdf
Figure 22: Renewable Energy and Traditional Biomass
Source: WorldWatch Institute, 2007 and UNEP, Towards sustainable production and use of resources: Assessing biofuels, 2009
Figure 23. Trends in Biofuel Production, 1975-2007
1200
1000
Peta Joules
800
600
Ethanol
Biodiesel Equiv.
400
200
0
Source: Adapted from UNEP, Towards sustainable production and use of resources: Assessing Biofuels, 2009; and SCOPE
International Biofuels Project 2009, available at http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/howarth/SCOPEBiofuels_home.html
Figure 24. Greenhouse Gas Savings of Biofuels
Compared to Fossil Fuels
Source: UNEP, Towards sustainable production and use of resources: Assessing biofuels ,2009