Journal of Forest and Environmental Science

  • 제34권5호
  • /
  • Pages.405-411
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 2288-9744(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-9752(eISSN)
강원대학교 산림과학연구소 (Institute of Forest Science, kangwon National University)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Barriers to Realization of Forestry Mitigation Potential in India

  • Murthy, Indu K (Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science) ;
  • Prasad KV, Devi (Department of Ecology and Environment, Pondicherry University)
  • 투고 : 2018.02.15
  • 심사 : 2018.10.11
  • 발행 : 2018.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Implementation of mitigation options on land is important for realisation of the goals of the Paris Agreement to stabilize temperature at $2^{\circ}C$. In India, the Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) targets include a forestry goal of creation of carbon sinks of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes by 2030. There are however, multiple barriers to implementation of forestry mitigation options in India. They include environmental, social, financial, technological and institutional barriers. The barriers are varied not just across land categories but also for a land category depending on its regional location and distribution. In addition to these barriers is the impeding climate change that places at risk realisation of the mitigation potential as rising temperatures, drought, and fires associated with projected climate change may lead to forests becoming a weaker sink or a net carbon source before the end of the century.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Betts RA, Cox PM, Collins M, Harris PP, Huntingford C, Jones CD. 2004. The role of ecosystem-atmosphere interactions in simulated Amazonian precipitation decrease and forest dieback under global climate warming. Theor Appl Climatol 78: 157-175.
  2. Clark JS, Iverson L, Woodall CW, Allen CD, Bell DM, Bragg DC, D'Amato AW, Davis FW, Hersh MH, Ibanez I, Jackson ST, Matthews S, Pederson N, Peters M, Schwartz MW, Waring KM, Zimmermann NE. 2016. The impacts of increasing drought on forest dynamics, structure, and biodiversity in the United States. Glob Change Biol 22: 2329-2352. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13160
  3. de Boer IJM, Cederberg C, Eady S, Gollnow S, Kristensen T, Macleod M, Meul M, Nemecek T, Phong LT, Thoma G, van der Werf HMG, Williams AG, Zonderland-Thomassen MA. 2011. Greenhouse gas mitigation in animal production: towards an integrated life cycle sustainability assessment. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 3: 423-431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2011.08.007
  4. Forneri C, Blaser J, Jotzo F, Robledo C. 2006. Keeping the forest for the climate's sake: avoiding deforestation in developing countries under the UNFCCC. Clim Policy 6: 275-294. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2006.0618
  5. Government of India. 2015. India's intended nationally determined contribution: working towards climate justice. http://www4.unfccc.int/submissions/INDC/Published Documents/India/1/INDIAINDCTOUNFCCC.pdf. Accessed 14 Feb 2018.
  6. Gurney KR, Eckels WJ. 2011. Regional trends in terrestrial carbon exchange and their seasonal signatures. Tellus B Chem Phys Meteorol 63: 328-339. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2011.00534.x
  7. Halvorson JJ, Gonzalez JM, Hagerman AE. 2011. Repeated applications of tannins and related phenolic compounds are retained by soil and affect cation exchange capacity. Soil Biol Biochem 43: 1139-1147.
  8. Herold M, Johns T. 2007. Linking requirements with capabilities for deforestation monitoring in the context of the UNFCCCREDD process. Environ Res Lett 2: 045025.
  9. Huettner M. 2012. Risks and opportunities of REDD+ implementation for environmental integrity and socio-economic compatibility. Environ Sci Policy 15: 4-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2011.10.002
  10. IPCC. 2014a. Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL, eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, pp 1-32.
  11. IPCC. 2014b. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.
  12. IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.
  13. Korner C. 2004. Through enhanced tree dynamics carbon dioxide enrichment may cause tropical forests to lose carbon. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 359: 493-498.
  14. Lederer M. 2011. From CDM to REDD+: What do we know for setting up effective and legitimate carbon governance? Ecol Econ 70: 1900-1907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.02.003
  15. Madlener R, Robledo C, Muys B, Freja JTB. 2006. A Sustainability Framework for Enhancing the Long-Term Success of LULUCF Projects. Climatic Change 75: 241-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-005-9023-0
  16. Murdiyarso D, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin WD, Verchot L. 2012. Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 4: 678-685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.10.014
  17. Nonhebel S. 2005. Renewable energy and food supply: will there be enough land? Renew Sustain Energy Rev 9: 191-201.
  18. Palmer C. 2011. Property rights and liability for deforestation under REDD+: Implications for 'permanence' in policy design. Ecol Econ 70: 571-576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.10.011
  19. Rosendal GK, Andresen S. 2011. Institutional design for improved forest governance through REDD: Lessons from the global environment facility. Ecol Econ 70: 1908-1915.
  20. Schroter D, Cramer W, Leemans R, Prentice IC, Araujo MB, Arnell NW, Bondeau A, Bugmann H, Carter TR, Gracia CA, de la Vega-Leinert AC, Erhard M, Ewert F, Glendining M, House JI, Kankaanpaa S, Klein RJT, Lavorel S, Lindner M, Metzger MJ, Meyer J, Mitchell TD, Reginster I, Rounsevell M, Sabate S, Sitch S, Smith B, Smith J, Smith P, Sykes MT, Thonicke K, Thuiller W, Tuck G, Zaehle S, Zierl B. 2005. Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe. Science 310: 1333-1337. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1115233
  21. Smith P, Wollenberg E. 2012. Achieving mitigation through synergies with adaptation. In: Climate Change Mitigation and Agriculture (Wollenberg E, Nihart A, Tapio-Bistrom ML, Grieg‐Gran M, eds). Earthscan, London, pp 50-57.
  22. Streck C. 2012. Financing REDD+: matching needs and ends. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 4: 628-637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.10.001
  23. Thompson MC, Baruah M, Carr ER. 2011. Seeing REDD+ as a project of environmental governance. Environ Sci Policy 14: 100-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2010.11.006
  24. Tubiello FN, Rahman A, Mann W, Schmidhuber J, Koleva M, Muller A. 2009. Carbon financial mechanisms for agriculture and rural development: challenges and opportunities along the Bali roadmap. Clim Chang 97: 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-009-9611-5
  25. UNDP International Poverty Centre. 2006. What is poverty? Who asks? Who answers? International Poverty Centre, Brasilia.
  26. UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change). 2015. Adoption of the Paris Agreement. FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1.