Land and biodiversity policies/Forestry sector: Difference between revisions

From IMAGE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(added references to afforestation policy section)
 
(28 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ZZ_PolicyResponsePartTemplate
{{PolicyResponsePartTemplate
|PageLabel=Targeting agricultural demand
|PageLabel=Forestry sector
|Sequence=3
|Sequence=4
|Description=<h2>Interventions targeting the agricultural production system</h2>
|Reference=FAO, 2013a; IEA, 2012; Putz et al., 2012;
The production system describes the way animals are raised and crops are cultivated; for example, which and how much input is used to produce one unit of product, and the amount of wood harvested per square kilometre of forest. Those characteristics then define the environmental impacts. Several interventions may increase the efficiency of production systems, and should thus lead to a lower use of input or to a reduction in environmental impacts.
{{DisplayFigureLeftOptimalTemplate|Flowchart LBP II}}<br clear="all"/>
}}
}}
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
<div class="page_standard">
|Header=Improving livestock systems
<h2>Interventions targeting the forestry sector</h2>
|Description=Interventions that improve livestock systems include the use of other breeds that have higher feed conversion rates, which may require another ratio of feed composites, or produce less manure. Changes in the feed conversion or composition of feed, for example, the ratio between grazing and feed crop feeding, influence the demand for grazing areas and crop areas, and therefore changing these systems will result in other environmental impacts and other patterns of agricultural land use. The amounts and quality of manure affect nitrogen emission levels and thus also both nutrient balances and climate-change impacts. In addition, biodiversity will be affected via nitrogen emissions. As a positive side effect, different production systems can have positive impacts on animal welfare, too. However, in most cases, higher animal welfare standards involve more input per unit of production ([[PBL, 2011]]). The way manure is stored and applied to the land also differs across livestock systems, and influences crop yields and emission levels. A secondary impact of increasing feed efficiencies could be that of cost reductions, leading to a similar feedback effect as described for changes in demand.
{{DisplayFigureLeftOptimalTemplate|Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (C)}}
Reducing the rate of agricultural expansion can lead to fewer wood products from forest clearance / deforestation, and thus to an increase in the forest area to meet the wood demand ([[PBL, 2010]]); see also Component [[Forest management]]. Options for alternative forest management have been evaluated in [[Rethinking Biodiversity Strategies (2010) project|Rethinking Global Biodiversity Strategies]] ([[PBL, 2010]]).
</div>


For the purpose of this section, we distinguish two interventions within the cropping system:  ‘improved cropping systems or varieties’ and ‘crop and grass yields, cropping intensity’. Those two interventions are closely linked. Management in agriculture is a subtle interplay between the cultivar chosen, soil management, fertilizer and other input, and the timing and choice for each cultivation step. Here, the first interventions particularly focus on the reduction in – often negative – external effects other than the use of land. The second intervention targets concern the use of as few hectares as possible (address the amount of product per hectare).
 
|PISet=Animal waste storage; Crop and livestock production systems; Excretion; Extensification; Feed conversion (policy intervention); Feed ration; Grazing intensity; Integrated manure management; Intensification; Productivity;  
'''Afforestation for climate change mitigation'''
 
Planting forest on former agricultural land results in the storage of carbon in plant biomass. These negative emissions can be crucial to achieve stringent climate targets. In IMAGE, forest can be expanded by reducing agricultural land. Forest can be grown through natural regeneration or through active planting and management of trees (similar to wood plantations) to enhance forest growth ([[Braakhekke et al., 2019]]). The extent of afforestation can be applied cost-optimally by making afforestation dependent on the carbon price as determined in the [[climate policy]] model ([[Doelman et al., 2019]]). In this way, afforestation is compared to other climate change mitigation options in the energy system and in agriculture. Alternatively, afforestation can be prescribed based on government policies or international ambitions.
{{#default_form:PolicyResponsePartForm}}
{{PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Shifts in consumption
|Description=Interventions targeting shifts in consumption of forest products have a direct effect on timber demand and, thus also affect the need for forestry areas in production (PBL, 2010). The increase in demand could concern industrial roundwood or paper, but also wood as traditional bioenergy. As a first-order effect, an intervention to change demand for industrial products reduces all upstream effects of production proportionally. Data on wood for traditional biomass are not available, and estimates vary greatly partly due to whether the focus is on use or production. With estimates ranging from 1300 Mt/y ([[FAO, 2013a]]) to 2400 Mt/y ([[IEA, 2012]]), a considerable proportion of the total wood use can be attributed to fuelwood. A decrease in wood use for traditional biomass has fewer direct impacts on the IMAGE biodiversity results than decreases in other uses, because only part of the production is harvested in industrial forestry activities (see Component [[Forest management]]). Large quantities of fuelwood are collected or produced in areas smaller than included in the level of detail of the IMAGE framework, such as orchards and road-sides. This implies that interventions related to this kind of use do not completely show up in biodiversity impacts.
|PISet=Increase access to water;
}}
}}
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
{{PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Improving cropping systems or varieties
|Header=Bio-energy demand
|Description=Improved cropping systems or varieties could increase the efficiency of the use of inputs, including water and nutrients. Combined with an application of those inputs that are well tuned to the requirements of the crops, this would lead to fewer nitrogen emissions or less water use per tonne of crop and, ultimately, would reduce the impacts on biodiversity and climate. Such improved management could also lead to higher yields (see below). Improved systems could imply a shift in the ratio between the factors used, such as labour, capital, land, fertilizer, water and other inputs. Therefore, the cost price of agricultural products may change, resulting in other market prices and a changed consumption.
|Description=Bioenergy demand will affect demand for forestry products for the energy sector, with effects similar to those expected under the shifts in consumption. The impact on biodiversity will depend on the sustainability criteria, management practices, and regions in which timber is harvested.
|PISet=Crop and livestock production systems;  
|PISet=‎Implementation of sustainability criteria in bio-energy production;
}}
}}
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
{{PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Crop and grass yields
|Header=Improve forest management
|Description=Yield increase can be induced by other crop varieties; for example, by increasing the potential yield or better management (thus, closing the yield gap). One should keep in mind that other – more suitable – crop varieties often also need other types of management in order to give higher yields.
|Description=Improving forest management will affect the area required to meet timber demand and the impact of timber harvest on biodiversity loss. A system of Reduced Impact Logging ({{abbrTemplate|RIL}}), which relates to improvements that can be implemented in selective logging management, could reduce harvest damage, stimulate regrowth and maintain biodiversity ([[Putz et al., 2012]]). In addition, dedicated plantations could be established and would reduce the area of natural forest needed for timber harvest, since wood production is higher in plantation areas. However, biodiversity values of those areas are relatively low.
|PISet=Crop and livestock production systems; Improved irrigation efficiency; Improved rainwater management; Increasing storage capacity; Integrated manure management;  
|PISet=More sustainable forest management; Expanding Reduced Impact Logging; Increase forest plantations
}}
}}
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
{{PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Cropping intensity
|Description=Cropping intensity can be increased by multiple cropping (more harvests per year), which depends on climatic circumstances, or by decreasing the area that is left fallow. Both interventions would decrease the required production area for all crops, but it could also, locally, increase the environmental impacts per hectare of crops. Where lower area requirements decrease biodiversity and climate impacts, the environmental impacts per hectare could increase them again. Thus, to decrease biodiversity loss, yield increases should go hand in hand with system changes, which may result in fewer negative external impacts, as described for the intervention above. Increased cropping intensity increases the risk of soil degradation if cropping rotations or soil management are not adapted, as well.
|PISet=Crop and livestock production systems;
}}
}}
[[Page has default form::ZZ_PolicyResponsePartForm| ]]
{{ContentPartsTemplate}}

Latest revision as of 15:34, 16 June 2021

link to framework components overview

Parts of Land and biodiversity policies/Forestry sector

  1. Introduction page
  2. Agricultural demand
  3. Agricultural production system
  4. Forestry sector
  5. Land-use regulation
  6. Policy issues
  7. Data, uncertainties and limitations
  8. Overview of references
Relevant overviews
References

Interventions targeting the forestry sector


Policy interventions in the forestry system
Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (C). Policy interventions targeting the forestry sector.

Reducing the rate of agricultural expansion can lead to fewer wood products from forest clearance / deforestation, and thus to an increase in the forest area to meet the wood demand (PBL, 2010); see also Component Forest management. Options for alternative forest management have been evaluated in Rethinking Global Biodiversity Strategies (PBL, 2010).


Afforestation for climate change mitigation

Planting forest on former agricultural land results in the storage of carbon in plant biomass. These negative emissions can be crucial to achieve stringent climate targets. In IMAGE, forest can be expanded by reducing agricultural land. Forest can be grown through natural regeneration or through active planting and management of trees (similar to wood plantations) to enhance forest growth (Braakhekke et al., 2019). The extent of afforestation can be applied cost-optimally by making afforestation dependent on the carbon price as determined in the climate policy model (Doelman et al., 2019). In this way, afforestation is compared to other climate change mitigation options in the energy system and in agriculture. Alternatively, afforestation can be prescribed based on government policies or international ambitions.


Shifts in consumption

Interventions targeting shifts in consumption of forest products have a direct effect on timber demand and, thus also affect the need for forestry areas in production (PBL, 2010). The increase in demand could concern industrial roundwood or paper, but also wood as traditional bioenergy. As a first-order effect, an intervention to change demand for industrial products reduces all upstream effects of production proportionally. Data on wood for traditional biomass are not available, and estimates vary greatly partly due to whether the focus is on use or production. With estimates ranging from 1300 Mt/y (FAO, 2013a) to 2400 Mt/y (IEA, 2012), a considerable proportion of the total wood use can be attributed to fuelwood. A decrease in wood use for traditional biomass has fewer direct impacts on the IMAGE biodiversity results than decreases in other uses, because only part of the production is harvested in industrial forestry activities (see Component Forest management). Large quantities of fuelwood are collected or produced in areas smaller than included in the level of detail of the IMAGE framework, such as orchards and road-sides. This implies that interventions related to this kind of use do not completely show up in biodiversity impacts.

Table: Policy interventions Shifts in consumption
Policy interventionDescriptionImplemented in/affected component
Increase access to water Increase access to safe drinking water and improved sanitation by lowering prices and investing in infrastructure

(*) Implementing component.


Bio-energy demand

Bioenergy demand will affect demand for forestry products for the energy sector, with effects similar to those expected under the shifts in consumption. The impact on biodiversity will depend on the sustainability criteria, management practices, and regions in which timber is harvested.

Table: Policy interventions Bio-energy demand
Policy interventionDescriptionImplemented in/affected component
‎Implementation of sustainability criteria in bio-energy production Sustainability criteria that could become binding for dedicated bio-energy production, such as the restrictive use of water-scarce or degraded areas.

(*) Implementing component.


Improve forest management

Improving forest management will affect the area required to meet timber demand and the impact of timber harvest on biodiversity loss. A system of Reduced Impact Logging (RIL), which relates to improvements that can be implemented in selective logging management, could reduce harvest damage, stimulate regrowth and maintain biodiversity (Putz et al., 2012). In addition, dedicated plantations could be established and would reduce the area of natural forest needed for timber harvest, since wood production is higher in plantation areas. However, biodiversity values of those areas are relatively low.

Table: Policy interventions Improve forest management
Policy interventionDescriptionImplemented in/affected component
More sustainable forest management Sustainable forest management aims for maintaining long-term harvest potential and good ecological status of forests (e.g. the nutrient balance and biodiversity). This can be implemented by (i) enlarging the return period when a forest can be harvested again; (ii) only using certain fractions of the harvested biomass and leave the remaining part in the forests.
Expanding Reduced Impact Logging Increasing the share of produced wood yielded with Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) practices instead of conventional logging practices.
Increase forest plantations Increase the use of wood from highly productive wood plantations instead of wood from (semi-) natural forests.

(*) Implementing component.




  1. Introduction page
  2. Agricultural demand
  3. Agricultural production system
  4. Forestry sector
  5. Land-use regulation
  6. Policy issues
  7. Data, uncertainties and limitations
  8. Overview of references
Retrieved from "https://models.pbl.nl/index.php?title=Land_and_biodiversity_policies/Forestry_sector&oldid=36579"