When people debate climate change they often use scientific and technical language. The terms and acronyms we hear can cloud the issues if we don't know what they mean. The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) has prepared this simple guide to help journalists, policy makers, NGOs and interested global citizens better understand the importance of forests in combating climate change. It also highlights issues that CIFOR's research has identified as crucial if the global climate agenda is to progress in a way that is effective, efficient and equitable.
WHY MUST WE PROTECT FORESTS IF WE WANT TO CURTAIL CLIMATE CHANGE?
Scientists estimate that deforestation and forest degradation account for around 20 percent of the annual greenhouse gas emissions that fuel climate change. This is more than the emissions from the entire global transport sector.
HOW CAN EMISSIONS FROM FORESTS ADD UP TO MORE THAN ALL THE EMISSIONS FROM CARS, TRUCKS, AIRPLANES, AND SHIPS COMBINED?
When forests are damaged or cleared the burned or decaying wood releases the carbon stored in trees as carbon dioxide, increasing levels of this heat-trapping, greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. In addition, some forests protect large quantities of carbon stored below ground. For example, when forests in peatland are burned or drained, the carbon emissions are not limited to the above-ground vegetation; the organic matter below ground also begins to release carbon. Peatland forests have more carbon below the ground than above it. This carbon leaks out of the soil and into the atmosphere after the forest is cut. When the trees have gone, the Earth loses a valuable resource that was continuously absorbing carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere. Recent studies have suggested that just under five billion of the 32 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emitted annually through human activity are absorbed by forests. So losing a stand of trees is a double loss: We lose an ecosystem that absorbs greenhouse gases and we lose the carbon storage the trees provide.
SO WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN? FENCE OFF ALL FORESTS?
No. Forests are integral to the lives of the people who live in and around them and to society as a whole. According to the World Bank, over one billion people rely heavily on forests for their livelihoods. Hundreds of millions rely on medicines derived from plants harvested in forests. A large portion of the dietary protein consumed by rural communities comes from hunting and fishing on forested land. Forests are also important from a commercial perspective. In 2003, the international trade in sawn wood, pulp, paper and boards was worth almost US$150 billion - over 2 percent of world trade.
We can expect the conversion of forest to agricultural land to continue. But it must be done in a measured, strategic and sustainable way. Uncontrolled logging, clearing and burning of tropical forests should be stopped. We also need to stop the large-scale disruption of carbon-rich peatland, which releases disproportionately large amounts of greenhouse gases when cleared and drained.
WILL ANYBODY LOSE OUT IF WE TRY TO CONTROL FOREST DESTRUCTION?
Forests are usually cleared because there is money to be made from doing so. Converting forest to cash crops like oil palm, for instance, generates financial profits. So some short-term economic sacrifices will have to be made. But in the interests of equity poor, forest-dependent communities should not be the ones to suffer. Over the long term, everyone will benefit from more sustainable management of forests. If the greenhouse gases stored in forests are released, it will take generations to recapture them. So if large areas of forest continue to be lost, then we could find ourselves in a nightmare scenario.
WHAT IS THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO?
The most common one is called a positive feedback loop; a self-perpetuating and accelerating cycle of cause and effect. If enough forests are destroyed, more carbon in the atmosphere both from forest destruction and other human activities could lead to the destruction of what's left. More carbon emissions could lead to a warmer climate, which in turn could lead to more frequent droughts and forest fires, resulting in the release of even more carbon dioxide, which could lead to an even warmer climate. Forest exposed to repeated burning cannot recover, and can no longer store or absorb carbon. If we don't act soon, we could undermine the potential role forests can play in mitigating emissions.
WHAT SHOULD BE DONE NOW?
There is a lot of positive work being done to address climate change through forest conservation. CIFOR's research focuses on two aspects: adaptation and mitigation.
WHAT IS ADAPTATION?
As the climate changes, forests and people will have to cope with gradual changes in average temperatures and precipitation rates. They will also face more frequent and intense weather events such as droughts or floods. Adaptation strategies can help people manage the effects of climate change and protect their livelihoods. CIFOR's research promotes the inclusion of effective climate change adaptation strategies into forest management plans, and seeks to ensure that forests are sufficiently incorporated into strategies for the adaptation of society as a whole.
WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF ADAPTATION PROJECTS?
This is a new area of forest policy research, but to date examples include:
Many sectors have a stake in adaptation policy. For example, ministries of transportation want to conserve healthy forests because thick haze from forest fires can shut down airports, and landslides can close roads. Providers of drinking water and hydropower companies are starting to consider upstream ecosystem management, including forest management. They want to reduce their vulnerability to shifting rainfall patterns and ensure the quality and quantity of their water supply.
WHAT IS MITIGATION?
Adaptation and mitigation are complementary. Adaptation deals with the consequences of climate change while mitigation deals with the causes. We need both because scientists expect the effects of previous emissions to continue for some time even if we were to stop emitting greenhouse gases immediately.
HOW CAN THE PACE OF CLIMATE CHANGE BE SLOWED OR MITIGATED?
Most mitigation efforts must come from reducing the use of fossil fuels in industrialised countries. Planting new trees to sequester carbon will also play a role. But to reduce the 20 percent of emissions related to forests, we need a new and more effective approach to conservation. One approach is called REDD, short for 'reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation'. This idea differs from previous attempts to preserve forests because it directly links financial incentives for conservation with carbon stored in forests.
HOW WOULD REDD WORK?
Credits from reduced emissions, also called 'avoided deforestation', would be quantified. That positive quantity would then become a credit that could be sold in an international carbon market. Alternatively the credit could be handed to an international fund set up to provide financial compensation to participating countries that conserve their forest. REDD schemes allow forest conservation to compete on economic terms with the drivers of deforestation. Current economic drivers favour destructive logging practices and conversion of forest to other uses, such as pasture for livestock and arable land.
