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: yson@korea.ac.kr

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