Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse




Journal Article

Modelling carbon stock and carbon sequestration ecosystem services for policy design: a comprehensive approach using a dynamic vegetation model


Quijas,  S.
External Organizations;

Boit,  A.
External Organizations;


Thonicke,  Kirsten
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

Murray-Tortarolo,  G.
External Organizations;

Mwampamba,  T.
External Organizations;

Skutsch,  M.
External Organizations;

Simoes,  M.
External Organizations;

Ascarrunz,  N.
External Organizations;

Pena-Claros,  M.
External Organizations;

Jones,  L.
External Organizations;

Arets,  E.
External Organizations;

Jaramillo,  V. J.
External Organizations;

Lazos,  E.
External Organizations;

Toledo,  M.
External Organizations;

Martorano,  L. G.
External Organizations;

Ferraz,  R.
External Organizations;

Balvanera,  P.
External Organizations;

External Ressource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (public)

(Publisher version), 5MB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available

Quijas, S., Boit, A., Thonicke, K., Murray-Tortarolo, G., Mwampamba, T., Skutsch, M., Simoes, M., Ascarrunz, N., Pena-Claros, M., Jones, L., Arets, E., Jaramillo, V. J., Lazos, E., Toledo, M., Martorano, L. G., Ferraz, R., Balvanera, P. (2018): Modelling carbon stock and carbon sequestration ecosystem services for policy design: a comprehensive approach using a dynamic vegetation model. - Ecosystems and People, 15, 1, 42-60.

Cite as: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_22758
Ecosystem service (ES) models can only inform policy design adequately if they incorporate ecological processes. We used the Lund-Potsdam-Jena managed Land (LPJmL) model, to address following questions for Mexico, Bolivia and Brazilian Amazon: (i) How different are C stocks and C sequestration quantifications under standard (when soil and litter C and heterotrophic respiration are not considered) and comprehensive (including all C stock and heterotrophic respiration) approach? and (ii) How does the valuation of C stock and C sequestration differ in national payments for ES and global C funds or markets when comparing both approach? We found that up to 65% of C stocks have not been taken into account by neglecting to include C stored in soil and litter, resulting in gross underpayments (up to 500 times lower). Since emissions from heterotrophic respiration of organic material offset a large proportion of C gained through growth of living matter, we found that markets and decision-makers are inadvertently overestimating up to 100 times C sequestrated. New approaches for modelling C services relevant ecological process-based can help accounting for C in soil, litter and heterotrophic respiration and become important for the operationalization of agreements on climate change mitigation following the COP21 in 2015.