 |
| Titel |
Terminology as a key uncertainty in net land use and land cover change carbon flux estimates |
| VerfasserIn |
J. Pongratz, C. H. Reick, R. A. Houghton, J. I. House |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
2190-4979
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Earth System Dynamics ; 5, no. 1 ; Nr. 5, no. 1 (2014-03-27), S.177-195 |
| Datensatznummer |
250115300
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/esd-5-177-2014.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| Reasons for the large uncertainty in land use and land cover change (LULCC)
emissions go beyond recognized issues related to the available data on land
cover change and the fact that model simulations rely on a simplified and
incomplete description of the complexity of biological and LULCC processes.
The large range across published LULCC emission estimates is also
fundamentally driven by the fact that the net LULCC flux is defined and
calculated in different ways across models. We introduce a conceptual
framework that allows us to compare the different types of models and
simulation setups used to derive land use fluxes. We find that published
studies are based on at least nine different definitions of the net LULCC flux.
Many multi-model syntheses lack a clear agreement on definition. Our
analysis reveals three key processes that are accounted for in different
ways: the land use feedback, the loss of additional sink capacity, and
legacy (regrowth and decomposition) fluxes. We show that these
terminological differences, alone, explain differences between published net
LULCC flux estimates that are of the same order as the published estimates
themselves. This has consequences for quantifications of the residual
terrestrial sink: the spread in estimates caused by terminological
differences is conveyed to those of the residual sink. Furthermore, the
application of inconsistent definitions of net LULCC flux and residual sink
has led to double-counting of fluxes in the past. While the decision to use
a specific definition of the net LULCC flux will depend on the scientific
application and potential political considerations, our analysis shows that
the uncertainty of the net LULCC flux can be substantially reduced when the
existing terminological confusion is resolved. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|