| Title |
Scenarios in tropical forest degradation: carbon stock trajectories for REDD+
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Carbon Balance and Management, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13021-017-0074-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rafael B. de Andrade, Jennifer K. Balch, Amoreena L. Parsons, Dolors Armenteras, Rosa Maria Roman-Cuesta, Janette Bulkan |
| Abstract |
Human-caused disturbance to tropical rainforests-such as logging and fire-causes substantial losses of carbon stocks. This is a critical issue to be addressed in the context of policy discussions to implement REDD+. This work reviews current scientific knowledge about the temporal dynamics of degradation-induced carbon emissions to describe common patterns of emissions from logging and fire across tropical forest regions. Using best available information, we: (i) develop short-term emissions factors (per area) for logging and fire degradation scenarios in tropical forests; and (ii) describe the temporal pattern of degradation emissions and recovery trajectory post logging and fire disturbance. Average emissions from aboveground biomass were 19.9 MgC/ha for logging and 46.0 MgC/ha for fire disturbance, with an average period of study of 3.22 and 2.15 years post-disturbance, respectively. Longer-term studies of post-logging forest recovery suggest that biomass accumulates to pre-disturbance levels within a few decades. Very few studies exist on longer-term (>10 years) effects of fire disturbance in tropical rainforests, and recovery patterns over time are unknown. This review will aid in understanding whether degradation emissions are a substantial component of country-level emissions portfolios, or whether these emissions would be offset by forest recovery and regeneration. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 17% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 199 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 15% |
| Researcher | 29 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 33 | 17% |
| Unknown | 42 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 74 | 37% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 40 | 20% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 16 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 6% |
| Unknown | 51 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,866,332
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Carbon Balance and Management
#85
of 239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,024
of 309,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Carbon Balance and Management
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 239 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.