Forest carbon accounting to leverage mitigation actions: implications for the Paris Agreement based on the analysis of countries’ decision under the Kyoto Protocol

Figures & data

Table 1. Summary of the cross-cutting analysis results among countries based on a literature review, according to the initial reports under article 7.4 of the KP, fourth national communications, and EU reports for joint fulfilment of commitments, decision 16/CMP.1 presented in the main text^a).

	Overall Circumstances under the KP			National Circumstances on FM				National Forest Circumstances in 2005					Additional measures to enhance emission reduction/removal from forest					Information of future projection
Country	KP ratified?	Quantified emission reduction commitment for the 1st CP of the KP^b)	Trend of total GHG emissions	Trend of GHG emission reduction/removals from forest	FM elected?	FM Cap (Mt-C/yr^−1) ^c)	LUCF in 1990^d)	Forest area change^e)	Glowing stock change^e)	Trend of Wood production^e)	Measures to increase woody biomass use	Measures to increase C stock of HWP	AR	D	FM	Woody Biomass	HWP	AR	D	FM
Asia and Oceania
Australia	Yes	108	↗	↗	No	0.00	E	↘	NA^f)	↗			✓	✓				✓	✓	✓
Japan	Yes	94	↗	↗	Yes	13.00	R	→	↗	↗			✓		✓			✓	✓	✓
New Zealand	Yes	100	↗	↗	No	0.20	R	→	↗	↗			✓	✓				✓	✓
North America
Canada	Yes	94	↗	F^g)	No	12.00	R	→	→	↗	✓		✓			✓
United States	No	93^h)	↗	↘	-	-	R	→	↗	↘	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓
EU Countries
Austria	Yes	87	↗	↑	No	0.63	R	↗	↗	↗	✓					✓		✓	✓
Denmark	Yes	79	↘	↗	Yes	0.05	R	↗	↗	→	✓		✓			✓		✓
Finland	Yes	100	↗	F	Yes	0.16	R	→	↗	↗	✓		✓			✓	✓	✓	✓
France	Yes	100	→	↗	Yes	0.88	R	↗	↗	↘	✓	✓				✓	✓	✓	✓
Germany	Yes	79	↘	↗	Yes	1.24	R	→	NA	↗	✓	✓	✓			✓	✓
Ireland	Yes	113	↘	↗	No	0.05	E	↗	↗	↗	✓		✓			✓		✓	✓
Italy	Yes	93.5	↗	↗	Yes	2.78^i)	R	↗	↗	↘			✓					✓	✓
Netherlands	Yes	94	→	→	No	0.01	E	↗	↗	→			✓	✓				✓	✓
Portugal	Yes	127	↗	↗	Yes	0.22	E	↗	→	↗			✓	✓	✓			✓	✓	✓
Spain	Yes	115	↑	↗	Yes	0.67	R	↗	→	→			✓	✓	✓			✓	✓	✓
Sweden	Yes	104	↘	F	Yes	0.58	R	→	→	↗	✓									✓
United Kingdom	Yes	87.5	↘	↗	Yes	0.37	E	↗	↗	↗	✓		✓					✓	✓	✓
Non-EU Countries
Iceland	Yes	110	↗	↗	No	0.00	R	↗	↗	→			✓					✓
Norway	Yes	101	↗	↑	Yes	0.40	R	→	↗	↘	✓							✓	✓	✓
Russian Federation	Yes	100	↘	↗	Yes	33.00	R	→	↗	↘			✓
Switzerland	Yes	92	→	→	Yes	0.50	R	↗	→	↗	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓

^a)Information in this table is cited mainly from the UNFCCC database ”Fourth National Communications and Reports Demonstrating Progress under the Kyoto Protocol – Annex I‘ (UNFCCC, 2005–2007) and ’Initial reports under Article 7, paragraph 4, of the Kyoto Protocol and initial review reports” (UNFCCC 2006), and other sources including, Australian Government 2003; Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency 2006; Forest Research UK, 2021; Howard and Jones, 2016; Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. New Zealand, 2009; Ministry of Finance (Ireland) 1999; Natural Resources Canada 2005.

^b)For non-EU countries, based on the Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol. EU countries targets are based on the joint fulfillment agreement within the EU (EC 2002).

^c)Based on Decision 16/CMP.1 (UNFCCC 2005).

^d)”E‘ represents emissions and ’R” represents removals.

^e)Based on FRA 2005 (FAO, 2005), FRA 2010 (FAO, 2010), and FRA 2015 (FAO, 2015).

^f)”NA‘ represents ’data not available.”

^g)”F‘ represents ’highly fluctuated.”

^h)Target for the US was indicated in Annex B of the KP but US did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol (UN 1997).

ⁱ⁾Revised by decision 8/CMP.2 (UNFCCC 2006).

Table 2. Countries’ national circumstances in relation to forests and forestry.

Countries	Forest cover ratio^a)	Planted forest ratio^b)	Growing stock per area^c)	Annual change in growing stock^d)	Wood production per area^e)	Average annual forest area disturbed^f)	FM cap per area^g)
	(%)	(%)	（m^3/ha）	（m^3/ha/yr）	（m^3/ha/yr）	(%)	(t-C/ha)
Asia and Oceania
Australia	21.3	1.3	80	0.0	0.2	4.9	0.0
Japan	68.2	41.4	171	3.2	0.9	0.1	52.3
New Zealand	31.0	20.7	434	1.8	3.0	1.2	2.4
North America
Canada	33.6	3.4	106	0.0	0.7	6.5	3.9
United States	33.1	8.0	116	0.6	1.8	4.8	-
EU countries
Austria	46.7	44.1	300	3.3	5.2	3.7	16.3
Denmark	11.8	75.7	153	0.0	3.6	0.8	10.0
Finland	73.9	26.7	96	0.8	2.9	0.0	0.7
France	28.3	13.9	158	2.3	3.3	0.0	5.7
Germany	31.7	46.4	315	4.8	5.5	2.3	11.2
Ireland	9.7	88.2	98	−0.1	4.2	0.1	7.5
Italy	33.9	6.9	145	1.7	1.0	3.4	27.9
Netherlands	10.8	100.0	178	1.7	3.3	0.0	2.7
Portuguese	41.3	25.5	93	1.0	2.9	3.2	5.8
Spain	35.9	14.8	50	0.3	1.0	0.2	3.7
Sweden	66.9	39.3	115	0.8	2.8	1.7	2.1
United Kingdom	11.8	89.9	120	1.9	3.1	0.0	13.0
Non-EU European Countries
Iceland	0.5	71.2	65	−1.2	0.0	0.3	0.0
Norway	30.7	11.6	92	1.0	1.0	1.4	4.3
Russian Federation	47.9	2.1	100	0.1	0.2	0.2	4.1
Switzerland	30.9	13.7	368	2.0	5.7	0.7	41.0

^a)FRA 2005 ”Extent of forest and other wooded land 2005” (FAO, 2005).

^b)Estimated from FRA 2015. For the UK, planted forest area in 2010 was substituted since the 2005 data was not available in FRA 2015 (FAO, 2015).

^c)FRA 2005 ”Growing stock in forest and other wooded land 2005.‘ Germany and New Zealand data were acquired from FRA 2010 as data were not available in FRA 2005. Australia was estimated from FRA 2010 ’carbon stock in living forest biomass” as Australia does not have national data on growing stock composition (FAO, 2005; FAO, 2010).

^d)FRA 2005 ”Annual change in growing stock 1990–2005.” Values for Australia, New Zealand, and Germany were complemented using the FRA 2020 country report as data was not available in FRA 2005 (FAO, 2005; FAO, 2020).

^e)Estimated based on FRA 2005 (FAO, 2005).

^f)Estimated based on the FRA 2020 country report. Area affected by insects, diseases, severe weather events, and fire in 2000–2005 were extracted. Unavailable values were complemented using different reference period (FAO, 2020).

^g)Estimated based on 16/CMP.1 and FRA 2005 (UNFCCC, 2005; FAO, 2005).

Table 3. Factor loadings and communalities based on a principal components’ analysis with promax rotation for seven data sets.

	Factor loadings			Commonality
	Factor1	Factor2	Factor3
	Productivity	Risk Controllability	Accounting advantage
Growing stock per area	1.056	−0.221	−0.161	0.554
Annual change in growing stock	0.574	0.043	0.406	0.995
Wood production per area	0.714	0.247	−0.091	0.886
Planted forest ratio	−0.092	1.000	−0.236	0.743
Average annual forest area disturbed	0.135	−0.548	−0.097	0.642
Forest cover ratio	−0.195	−0.270	0.753	0.266
FM cap per area	0.208	0.062	0.440	0.342
Cumulative Variance	0.295	0.507	0.654

Numbers in bold with underlines indicate the most significant factor loadings for each factor.

Figure 1. Results of factor analysis (a) scatterplot of the factor scores with factor 1: forest productivity and factor 2: risk controllability. (b) Scatterplot of factor scores with factor 2: risk controllability and factor 3: accounting advantage.

AT: Austria, AU: Australia, CA: Canada, CH: Switzerland, DE: Germany, DN: Denmark, ES: Spain, FI: Finland, FR: France, GB: United Kingdom, IE: Ireland, IL: Iceland, IT: Italy, JP: Japan, NL: Netherlands, NO: Norway, NZ: New Zealand, PT: Portugal, RU: Russian Federation, SE: Sweden, and US: United States. Countries that did not elect FM are indicated with triangles and underlined codes.

Table 4. Factor analysis and characteristics of three groups of countries based on the cross-cutting analysis.

	Country	Characteristic	Election of FM
Group A	Austria, Japan, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Portuguese, Russia, Spain, and Sweden	Countries maintaining or increasing forest areas, increasing growing stock and wood production	Only Austria did not elect FM
Group B	Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Switzerland, and the US	Countries having a relatively higher risk of forest management, including large forest areas with a high ratio of natural forests, natural disturbance, and private ownership	Only Switzerland elected FM
Group C	Denmark, Ireland, Netherland, the UK, and Iceland	Countries having a relatively small forest area or forest area ratio	Denmark and UK elected FM

UNFCCC. 2005–2007. Fourth National communications and reports demonstrating progress under the Kyoto protocol - annex I. UNFCCC.

 Google Scholar

UNFCCC. 2006. Decision 8/CMP.2 forest management under article 3, paragraph 4, of the Kyoto protocol: Italy. UNFCCC.

 Google Scholar

Australian Government, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. 2003. Australia’s Australia’s State of the Forests Report 2003.

 Google Scholar

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. 2006. Greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands 1990–2004 national inventory report 2006.

 Google Scholar

Forest Research UK. 2021. Forestry statistics 2021 a compendium of statistics about woodland, forestry and primary wood processing in the United Kingdom. Edinburgh (UK). [accessed 2023 April 29].

 Google Scholar

Howard JL, Jones KC. 2016. U.S.SS timber production, trade, consumption, and price statistics 1965–2013. USDA forest service, forest products laboratory. Res Pap. FPL-RP–679. doi: 10.2737/FPL-RP-679.

 Google Scholar

Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. New Zealand. 2009. Sustainable management of New Zealand forests, the 2008 New Zealand country report on the Montreal process criteria and indicators. October 2009. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry.

 Google Scholar

Ministry of Finance. 1999. Ireland national. Ireland. Journal Development Plan: 2000–2006.

 Google Scholar

Natural Resources Canada. 2005. The State of Canada’s Canada’s Forests 2004–2005, the Boreal Forest. [accessed April 29, 2023]. Ottawa: Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service.

 Google Scholar

European Council. 2002. Council decision of 25 April 2002: concerning the approval, on behalf of the European community, of the Kyoto protocol to the United nations framework convention on climate change and the joint fulfilment of commitments thereunder (2002/358/CE). Brussels, Bergium. [accessed April 29, 2023].

 Google Scholar

UNFCCC. 2005. Decision 16/CMP.1 land use, land-use change, and forestry.

 Google Scholar

FAO. 2005. Global forest resources assessment 2005: Main report.

 Google Scholar

FAO. 2010. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010: Main report.

 Google Scholar

FAO. 2015. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015: Main report.

 Google Scholar

United Nations. 1997. Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change.

 Google Scholar

FAO. 2020. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020: Main report.

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

All data are available in the article.