Presentation on theme: "United States Forest Service"— Presentation transcript:
1 United States Forest Service MEASURING AND MONITORING FOREST DEGRADATION IN ASIA: A REGIONAL ASSESSMENTRick TurnerUnited States Forest ServicePeter StephenUSAID LEAFGeoffrey BlateBangkok, ThailandJune 2015
2 ObjectivesUnderstand how USAID-supported emissions reduction projects are measuring, monitoring, and mitigating GHG emissions from forest degradation activities.Identify common factors for success and challenges to implementation.Recommend actions to support implementation of forest degradation measurement and monitoring systems in the region.
3 B+WISER: Biodiversity and Watersheds Improved for Stronger Economy and Ecosystem Resilience CREL: Climate-Resilient Ecosystems and LivelihoodsForest-PLUS: Partnership for Land-Use ScienceIFACS: Indonesia Forest and Climate SupportLEAF: Lowering Emissions in Asia’s ForestsSFB: Supporting Forests and BiodiversityVFD: Vietnam Forests and Deltas
4 Project Focus Landscapes CountryProjectFocus landscapesArea(million ha)BangladeshCRELTwenty-two forested landscapes (protected areas) across the country.0.68CambodiaSFBEastern Plains and Prey Long Forest1.00IndiaForest-PLUSShimoga (Shimoga District, Karnataka State); Hoshangabad (Madhya Pradesh State); Rampur (Himachal Pradesh State); Sikkim (Sikkim state)4.00IndonesiaIFACSEight landscapes on three islands in the Indonesian archipelago: Aceh Selatan and Aceh Tenggara (Sumatra), Ketapang and Katingan (Kalimantan), and Sarmi, Mamberamo, Mimika and Asmat (Papua)11 .00LaosLEAFHouaphanh Province1.74NepalHariyo BanTerai Arc (southern lower plains), Chitwan Annapurna (middle of southern foothills)1.32PhillipinesB+WISER7 sites across the Philippines: Mindoro Island, Negros Island, Luzon Island (3 sites), Mindanao Island (2 sites)0.78Papua New GuineaMadang Province2.91VietnamVFDThanh Hoa and Nghe An Provinces1.25
5 Evaluation Methods Standardized evaluation framework: Definitions Degradation driversEmissions estimates and significanceAccounting approachMeasurement and monitoring methodsData sourcesCommon methods and variations in monitoring forest degradationProject successes and challengesGoslee et al. 2015
7 Project Definitions for Forest Degradation CRELA forested area with any evidence of human impact, including stumps.SFBNone.Forest-PLUSIFACSPrimary forest that has changed to secondary forest as evidenced by human disturbance e.g. logging, fire, regrowth.LEAF (Laos)Persistent change in forest canopy cover over a five year period.Hariyo BanChange in tree canopy cover from a higher canopy cover class to a lower canopy class.B+WISERConversion from closed to open canopy forest.LEAF (PNG)VFD
8 Forest Degradation Monitoring Status All projects are currently in the initial or pilot implementation of their forest degradation monitoring systems.Most project landscapes: degradation component of total forest emissions has not been quantified.All project landscapes: emissions by activity has not been quantified.
10 Reasons for Not Monitoring Degradation: Insufficient financial and/or technical capacity to monitor large landscapes at frequent intervals.Relatively short project timeline.Degradation not a significant source of emissions.Emissions factors at appropriate scale not available.Difficulty tracking emissions from overlapping degradation activities.
11 Data Sources: Satellite Imagery ProjectImageryPixel Resolution (m)UseCRELRapidEye5.0Land cover mapping only. Not used for detecting degradation.Forest-PLUSLandsat 5,7,8IRS-ResourceSat 1,2 (LISS III)Worldview 230.023.50.5Canopy cover change by fractional cover downscaling of land use/land cover maps.Hariyo BanLandsatWorldview 1Canopy cover change detection by temporal change in NDVI.B+WISERALOS AVNIR10.0Canopy cover change detection by visual interpretation.LEAFLandsat 5,7Canopy cover change detection using composited images and spectral un-mixing.
12 Data Sources: Ground-Based Inventories Purpose:Measuring carbon stock change.Validating forest canopy cover change maps.Tracking degradation activities.Data types:Inventory plotsSystematic gridStratified-random sampling by forest type.Community forest timber stock inventory.Forest patrol records.
13 Monitoring Challenges Definitions:Lack of clear, measurable definition for forest degradationMethods:Uncertainty regarding accounting approachLack of sufficient cloud/haze-free imagerySome degradation not detectable by remote sensingGround inventory data collection can be expensive.Complex land ownerships inhibit ground inventoryInsufficient data to calculate emissions factors
14 Monitoring Challenges (Continued) Capacity:Insufficient funding or trained staff inhibits the expansion of monitoring demonstration sites to larger landscapes.Socio-political:Monitoring deforestation may be higher national priority.Lack of national direction reduces incentive for sub-national jurisdictions to monitor.Differing organizational structures complicates monitoring across multiple jurisdictions.Differences in cultural norms and sensitivities between jurisdictions and supporting partners.
15 CREL (Bangladesh)Forest Protected Areas – biomass loss due to understory tree removal.Widespread and even distributionn across the landscape.Detection by remote sensing difficult.Stumps measured on systematic grid of inventory plots.Allometric equations to estimate biomass loss.Potential application to areas with intensive, widespread degradation activity.
16 B+WISER (Philippines) Photo by B+WISERSpatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART)Accurate and efficient activity monitoring over large areas.Location and intensity of degradation activities.Data for ground inventory sampling design, imagery interpretation, emissions factor development.
17 RecommendationsProjects should clearly define forest degradation in a way that is consistent with REDD+ and their program objectives.Countries should work toward developing a framework for comparing emissions and drivers across borders in the region.Decide and clearly describe accounting approach (land or activity based) and emissions factor development (stock-difference or gain-loss) that is consistent with countries’ resources and capacity.Replicate and scale-up successful measurement and monitoring methods in the region.Create a regional forest degradation working group to facilitate knowledge sharing and collaboration.Utilize newly available tools to assist decision-making:Global Forest Observation Initiative Measuring and Monitoring GuidanceREDD+ Decision Support Toolbox (FCPF)Forest Degradation Guidance and Decision Support Tool (USAID LEAF)
18 Acknowledgements Jim Barber – US Forest Service Ruhul M. Chowdhury - CRELChris Dickinson - VFDKatie Goslee – Winrock InternationalGina Green – TetraTechElisabeth Grinspoon – US Forest ServiceKeshav Khanal – Hariyo BanNeville Kemp – IFACSChristopher Kernan – Forest-PLUSReed Merrill – IFACSMichael Netzer – Winrock InternationalMarija Kono – SilvaCarbonElizabeth Lebow – US Forest ServiceGuillermo Mendoza – B+WISERVeerachai Tanpipat – LEAFGokarna Jung Thapa – Hariyo BanShams Uddin – CREL