1 Reported policies and measures; Land-Use Change and Forestry Heikki Granholm Programme Officer UNFCCC MIS Programme

2 Overview Emission/removal trends in LUCF sector Portfolio of reported PAMs PAMs to increase CO 2 sequestration PAMs to reduce GHG emissions Research-based PAMs PAMs having negative impact Additional findings

3 Emission/removal trends in LUCF sector In 2000 LUCF sector removed 10 % of total aggregated emissions compared to 13 % in 1990 –High net removals in EST42% of total emissions, LVA 40%, SWE 39%, NOR 34%, NZL 31%, FIN 16%, USA 13%, FRA 12%, POL 11% –Low net removals in BEL and NLD or net source in GBR 0.5% Most Parties expect small increases in net sequestration in 2010, however for USA net removals are expected to decreased by 13%

4 Portfolio of reported PAMs Almost all Parties reported LUCF PAMs About 40 PAMs reported; 3/4 implemented, 1/10 adopted and rest planned

5 PAMs to increase CO 2 sequestration Changes in forest and other woody biomass stocks, widely reported, integration of environmental and sustainable development aspects –Development of national forest programmes and strategies to increase carbon storage in forests and in products –Afforestation and reforestation –Improved forest management, regulatory and voluntary measures –Few PAMs addressing soils (JPN, CAN)

6 PAMs to reduce GHG emissions Seldom reported –E.g. restrict conversion of forest land to other uses (Latvia); Protection of existing forests (AUT); Protection of soil carbon (Slovakia); Protection of forest resources from fire and pests (CAN, NZL).

7 Research-based PAMs Specific measures and general research, extension and outreach programmes. –E.g. Increased understanding on adaptive strategies on conservation areas (AUT); Research on sequestration (BEL); Improved methods of fire control (CAN); Carbon storage in buildings, furniture, landfills and other wood products (NOR); R&D on monitoring (NZL).

8 PAMs that have negative impacts How to balance different objectives? Subject to national circumstances. –E.g. Fire as element of long-term ecological stability and encouragement of use of controlled fires (SWE); Replacement of faster- growing conifers by slower-growing broad- leaved species (SWE); Promotion of use of forest resources may result in increased harvest (JPN)

9 Additional findings LUCF have a significant contribution as one of the mitigation options, based on 23 reports available Uncertainty on treatment of LULUCF under KP has influenced identification of PAMs GPG for LULUCF is under development Focus on net removals (increment/growth minus harvesting/drain) or on emissions and removals separately?