1. The land representation issue: how to report transparently Coalition for Rainforest Nations Sandro Federici & Danilo Mollicone sandro.federici@gmail.comdanilo.mollicone@googlemail.com

2. Land Use vs Land Cover The land cover is the observed physical cover of the earths surface while The land use is the description of socio-economic function of the same area (Land Use/Cover Area frame statistical Survey LUCAS - EUROSTAT, 2003 ) In the case of land cover the presence and the distribution of elements on the land determine the land classification, while in the case of land use the presence and the use by humans of the elements (subject to a socio- economic hierarchical order) determine the land classification

3. Land Use vs Land Cover The land cover is the observed physical cover of the earths surface while The land use is the description of socio-economic function of the same area (Land Use/Cover Area frame statistical Survey LUCAS - EUROSTAT, 2003 )

4. Land Use classification 1- adoption of land-use categories definitions Forest Land spanning more than 0.5 ha with trees higher than 5 m and a canopy cover of more than 10 %, or trees able to reach these thresholds in situ. It does not include land that is predominantly under agricultural or urban land use ( FAO FRA2005 ) 2 – adoption of a hierarchical order of the land-use categories 3 – implementation of a measurement system coherent with 1 and 2 N.B. The methodology resulting from provisions at points 1, 2 and 3 shall ensure that any unit of land could be classified univocally (exclusion of multiple classification of the same unit of land) under a category (exclusion of the null case)

5. % Settlements % Cropland % Forest % Grassland % Wetland Other land >% % % % % <% >% % % % <% % >% % <% % >% <% Land Use classification Percentage of cover of the various land-elements in any land-use category >%

6. The assignment of any unit of land to a land-use category is done following the hierarchical order and checking the overwhelming of the cover thresholds settled for the relevant land elements Once established the land-use classification of the national land then the comparison of subsequent land-use classifications produces the land-use change matrix The land-use change matrix determines the activities under which every unit of land shall be accounted for, if any While, the changes in the carbon stocks are directly related to changes in the land-elements presence, rather than to the land-use change typology Therefore, the measurement system should be able to detect both changes in the land use categories and in the presence of the land elements Land Use classification

7. Classification routine example yellow = herbs covers X% of the area green = trees covers X% of the area red circle = 0.5 ha FAO Forest thresholds: 0.5ha 5m 10% Land Use vs Land Cover

8. For instance, an area, where different land elements, e.g. farm, herbaceous culture, coppice, are present, will be classified, testing: if the land element farm reaches or exceeds settlements threshold, then the sample point is classified as settlements land use and the coverage percentage of each land element is recorded; else if the land-use indicator herbaceous culture reaches or exceeds cropland threshold, then the sample point is classified as cropland land use and the coverage percentage of each land element is recorded; else if the land-use indicator coppice reaches or exceeds forest land threshold, then the sample point is classified as forest land land use and the coverage percentage of each land element is recorded. Once set the land-use classification of the national land, the comparison of subsequent land-use classifications produces land-use change matrices which permit to figure out the activities under which every unit of land shall be accounted for, if any. Land Use classification

9. In a land use classification both examples are classified as FOREST while in a land cover classification the example on the right side would be classified as GRASSLAND since trees are not continuously distributed yellow = herbs covers 90% of the area green = trees covers 10% of the area red circle = 0.5 ha FAO Forest thresholds: 0.5ha 5m 10% Land Use vs Land Cover

10. In a land cover classification both could be classified as FOREST, since trees cover continuously the 10% of the land for an area larger than 0.5 ha Conversely, in a land use classification the example on the right should be classified as CROPLAND (since the presence of the predominant agricultural use) while the example on the left would be classified as FOREST (no predominant use are present and thresholds are matched) orange = crops 90% area cover Land Use vs Land Cover green = trees 10% area cover yellow = herbs 90% area cover circle = 0.5 ha FAO Forest thresholds: 0.5ha 5m 10%

11. In the KP framework, Is the Forest a land use category? Consideration: in the KP the changes from (D) and to (AR) forest are defined as land-use change activities therefore forest is a land use Global Forest Resource Assessment 2000 – FAO:...the basic forest and forest change terms were revisited in light of the experiences gained during FRA 2000. One driving factor behind this re-examination was the request for input to the Kyoto Protocol process and the elaborations on carbon sequestration in forests… Global Forest Resource Assessment 2005 – FAO: Forest is determined both by the presence of trees and the absence of other predominant land uses N.B. The setting of the land-use categories, of the hierarchical order and of the land elements are the needed and sufficient information to allow any independent analyst to verify the results of a land-use classification

12. Land Use: FOREST Changes in intent or management practice likewise constitute land-use change: REFORESTATION from CROPLAND to FOREST, no change in tree cover FAO Forest thresholds 0.5ha 5m 10% Land-use change analysis orange = crops 90% area cover yellow = herbs 90% area cover green = trees 10% area cover CROPLAND

13. Land-use change analysis Changes in intent or management practice likewise constitute land-use change: DEFORESTATION from FOREST to CROPLAND, no change in tree cover FAO Forest thresholds 0.5ha 5m 10% green = trees 50% area cover Land Use: FOREST CROPLAND yellow = herbs 50% area cover orange = crops 50% area cover

14. UNFCCC vs KP Uses vs Activities An use is a socio-economic function assigned from humans to a land. An activity is a practice or ensemble of practices that takes place on a delineated area over a given period of time. Therefore: an use could be considered additional to a BAU scenario if it is intervened successively (i.e. land use conversion); an activity could be considered additional to a BAU scenario if it is intervened successively (e.g. since 1990) and it is not the consequence of the BAU;

15. UNFCCC vs KP Unmanaged vs Not eligible/elected Unmanged means that the land is not subject to periodic or ongoing human interventions Not eligible/elected means that changes in carbon stocks occurring on the land are not the direct consequence of additional activities Therefore, a managed forest (UNFCCC sensu) could be considered not elected under the forest management activity

16. Items to be considered for a transparent report of land-related information A. Directly human-induced (Art 3.3) B. The geographical location of the boundaries of the areas that encompass: Units of land subject to activities under Article 3, paragraph 3 Units of land subject to activities under Article 3, paragraph 3, which would otherwise be included in land subject to elected activities under Article 3, paragraph 4, Land subject to elected activities Article 3, paragraph 4 The information aims to ensure that units of land… are identifiable (15/CMP.1) C. Information on how harvesting or forest disturbance that is followed by the re-establishment of a forest is distinguished from deforestation (15/CMP.1) D. For the first commitment period, debits resulting from harvesting during the first commitment period following afforestation and reforestation since 1990 shall not be greater than credits accounted for on that unit of land (16/CMP.1)

17. The direct human-induced attribute cannot be directly detected in a land (or unit of land) since it is not measurable (it is not quantitative) A. Directly human-induced The direct human-induced attribute should then be assigned ex ante to a unit of land because there are in place either some human activities with the aim to change the use of land or some legal provisions promoting the change of the use

18. Any forest expansion on land where either human activities implemented for (the change in land use) are in place or the land-use change is promoted by legal provision, should be accounted for under afforestation/reforestation, if no other predominant uses are in place A. Directly human-induced Since forest is a land use, any forest conversion should be accounted for under deforestation Furthermore: natural causes (e.g. fires) determining the loss of the tree-cover do not change the use of the land (exceptions: volcanic eruption, permanent flooding, landslide i.e. when even the soil and its germinative capacity are affected); unmanaged lands losing their tree-cover (over the forest definition thresholds) shall be accounted for under deforestation if any other predominant land use will result (e.g. grassland)

19. Land use: Cropland No Land use: unmanaged land with tree cover that matches the forest thresholds Land-use change: DEFORESTATION from unmanaged land to cropland Land use: Forest A. Directly human-induced orange = crops green = trees

20. N.B. Whether an increase of forest area could be considered directly human-induced depends on national circumstances and shall be clearly reported and explained (para 8a of Annex to Decision 15/CMP.1 asks forInformation that demonstrates that activities… …are directly human- induced) and shall be implemented consistently during all the commitment period; thus two cases could occur: A1. The whole forest area increase is considered as directly human- induced A2. Only a portion of that increase is considered as directly-human induced A. Directly human-induced

21. No change (forest) D (forest) D (grassland) Land-use changes among n, n-1 & n-2 AR (forest) grassland forest Year n-2 The time-series (starting from 01/01/1990) of the forest/non-forest land uses, obtained with either the complete tally or the representative sample of geographically located points of the whole national territory, enables the Party to estimate areas where a land-use change to and from forest is occurred by means of the comparison of the same unit of land among subsequent land-use inventory years grassland forest Year n-1 B. The geographical location No change (grassland) Year n forest grassland

22. Decision 15/CMP.1 does not prevent Parties to report together within the same boundary units of land and land accounted for under different activities of article 3.3 and 3.4; But asks for units of land and land to be identifiable (i.e. they should not be confused each others) It means that the different units of land (unit of land = contiguous area where a change from one use to another one use occurred ) and/or land should not be confused each others and should be quantified (i.e. their area reported) B. The geographical location

23. 1. Could a unit of land under either afforestation/reforestation or deforestation be confused with some other unit of land or land not affected by that activity? NO, the land-use change classification for art. 3.3 purposes results in three different (and distinguishable) land-use change categories; provisions contained in decision 16/CMP.1 determine a hierarchical order: 1) deforestation category, includes only: Every piece of land under any use (forest included) where, at any point in time since 1990, the use was changed from forest to any other use 2) afforestation/reforestation category, includes only: Every piece of land under forest use, where a change of use from any other land use, at 01/01/1990, to forest use has occurred, and that has not been classified under deforestation 3) no-change category: Every piece of land under any use, where no-change of use are occurred since 1990 B. (case A1) The geographical location of Units of land subject to activities

24. 2. Could the reported area encompassed by boundary either contain units under different land-use changes? Or shall it be homogeneous? YES, the homogeneity (regards to the land-use change categories) is not an issue In practice if there are not possibilities to confuse different process - unit of land either deforested (x) or afforested/reforested (y) - there are not reasons for not including all those different kind of units of land within the same geographical boundaries B. (case A1) The geographical location of Units of land subject to activities x zy w x Homogeneous landHeterogeneous land

25. 1. Could a unit of land under either afforestation/reforestation or deforestation be confused with some other unit of land not affected by that activity? Yes, there is not chance to distinguish, for instance, between an area reforested and an area where forest is expanded as a secondary effect of human activity (or inactivity). B. (case A2) The geographical location of Units of land subject to activities 2. Could the reported land (i.e. the area encompassed by boundary) either contain units under different land-use changes? Or shall it be homogeneous? Only if the area encompassed by boundary contains only units of land where the change in use has been directly human-induced. Otherwise, it would not be possible to verify if background data has been rightly collected from the areas converted because human direct intervention instead of from areas spontaneously converted

26. Afforested/Reforested Area Clear Cut Area Forest area in the geographical location Where ? Area Converted to Forest Where ?

27. Afforested/Reforested Forest Area Clear Cut Area Forest area in the geographical location Area Converted to Forest

28. Afforested/Reforested Area Clear Cut Area Forest area in the geographical location Area Converted to Forest

29. Afforested/Reforested Area Clear Cut Area Forest area in the geographical location Area Converted to Forest

30. Afforested/Reforested Area Clear Cut Area Forest area in the geographical location Where ? Area Converted to Forest Where ? Sampling grid

31. B. The geographical location of Lands subject to activities The same rationales could be applied for lands subject to Article 3.4 activities. The area encompassed by boundary should not include both land, under a certain use, subject to an activity and land, under the same use, subject to a different activity or not subject to activity. Otherwise, it would not be possible to verify if background data has been rightly collected from the area to which the activity refers or from some other areas included in the geographical location reported and potentially subject to the activity Alternative option is to include additional information that allow to distinguish among different areas

32. Geographical location of boundaries

33. Sampling grid

34. Geographical location of boundaries Sampling grid

35. Geographical location of boundaries Sampling grid

36. Geographical location of boundaries Sampling grid Hypothetical borderline between elected and not elected areas Or hypothetical borderline between areas pertaining to the same use but subject to different activities

37. Geographical location of boundaries Sampling grid Hypothetical borderline between elected and not elected areas Or hypothetical borderline between areas pertaining to the same use but subject to different activities

38. C. how harvesting is distinguished from deforestation Clear-cut issue Any reduction of the tree cover, not caused by natural hazards (e.g. fire, flood, etc), occurring in a forest area has to be accounted for as harvesting if forest will remain the predominant use (even after that reduction), otherwise has to be accounted for as deforestation if any other use will became predominant. Therefore, it is needed to investigate the use of areas where the forest cover disappear by means of either multi-temporal analysis of photos or ground data. I.E. if the photo-interpretation (and/or ground survey) and multi-temporal analysis shows a land-use change the carbon stocks decrease has to be accounted for under deforestation otherwise under forest management (if elected)

39. D. debits from harvesting shall not be greater than credits accounted for This provision could increase very much the land-related information requested for an appropriate reporting Two approaches for the debits offsetting under Afforestation/Reforestation activity could be followed: D.1 The conservative The compensation is done at an aggregate level (all the units of land under afforestation/reforestation), no additional information are needed D.2 The detailed The compensation is done at a per unit of land level, supplementary disaggregated information shall be provided

40. D. debits from harvesting shall not be greater than credits accounted for D.1 The conservative (only the row with totals appear in the report) For the conservative approach no supplementary land-related information are needed

41. D. debits from harvesting shall not be greater than credits accounted for D.2 The detailed

42. Geographical boundaries of the land ? ? ? ? ? conservative 1 2 3 4 5 detailed For the detailed approach supplementary land-related information are needed: the geographical boundaries of every unit of land accounted for shall be reported i.e. the reported land shall be homogeneous in respect of the debits /credits attribute D. debits from harvesting shall not be greater than credits accounted for

43. ciao