CDM Forestry and the Ultimate Objective of the Climate Convention

In its Article 2, the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change policymakers gave themselves a long-term dynamic mandate under uncertainty. Taking the example of forestry activities in developing countries, the present article discusses whether land-based climate change mitigation measures in the context of compensation mechanisms for human-induced greenhouse gas emissions are covered under the UNFCCC's ultimate objective. Both the problem of climate change and human intervention act over long, yet finite timeframes. The article argues for taking a dynamic 100-year timeframe as reference for present-day activities. It concludes that increasing biotic carbon storage is legitimate for measures that contribute to biodiversity conservation, as long as it does not serve as a pretext for neglecting technological change. Among all forestry options, the list of priorities should be avoiding deforestation and devegetation, sustainable forest management, and afforestation. The problem of saturation can be encountered by the combination of forestry with the increased use of wood products and bioenergy. Concluding, the article gathers criteria for forest climate activities in the post-2012 regime. JEL Classification: Q23, Q54; Q57; Q58     

Baselines for land-use change in the tropics: application to avoided deforestation projects

Although forest conservation activities, particularly in the tropics, offer significant potential for mitigating carbon (C) emissions, these types of activities have faced obstacles in the policy arena caused by the difficulty in determining key elements of the project cycle, particularly the baseline. A baseline for forest conservation has two main components: the projected land-use change and the corresponding carbon stocks in applicable pools in vegetation and soil, with land-use change being the most difficult to address analytically. In this paper we focus on developing and comparing three models, ranging from relatively simple extrapolations of past trends in land use based on simple drivers such as population growth to more complex extrapolations of past trends using spatially explicit models of land-use change driven by biophysical and socioeconomic factors. The three models used for making baseline projections of tropical deforestation at the regional scale are: the Forest Area Change (FAC) model, the Land Use and Carbon Sequestration (LUCS) model, and the Geographical Modeling (GEOMOD) model. The models were used to project deforestation in six tropical regions that featured different ecological and socioeconomic conditions, population dynamics, and uses of the land: (1) northern Belize; (2) Santa Cruz State, Bolivia; (3) Paraná State, Brazil; (4) Campeche, Mexico; (5) Chiapas, Mexico; and (6) Michoacán, Mexico. A comparison of all model outputs across all six regions shows that each model produced quite different deforestation baselines. In general, the simplest FAC model, applied at the national administrative-unit scale, projected the highest amount of forest loss (four out of six regions) and the LUCS model the least amount of loss (four out of five regions). Based on simulations of GEOMOD, we found that readily observable physical and biological factors as well as distance to areas of past disturbance were each about twice as important as either sociological/demographic or economic/infrastructure factors (less observable) in explaining empirical land-use patterns. We propose from the lessons learned, a methodology comprised of three main steps and six tasks can be used to begin developing credible baselines. We also propose that the baselines be projected over a 10-year period because, although projections beyond 10 years are feasible, they are likely to be unrealistic for policy purposes. In the first step, an historic land-use change and deforestation estimate is made by determining the analytic domain (size of the region relative to the size of proposed project), obtaining historic data, analyzing candidate baseline drivers, and identifying three to four major drivers. In the second step, a baseline of where deforestation is likely to occur–a potential land-use change (PLUC) map—is produced using a spatial model such as GEOMOD that uses the key drivers from step one. Then rates of deforestation are projected over a 10-year baseline period based on one of the three models. Using the PLUC maps, projected rates of deforestation, and carbon stock estimates, baseline projections are developed that can be used for project GHG accounting and crediting purposes: The final step proposes that, at agreed interval (e.g., about 10 years), the baseline assumptions about baseline drivers be re-assessed. This step reviews the viability of the 10-year baseline in light of changes in one or more key baseline drivers (e.g., new roads, new communities, new protected area, etc.). The potential land-use change map and estimates of rates of deforestation could be re-done at the agreed interval, allowing the deforestation rates and changes in spatial drivers to be incorporated into a defense of the existing baseline, or the derivation of a new baseline projection.     

Equity rules for burden sharing in the mitigation process of climate change

Although international negotiation on the mitigation of climate change is a process of determining burden-sharing rules between countries, there has been no clear agreement on equity principles for burden sharing. During the negotiating process up to the Kyoto Protocol, various proposals were made on such burden-sharing rules, but an agreement on emission targets for Annex I countries was achieved without explicitly agree-ing to any rules. In the next phase of the negotiation, debates on emission targets are likely to shift from those between developed countries to those between all parties to the convention. In such a phase, debates on burden-sharing rules will be revisited. The purpose of this paper is: (1) to determine implicitly a formula for the rule for burden sharing between Annex I countries that was considered to be underlying the emission targets of the Kyoto Protocol, and (2) to examine plausible emission targets and timing of commitments for non-Annex I countries in the future by using the result of the analysis on the Kyoto Protocol. A multi-regression method is used for this purpose. It was concluded that the burden sharing between Annex I countries in the Kyoto Protocol can mostly be explained by three variables: the increase in the rate of CO₂ emission during the years 1990 to 2010, the increase in the rate of afforestation between 1990 and 1995, and the GDP per capita at the time of negotiation. The timing of future commitments of developing countries and the levels of targets differ widely, depending on which index or formula is agreed as “equitable”. Some of the developing countries would have to start limiting their emissions within several years if GDP per capita or CO₂ per capita were chosen as the burden-sharing indicator. Developing countries would not have to make commitments until the mid-late 21st century if population growth rate were chosen. If the inferred formula of the Kyoto Protocol were applied to developing countries, they would have had to start mild limitation from 1990.     

海滩旅游资源质量评比体系

论文回顾了当前国内外海滩旅游资源质量评价体系的发展现状 ,并依据我国具体状况 ,提出了适合我国国情的新的评价体系。新体系选择80个评价因子 ,分为旅游资源条件和可利用条件两个大类 ,前者包括地貌、水体、气候气象、生物、人文等5个亚类 ;后者包括基础设施及管理、安全、卫生等3个亚类。论文建立的新的海滩质量评比展示模式将有利于国内外海滩的质量对比 ,可促使我国海滩旅游业与国际接轨、能够向人们提供较多的海滩质量信息并利于海滩的经营管理     

Hot spots in the bee hive

Honeybee colonies (Apis mellifera) maintain temperatures of 35-36°C in their brood nest because the brood needs high and constant temperature conditions for optimal development. We show that incubation of the brood at the level of individual honeybees is done by worker bees performing a particular and not yet specified behaviour: such bees raise the brood temperature by pressing their warm thoraces firmly onto caps under which the pupae develop. The bees stay motionless in a characteristic posture and have significantly higher thoracic temperatures than bees not assuming this posture in the brood area. The surface of the brood caps against which warm bees had pressed their thorax were up to 3.2°C warmer than the surrounding area, confirming that effective thermal transfer had taken place.