4.8 Article

Forest management in southern China generates short term extensive carbon sequestration

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-13798-8

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFC0502400, 2018YFD1100103]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41930652]
  3. Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA23060100]
  4. Marie Curie fellowship [795970]
  5. AXA research grant
  6. Danish Council for Independent Research (DFF) [DFF-6111-00258]
  7. NASA Land Cover and Land Use Change Program [NNX14AD78G]
  8. European Research Council [ERC-2013-726 SyG-610028 IMBALANCE-P]
  9. Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [795970] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Land use policies have turned southern China into one of the most intensively managed forest regions in the world, with actions maximizing forest cover on soils with marginal agricultural potential while concurrently increasing livelihoods and mitigating climate change. Based on satellite observations, here we show that diverse land use changes in southern China have increased standing aboveground carbon stocks by 0.110.05Pg C y(-1) during 2002-2017. Most of this regional carbon sink was contributed by newly established forests (32%), while forests already existing contributed 24%. Forest growth in harvested forest areas contributed 16% and non-forest areas contributed 28% to the carbon sink, while timber harvest was tripled. Soil moisture declined significantly in 8% of the area. We demonstrate that land management in southern China has been removing an amount of carbon equivalent to 33% of regional fossil CO2 emissions during the last 6 years, but forest growth saturation, land competition for food production and soil-water depletion challenge the longevity of this carbon sink service.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available