Accounting for deep soil carbon in tropical forest conservation payments.

Secondary tropical forests are at the forefront of deforestation pressures. They store large amounts of carbon, which, if compensated for to avoid net emissions associated with conversion to non-forest uses, may help advance tropical forest conservation. We measured above- and below-ground carbon stocks down to 1 m soil depth across a secondary forest and in oil palm plantations in Malaysia. We calculated net carbon losses when converting secondary forests to oil palm plantations and estimated payments to avoid net emissions arising from land conversion to a 22-year oil palm rotation, based on land opportunity costs per hectare. We explored how estimates would vary between forests by also extracting carbon stock data for primary forest from the literature. When tree and soil carbon was accounted for, payments of US$18-51 tCO2-1 for secondary forests and US$14-40 tCO2-1 for primary forest would equal opportunity costs associated with oil palm plantations per hectare. If detailed assessments of soil carbon were not accounted for, payments to offset opportunity costs would need to be considerably higher for secondary forests (US$28-80 tCO2-1). These results show that assessment of carbon stocks down to 1 m soil depth in tropical forests can substantially influence the estimated value of avoided-emission payments.

What Is Secondary about Secondary Tropical Forest? Rethinking Forest Landscapes.

Forests have long been locations of contestation between people and state bureaucracies, and among the knowledge frameworks of local users, foresters, ecologists, and conservationists. An essential framing of the debate has been between the categories of primary and secondary forest. In this introduction to a collection of papers that address the questions of what basis, in what sense, and for whom primary forest is 'primary' and secondary forest is 'secondary,' and whether these are useful distinctions, we outline this debate and propose a new conceptual model that departs from the simple binary of primary and secondary forests. Rather, we propose that attention should be given to the nature of the disturbance that may alter forest ecology, the forms of regeneration that follow, and the governance context within which this takes place.