Modelling carbon stock and carbon sequestration ecosystem services for policy design: a comprehensive approach using a dynamic vegetation model
| dc.contributor.author | Sandra Quijas | |
| dc.contributor.author | Alice Boit | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kirsten Thonicke | |
| dc.contributor.author | Guillermo N. Murray‐Tortarolo | |
| dc.contributor.author | Tuyeni H. Mwampamba | |
| dc.contributor.author | Margaret Skutsch | |
| dc.contributor.author | Margareth Simões | |
| dc.contributor.author | Nataly Ascarrunz | |
| dc.contributor.author | Marielos Peña‐Claros | |
| dc.contributor.author | Laurence Jones | |
| dc.coverage.spatial | Bolivia | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-03-22T14:17:19Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-03-22T14:17:19Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
| dc.description | Citaciones: 18 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Ecosystem service (ES) models can only inform policy design adequately if they incorporate ecological processes. We used the Lund-Potsdam-Jena managed Land (LPJmL) model, to address following questions for Mexico, Bolivia and Brazilian Amazon: (i) How different are C stocks and C sequestration quantifications under standard (when soil and litter C and heterotrophic respiration are not considered) and comprehensive (including all C stock and heterotrophic respiration) approach? and (ii) How does the valuation of C stock and C sequestration differ in national payments for ES and global C funds or markets when comparing both approach? We found that up to 65% of C stocks have not been taken into account by neglecting to include C stored in soil and litter, resulting in gross underpayments (up to 500 times lower). Since emissions from heterotrophic respiration of organic material offset a large proportion of C gained through growth of living matter, we found that markets and decision-makers are inadvertently overestimating up to 100 times C sequestrated. New approaches for modelling C services relevant ecological process-based can help accounting for C in soil, litter and heterotrophic respiration and become important for the operationalization of agreements on climate change mitigation following the COP21 in 2015. | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/26395908.2018.1542413 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1080/26395908.2018.1542413 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://andeanlibrary.org/handle/123456789/45637 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.publisher | Taylor & Francis | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Ecosystems and People | |
| dc.source | Universidad de Guadalajara | |
| dc.subject | Carbon sequestration | |
| dc.subject | Ecosystem services | |
| dc.subject | Environmental science | |
| dc.subject | Stock (firearms) | |
| dc.subject | Soil carbon | |
| dc.subject | Ecosystem | |
| dc.subject | Heterotroph | |
| dc.subject | Natural resource economics | |
| dc.subject | Ecology | |
| dc.title | Modelling carbon stock and carbon sequestration ecosystem services for policy design: a comprehensive approach using a dynamic vegetation model | |
| dc.type | article |