Publications

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) figures prominently in modelled pathways to achieve the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5-2°C compared to pre-industrial levels. However, national roles and responsibilities to deliver CDR have been informed with CDR quota analyses that focus on developed economies and global major emitters. This study extends the discussion to implications for developing countries. For that purpose, we employ a diverse set of allocation methods on a wide range of global emissions scenarios to address equitability and uncertainty in sharing the burden of climate change mitigation. We further focus on tropical developing countries due to their large potential for natural climate solutions (NCS) that deliver CDR. Our analysis indicates the potential for stringent CDR quotas for the top seven countries that contribute ∼60% of pantropical cost-effective NCS potential, with median national quotas across emissions scenarios ranging from 0.1-29 GtCO2. However, the results reveal strong heterogeneity of quotas and inherent bias across allocation methods making agreement on an ‘equitable’ quota unlikely. Competition among NCS and non-NCS CDR options may arise when ambitious CDR quotas are implemented in countries with vast forest areas or large potential for expansion of tree cover. Therefore, it is important to not use CDR quotas to evaluate national climate actions or to inform climate targets that could exacerbate trade-offs between emissions reduction, biodiversity and ecosystem services in these NCS-rich countries. Instead, results from burden-sharing exercises could foster higher ambition if used to inform voluntary cooperation mechanisms. Discrepancy between perceived fairness and CDR quotas should be critically and transparently embraced to encourage acknowledgment of socio-ecological co-benefits as compensation. Such an approach will allow tropical developing economies to prioritise protection and restoration of nature in their climate change mitigation pathways.

Abstract How can equality of access be managed successfully and what are the informing trends that institutions should not only acknowledge but act upon? An opening up of the education market means widening access, but this cannot be done in a vacuum. The associated management of equality in access must have a place in institutions’ strategic plans linked to a system of performance indicators to ensure appropriate measurement. Approaches will differ, but senior management should be committed to allocating resources and devoting marketing energies to this important area. Commitment to CATS will be a significant part of managing equality in access as will be the management of quality in access. These are challenges that are on the further and higher education agenda but which have yet to assume a higher priority in implementation.

Energy is essential for human development and energy systems are a crucial entry point for addressing the most pressing global challenges of the 21st century, including sustainable economic and social development, poverty eradication, adequate food production and food security, health for all, climate protection, conservation of ecosystems, peace and security. Yet, more than a decade into the 21st century, current energy systems do not meet these challenges.

This database contains the average crop residue, manure nitrogen, manure organic carbon, net greenhouse gas emissions, and cropland area for 17 cropping systems at prefecture level during the period 2014-2018. In addition, it contained the changes of net greenhouse gas emissions caused by the optimization at prefecture level and province level. We also shared the key code for optimizing cropping systems at prefecture level and provided the all data. Users can run it the Matlab platform.

<ja:p>Countries need to assess changes in the carbon stocks of forest soils as a part of national greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol (KP). Since measuring these changes is expensive, it is likely that many countries will use alternative methods to prepare these estimates. We reviewed seven well-known soil carbon models from the point of view of preparing country-scale soil C change estimates. We first introduced the models and explained how they incorporated the most important input variables. Second, we evaluated their applicability at regional scale considering commonly available data sources. Third, we compiled references to data that exist for evaluation of model performance in forest soils. A range of process-based soil carbon models differing in input data requirements exist, allowing some flexibility to forest soil C accounting. Simple models may be the only reasonable option to estimate soil C changes if available resources are limited. More complex models may be used as integral parts of sophisticated inventories assimilating several data sources. Currently, measurement data for model evaluation are common for agricultural soils, but less data have been collected in forest soils. Definitions of model and measured soil pools often differ, ancillary model inputs require scaling of data, and soil C measurements are uncertain. These issues complicate the preparation of model estimates and their evaluation with empirical data, at large scale. Assessment of uncertainties that accounts for the effect of model choice is important part of inventories estimating large-scale soil C changes. Joint development of models and large-scale soil measurement campaigns could reduce the inconsistencies between models and empirical data, and eventually also the uncertainties of model predictions.</ja:p>

Global warming due to human-made gases, mainly CO2, is already 0.8°C and deleterious climate impacts are growing worldwide. More warming is 'in the pipeline' because Earth is out of energy balance, with absorbed solar energy exceeding planetary heat radiation. Maintaining a climate that resembles the Holocene, the world of stable shorelines in which civilization developed, requires rapidly reducing fossil fuel CO2 emissions. Such a scenario is economically sensible and has multiple benefits for humanity and other species. Yet fossil fuel extraction is expanding, including highly carbon-intensive sources that can push the climate system beyond tipping points such that amplifying feedbacks drive further climate change that is practically out of humanity's control. This situation raises profound moral issues as young people, future generations, and nature, with no possibility of protecting their future well-being, will bear the principal consequences of actions and inactions of today's adults.

Abstract Many global climate change mitigation pathways presented in IPCC assessment reports rely heavily on the deployment of bioenergy, often used in conjunction with carbon capture and storage. We review the literature on bioenergy use for climate change mitigation, including studies that use top‐down integrated assessment models or bottom‐up modelling, and studies that do not rely on modelling. We summarize the state of knowledge concerning potential co‐benefits and adverse side effects of bioenergy systems and discuss limitations of modelling studies used to analyse consequences of bioenergy expansion. The implications of bioenergy supply on mitigation and other sustainability criteria are context dependent and influenced by feedstock, management regime, climatic region, scale of deployment and how bioenergy alters energy systems and land use. Depending on previous land use, widespread deployment of monoculture plantations may contribute to mitigation but can cause negative impacts across a range of other sustainability criteria. Strategic integration of new biomass supply systems into existing agriculture and forest landscapes may result in less mitigation but can contribute positively to other sustainability objectives. There is considerable variation in evaluations of how sustainability challenges evolve as the scale of bioenergy deployment increases, due to limitations of existing models, and uncertainty over the future context with respect to the many variables that influence alternative uses of biomass and land. Integrative policies, coordinated institutions and improved governance mechanisms to enhance co‐benefits and minimize adverse side effects can reduce the risks of large‐scale deployment of bioenergy. Further, conservation and efficiency measures for energy, land and biomass can support greater flexibility in achieving climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Gaseous emissions from animal manure are considerable contributor to global ammonia (NH₃) and agriculture greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Given the demand to promote mitigation of GHGs while fostering sustainable development of the Paris Agreement, an improvement of management systems is urgently needed to help mitigate climate change and to improve atmospheric air quality. This study presents a meta-analysis and an integrated assessment of gaseous emissions and mitigation potentials for NH₃, methane (CH₄), and nitrous oxide (N₂O) (direct and indirect) losses from four typical swine manure management systems (MMSs). The resultant emission factors and mitigation efficiencies allow GHG and NH₃ emissions to be estimated, as well as mitigation potentials for different stages of swine operation. In particular, changing swine manure management from liquid systems to solid-liquid separation systems, coupled with mitigation measures, could simultaneously reduce GHG emissions by 65% and NH₃ emissions by 78%. The resultant potential reduction in GHG emissions from China's pig production alone is greater than the entire GHG emissions from agricultural sector of France, Australia, or Germany, while the reduction in NH₃ emissions is equivalent to 40% of the total NH₃ emissions from the European Union. Thus, improved swine manure management could have a significant impact on global environment issues.