Recommendations for the use of tree models to estimate national forest biomass and assess their uncertainty

21Citations
Citations of this article
149Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Key message: Three options are proposed to improve the accuracy of national forest biomass estimates and decrease the uncertainty related to tree model selection depending on available data and national contexts. Introduction: Different tree volume and biomass equations result in different estimates. At national scale, differences of estimates can be important while they constitute the basis to guide policies and measures, particularly in the context of climate change mitigation. Method: Few countries have developed national tree volume and biomass equation databases and have explored its potential to decrease uncertainty of volume and biomasttags estimates. With the launch of the GlobAllomeTree webplatform, most countries in the world could have access to country-specific databases. The aim of this article is to recommend approaches for assessing tree and forest volume and biomass at national level with the lowest uncertainty. The article highlights the crucial need to link allometric equation development with national forest inventory planning efforts. Results: Models must represent the tree population considered. Data availability; technical, financial, and human capacities; and biophysical context, among other factors, will influence the calculation process. Conclusion: Three options are proposed to improve accuracy of national forest assessment depending on identified contexts. Further improvements could be obtained through improved forest stratification and additional non-destructive field campaigns.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Henry, M., Cifuentes Jara, M., Réjou-Méchain, M., Piotto, D., Michel Fuentes, J. M., Wayson, C., … Saint-André, L. (2015). Recommendations for the use of tree models to estimate national forest biomass and assess their uncertainty. Annals of Forest Science, 72(6), 769–777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-015-0465-x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free