Ascription of the differences between Germany and Uganda’s Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry sector greenhouse gas methodologies for inventory improvement

Michael Mugarura (), Wolfgang Stümer, Karsten Dunger, Andreas Bolte, Matt Ramlow, Emmanuel Ackom and Steffi Röhling
Additional contact information
Michael Mugarura: Thünen Institute of Forest Ecosystems
Wolfgang Stümer: Thünen Institute of Forest Ecosystems
Karsten Dunger: Thünen Institute of Forest Ecosystems
Andreas Bolte: Thünen Institute of Forest Ecosystems
Matt Ramlow: Coalition for Rainforest Nations
Emmanuel Ackom: Denmark Technical University (DTU)
Steffi Röhling: Thünen Institute of Forest Ecosystems

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2021, vol. 26, issue 6, No 1, 30 pages

Abstract: Abstract Germany, as an Annex I Party is expected to prepare and submit annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventories of emissions and removals, including Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF) sector. Uganda, a non-Annex 1 party, is institutionalizing a sustainable national GHG inventory system. The LULUCF sector is a key emission source and plays a vital role in these two countries’ GHG inventories. This research analyzes the differences between applied LULUCF methodologies in Uganda as a developing country and Germany as a developed country with a particular focus on the forestry sector. It further analyzes the root cause factors for the different approaches, existing gaps and gives recommendations for future inventory improvement. The intricate institutional, policy framework, expertise, and applied methodological approaches for carbon change estimations in biomass pools are analyzed. Uncertainty analysis and time-series consistency process is reviewed with regard to how the countries’ quality assurance/control (QA/QC) and verification approaches adhere to the transparency framework. Resource limitations and data collection challenges dictate that Uganda uses the tier 1 methodological approach for emissions inventory. Consolidation and institutionalization of the GHG process will improve inventory accuracy while enhancing adherence to climate commitments. Germany uses higher tiers. Besides, government support for planned improvements using the recently developed country-specific biomass functions for estimating belowground biomass of silver birch, oak, and Scotch pine tree species will be essential for improving inventory quality. Operationalization of the inventory plan (IP) will be critical in driving inventory improvements geared towards time-series consistency, comparability, and transparency.

Keywords: Biomass stock; Emission factor; Uncertainty analysis; Allometric equations; National Forest Inventory; Stock-difference method (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-021-09957-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:26:y:2021:i:6:d:10.1007_s11027-021-09957-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11027

DOI: 10.1007/s11027-021-09957-2

Access Statistics for this article

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change is currently edited by Robert Dixon

More articles in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().