This paper provides an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding relationships between carbon and biodiversity in tropical forests.Resource Type: Reports
Access to UNEP-WCMC datasets is provided on the understanding that you read and consent to be bound by the Terms and Conditions attached. For the purposes of this Agreement the “Data” comprise any of the spatial data and associated attribute data downloadable from the UNEP-WCMC website, excluding the World Database on Protected Areas.
To provide a global context for a discussion of mountain forests, it is first necessary to define the locations and types of mountain forests, and this in turn requires a definition of mountains or mountain areas. Altitude and slope and the environmental gradients they generate are key components of such a definition, but their combination is problematic. Simple altitude thresholds both exclude older and lower mountain systems and include areas of relatively high elevation that have little topographic relief and few environmental gradients. Using slope as a criterion on its own or in combination with altitude can resolve the latter problem, but not the former. As a first step to evaluating global mountain forest resources and the threats to them, UNEP-WCMC (in collaboration with the Environmental Change Institute and kindly supported by the Swiss Agency for Development and Co-operation - SDC) in 2000 made a first attempt to map the mountain forests of the world.
Co‐benefits, often called multiple benefits, are the positive impacts of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) that are additional to emissions reductions. These include ecosystem and social benefits such as biodiversity and non‐timber forest products. Potential co‐benefits from REDD are widely relevant in Tanzania, where forests and woodlands support the livelihoods of 87% of the rural poor (Milledge et al. 2007). Conserving biodiversity also promotes the continued provision of these benefits under environmental change (Campbell et al. 2009), thus increasing resilience to climate change. Depending on where REDD action is taken, the co‐benefits delivered will vary. Simple mapping tools can help identify how carbon, other services and pressures such as fire are distributed and relate to each other.
Here, we map the distribution of carbon stocks in relation to the possible co‐benefits of REDD, alongside other relevant factors. A new map of carbon in Tanzania’s ecosystems has been produced for this analysis.Resource Type: Reports
UNEP-WCMC, with support from the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), has launched a new website highlighting the potential for actions on reducing emissions from land use change to secure additional important benefits for biodiversity and ecosystem services (co-benefits). The website demonstrates the utility of spatial analyses to assist decision makers in identifying areas where high carbon, high biodiversity priority, and ecosystem service values overlap, which represent opportunities for securing co-benefits. It showcases UNEP-WCMC’s recent work with in-country partners on developing such analyses and includes an interactive mapping tool that allows users to explore the spatial relationships between carbon and co-benefits.Resource Type: Tools / Applications
A list of CITES-listed trees has been compiled by UNEP-WCMC.Resource Type: Tools / Applications
The paper provides an analysis of the ecosystem-derived multiple benefits of REDD+.
The terminology around multiple benefits is not yet clear cut. Here, the different terms in use are reviewed and suggestions are made about how terms can be used in a consistent way.Resource Type: Reports
This briefing provides an update on negotiations under the climate change convention on REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation), and their relevance to forest restoration. It has been prepared as part of the REFORLAN project, European Community Sixth Framework Programme contract number 032132. REFORLAN has carried out research on dry forest restoration in Mexico, Chile and Argentina. Hence this briefing has a particular focus on these countries.Resource Type: Reports
©2013 UNEP All rights reserved