• About this site|
• Site index|
• Contact us

Framework Report on the Development of the National Carbon Monitoring System

Contents

1. Executive Summary

2. Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Mitigation

3. Developing the 1990 Baseline for Soils

4. A National Monitoring System For Soil Carbon

5 Development of Baseline 1990 Estimates for Forest and Scrub

7 An Information Management System for the CMS

8 International Review of the CMS Development

9 Response to the Review

10 Application of the Generalised Linear Model to Soils Data (Giltrap et al. 2001)

12 Potential Other End-User Requirements

13 Integration of the LCDB with the CMS (Stephens et al. 2001)

14 Improved Allometric Functions for Forest and Scrubland (Beets et al. 2001)

15 Forest Sampling Options for the CMS

16 Costs of a Proposed Structure

17 A Proposed Structure for the CMS

18 Concluding Remarks

20 APPENDICES

12 Potential Other End-User Requirements

12.1 Background

The information required for a carbon monitoring system that meets the standards required of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) also provides many of the elements required for other monitoring and reporting purposes. In particular there is likely overlap with biodiversity monitoring needs of DOC and MfE and the wider monitoring needs of the Environmental Performance Indicators Programme (EPIP), also managed by MfE. There are also other requirements for Regional Councils and Territorial Authorities and MAF.

The various synergies with other proposed monitoring systems are summarised below.

12.2 Other MfE programmes

• Soil has been a component of both the development of the CMS and the EPIP and is considered to be a strong unifying link

• The CMS is concerned with soil carbon levels and how these change with land use.  The EPIP is focussing on core indicators for land/soil-intactness pressures and degree of erosion/soil-health pressures and indicators (where one of the Stage 1 EPIP indicators is percent carbon)

• Land-use pressures are determined by considering the match of land cover (LCDB) and land capability/soil type. The approach to determine this is the same for both CMS and EPIP

• Carbon will always be used for both the CMS and the EPIP land theme

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

• Carbon will always be used for both the CMS and the EPIP land theme

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

• Land-use pressures are determined by considering the match of land cover (LCDB) and land capability/soil type. The approach to determine this is the same for both CMS and EPIP

• Carbon will always be used for both the CMS and the EPIP land theme

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

• Carbon will always be used for both the CMS and the EPIP land theme

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

• MfE EPIP and DOC share the interest in monitoring forest biodiversity, a feature of the indigenous forest and scrub monitoring system, and this critical soil characteristic will need to be monitored.

12.3 With MAF

• Sustainable land management

• Reporting to OECD (Agriculture, Food and Forestry Directorate)

• Reporting to FAO Forestry Department (TBFRA2000)

• Indicators of sustainable forest management (Montreal Process).

• Reporting to FAO Forestry Department (TBFRA2000)

• Indicators of sustainable forest management (Montreal Process).

12.4 With DOC

• Convention on Biodiversity

• Indigenous Forest Condition supplementing DOC’s network for private land

• Convention of wetlands of international importance.

12.5 For local government and others

• Assist Regional Councils  in State of the Environment Reporting

• Contribute to the research programmes of a variety of science providers.

[ Previous| Next