Indicators in Estimation of Land Degradation Neutrality for Russian Boreal Forests
- Authors: Ptichnikov A.V.1, Karelin D.V.1,2, Kotlyakov V.M.1, Pautov Y.A.3, Borovlev A.Y.3, Kuznetsova D.A.1, Zamolodchikov D.G.2, Grabovsky V.I.2
-
Affiliations:
- Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences
- Center for Ecology and Forest Productivity, Russian Academy of Sciences
- Silver Taiga Sustainable Development Fund
- Issue: Vol 489, No 1 (2019)
- Pages: 1345-1347
- Section: Geography
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/1028-334X/article/view/195631
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1028334X19110151
- ID: 195631
Cite item
Abstract
In this paper, we analyze the applicability of the land degradation neutrality (LDN) concept of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification to the Russian boreal forests. In this regard, it is necessary to adapt three global LDN indicators (land cover, land productivity, and carbon stock) to the assessment of land degradation processes of boreal forests in Russia and around the world. According to the research results, landscapes with different types of forest restoration dynamics can be viewed as an object of forest land dynamic studies. A set of LDN indicators adapted for boreal forests conditions has also been suggested in the course of our research. In order to assess LDN proxies, we calculated the retrospective and projected net carbon balance in the middle taiga zone of the Noshulskoye forest domain (Komi Republic, Russia) using the CBM CFS model. We explored three scenarios of forest net carbon balance under three different felling regimes. The net carbon balance should not be applied as an independent LDN indicator, because it does not take into account changes in species diversity and primary productivity. It is suggested that industrial felling should imitate natural types of restoration dynamics in order to achieve LDN targets. It can be reached through minimization of forest felling at sites with fireless types of succession, which accumulate maximum stocks of dead phytomass matter and serve as forest refuges supporting biodiversity.
About the authors
A. V. Ptichnikov
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Moscow, 119017
D. V. Karelin
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences; Center for Ecology and Forest Productivity, Russian Academy of Sciences
Author for correspondence.
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Moscow, 119017; Moscow, 117997
V. M. Kotlyakov
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Moscow, 119017
Y. A. Pautov
Silver Taiga Sustainable Development Fund
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Syktyvkar, 167000
A. Y. Borovlev
Silver Taiga Sustainable Development Fund
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Syktyvkar, 167000
D. A. Kuznetsova
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Moscow, 119017
D. G. Zamolodchikov
Center for Ecology and Forest Productivity, Russian Academy of Sciences
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Moscow, 117997
V. I. Grabovsky
Center for Ecology and Forest Productivity, Russian Academy of Sciences
Email: dkarelin7@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Moscow, 117997
Supplementary files
