Year: 2020
Type: report
Abstract: Bartlett, J., Rusch, G.M., Kyrkjeeide, M.O., Sandvik, H. & Nordén, J. 2020. Carbon storage in Norwegian ecosystems. NINA Report 1774. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research.\nThis report discusses approximate estimations of the carbon budgets within Norway’s mainland ecosystems. It stands as an initial overview of the natural potential of carbon storage and sequestration in Norwegian ecosystems. We describe carbon cycling in five key ecosystem groups: forest, alpine and cryosphere, agriculture and grassland, wetland, and freshwater and near-shore ecosystems. We emphasise the vital ecosystem service that Norwegian landscapes and ecosystems provide in sequestering carbon, and how climate change and management practices may aggravate or mitigate this function. We find that the largest stores of carbon in Norway are in the forests (32%) which also cover 38% of the total land area. Wetlands and permafrost cover 9% and 3% of the total land mass respectively, yet are storing over 2.2 Pg C, 31% of the nation’s carbon. These two ecosystems are the most carbon dense ecosystems per km2, with 53 and 48 kg C m−2 for wetlands and permafrost respectively. The next densest storage of carbon can be found in freshwater lake sediments, with 45 kg C m−2, amounting to 13% of all carbon stores. Forests and low-mid alpine zones sequester the most carbon on an annual basis (5.5 and 5.3 Tg C yr−1, respectively), with soils in alpine heathlands contributing the most to alpine carbon stores. In considering the carbon stored in key ecosystems, we find that Norway contains approximately 0.18% of all global carbon stocks, with a land mass that is 0.07% of the planet. This high carbon-to-area ratio is likely due to the large proportion of the country that is carbon rich peatlands (alpine and lowland) and boreal forest.\nSince ratifying the Paris Agreement, Norway has pledged to become carbon neutral by 2050, yet is presently one of the highest CO2/CO2-e emitters per capita in Europe, and within the top 20% of emitters globally. Terrestrial ecosystems that are included in the emissions reporting system for Norway include productive forest and land-use changes therein, arable land and farm grazing land, infrastructure areas, and a small portion of the total area of mire. However, a large portion of the remaining land area in Norway is not included in the accounting, but whose carbon emissions and sink capacity can be significantly affected by management practices and/or conversion. Currently non-managed areas such as wetlands, alpine zones, mountain forest, freshwater sediments, habitats included in non-agricultural open lowland classes, and the cryosphere including permafrost, are not considered in carbon reporting, or accurate land cover estimates. These areas account for more than half of the land cover of Norway and could account for approximately 68% of the nation’s carbon stores. Additionally, coastal ecosystems, such as kelp forests are also not included, yet play a key role in both carbon budgets and biodiversity measures.\nThe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) finds that the conservation and enhancement of carbon sinks and natural carbon stores is one of the surest ways for us to combat the extremes of climate change. The most efficient and cost-effective process is by using existing ecosystems. Current national inventories do consider the changes in land use, and how this may impact carbon emissions. However, much of the regularly assessed land types are biased towards managed ecosystems, and there is currently no framework for how to incorporate impacts on biodiversity. The loss of biodiversity is accelerating, and that has negative consequences for populations, species, communities and ecosystems, and thus ecosystem services, including those underpinning the capacity for climate mitigation and adaptation. The recent reports from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES Global Assessment 2019) and the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC Land Report 2019) both point to biodiversity and ecosystems as underpinning climate actions. They also emphasise the necessity of developing mixes of instruments that make best use of synergistic opportunities that can motivate land-owners and other decision-makers to make decisions that both conserve biodiversity and ecosystem integrity and deliver high levels of ecosystem services. The latter includes reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased removals. Ensuring a diverse portfolio of healthy ecosystems, either through conservation of already existing ones or by restoring degraded ones, will have the greatest value of ecosystem services and ensure the highest chance of adaptability to climate change pressures in the future. The ability of non-managed and seemingly unproductive ecosystems, such as alpine landscapes, to sequester and store carbon is significant.\nWe suggest that, in addition to a ‘Klimakur’ (“climate cure”), there is a need for a ‘Naturkur’ (“nature cure”) to implement a strategy for biodiversity and ecosystem services following-up the findings and recommendations from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Bio-diversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the new international commitments under the Bio-diversity Convention (CBD), and the national implementation of the Norwegian “Nature for Life” white paper (Meld. St. 14 (2015-2016), Ministry of Climate and Environment 2015). A Naturkur would emphasise the value of maintaining a diverse portfolio of ecosystems at a national level, ecosystems that are inextricably interlinked with carbon storage, sequestration capacity and biodiversity itself, and of finding solutions that can help achieve multiple objectives by proposing synergistic measures. Or rather, a harmonized Klima-Naturkur, where actions for climate mitigation and adaptation, and for biodiversity and ecosystem services conservation are not designed independently, but address societal challenges in a coordinated manner, are synergistic, and reinforce each other to achieve multiple benefits.
Language: English
Subfield: Soil Science
Domain: Life Sciences
SDGs: Climate action, Life on land
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W3016156974