Forest definitions matter: an Indonesia and PNG case study
Dr Sadadi Ojoatre
Dr Nick Atkinson
Chief Science Officer
With the growing demand for transparency in the voluntary carbon market and the pending implementation of Article 6, a standard definition for forests is becoming increasingly necessary. Reliance on national definitions creates inconsistencies in forest cover estimates compared to global data. We present a case study for Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, which have adopted different classification systems, to illustrate the effects on forest cover estimates.
Our findings suggest an overestimation of forest cover in national assessments when compared with globally available datasets, especially for Indonesia. Findings for Indonesia were closest to the Global Forest Watch (GFW) estimate, whereas the PNG forest cover was overestimated by the GFW model. These differences in estimates suggest a need for a global standard forest cover definition of forest, particularly with the advent of Article 6 markets.
1. National forest definitions (land use classification) can create anomalous estimates of forest cover compared to global remotely sensed data. We use two neighbouring countries, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, as a case study.
2. We find that Indonesia's national definition overestimates actual canopy cover by approximately one-third compared to global (UN FAO) data. Conversely, Papua New Guinea's national definition provides a close estimate of the UN FAO and other global datasets, likely because of the similar definitions.
3. Forest definitions play a major but often overlooked role in policy decisions, such as the setting of Nationally Determined Contributions, and have the potential to influence carbon credit trading under Article 6 mechanisms.
Fill in the form below to access the full report.
To sign up to updates from BeZero Carbon, including ratings, events and insights, click here.