What happened to forests in Copenhagen?

doi:10.3832/ifor0529-003

After the chaotic final days of the Copenhagen climate conference, many saw only fog, i.e., an unclear outcome and much uncertainty on future steps to take. Were the forests lost in this fog or some tree is still visible, possibly suggesting a path to take? This commentary will briefly analyse the outcome of the Copenhagen conference with respect to the main forestry issues under debate: LULUCF (Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry, i.e., mainly forest CO₂ removals in industrialized countries) and REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation in developing countries).

Keywords

Forest, Climate Change, LULUCF, REDD, Kyoto

Authors’ address

(1)

European Commission - Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Ispra, VA (Italy)

Corresponding author

Giacomo Grassi
giacomo.grassi@jrc.it

Citation

Grassi G, Federici S, Pilli R (2010). What happened to forests in Copenhagen?. iForest 3: 30-32. - doi: 10.3832/ifor0529-003

Paper history

Received: Feb 12, 2010
Accepted: Feb 15, 2010

First online: Mar 02, 2010
Publication Date: Mar 02, 2010
Publication Time: 0.50 months

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Breakdown by View Type

(Waiting for server response...)

Article Usage

Total Article Views: 54459
(from publication date up to now)

Breakdown by View Type
HTML Page Views: 47455
Abstract Page Views: 2569
PDF Downloads: 3659
Citation/Reference Downloads: 27
XML Downloads: 749

Web Metrics
Days since publication: 5378
Overall contacts: 54459
Avg. contacts per week: 70.88

Article Citations

Article citations are based on data periodically collected from the Clarivate Web of Science web site
(last update: Feb 2023)

Total number of cites (since 2010): 4
Average cites per year: 0.29

(no Plumx Metrics available for this paper)

Publication Metrics

by Dimensions ^©

Articles citing this article

List of the papers citing this article based on CrossRef Cited-by.

(1)

Diamond J (2005)
Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. Viking press, New York, USA, pp. 592.
Online | Gscholar

(2)

Le Quéré C, Raupach MR, Canadell JG, Marland G, Bopp L, Ciais P, Conway TJ, Doney SC, Feely RA, Foster P, Friedlingstein P, Gurney K, Houghton RA, House JI, Huntingford C, Levy PE, Lomas MR, Majkut J, Metzl N, Ometto JP, Peters GP, Prentice IC, Randerson JT, Running SW, Sarmiento JL, Schuster U, Sitch S, Takahashi T, Viovy N, van der Werf GR, Woodward FI (2009)
Trends in the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide. Nature Geoscience 2: 831-836.
CrossRef | Gscholar

(3)

van der Werf GR, Morton DC, DeFries RS, Olivier JGJ, Kasibhatla PS, Jackson RB, Collatz GJ, Randerson JT (2009)
CO₂ emissions from forest loss. Nature Geoscience 2: 737-738.
CrossRef | Gscholar