Assessing Forest Carbon Sequestration in China Under Multiple Climate Change Mitigation Scenarios

Understanding how climate policies impact forest carbon sequestration is crucial for optimizing mitigation strategies. This study evaluated forest carbon sequestration in China from 2020 to 2060 under three climate scenarios: SSP1-2.6 (high mitigation), SSP3-7.0 (limited mitigation), and SSP5-8.5 (no mitigation). We integrated the land-use harmonization (LUH2) and patch-generating land-use simulation (PLUS) models to project forest cover change, and the Lund–Potsdam–Jena managed land (LPJmL) model to simulate carbon dynamics. The results showed stronger mitigation efforts led to higher sequestration, with annual rates of 0.49, 0.48, and 0.20 Pg yr−1 across the scenarios. SSP1-2.6 achieved the highest carbon density (17.75 kg m−2) and sequestration (56.95 Pg), driven by the greatest increases in the carbon density of existing forests (+41.56%) and soil carbon (+39.94%). SSP3-7.0, despite the highest forest cover (34.74%), had a lower carbon density (17.19 kg m−2) and sequestration (56.84 Pg). SSP5-8.5 recorded the lowest forest cover (27.12%) and sequestration (45.62 Pg). Increasing carbon density, rather than expanding forest area, could be more effective for carbon sequestration in China. The carbon density and annual sequestration in existing forests were 2.36 and 2.89 times higher than in new forests. We recommend prioritizing SSP1-2.6 to maximize sequestration, focusing on protecting southwest forests and soil carbon.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Land
Published
2025-03-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/land14030571
Primary Topic
Forest Management and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessing Forest Carbon Sequestration in China Under Multiple Climate Change Mitigation Scenarios

Dianfeng Liu, Mingli Qiu, Yang Zhao
1 links
Land
Forest Management and Policy
article

Assessing Forest Carbon Sequestration in China Under Multiple Climate Change Mitigation Scenarios

Dianfeng Liu, Mingli Qiu, Yang Zhao
article en

Abstract

Understanding how climate policies impact forest carbon sequestration is crucial for optimizing mitigation strategies. This study evaluated forest carbon sequestration in China from 2020 to 2060 under three climate scenarios: SSP1-2.6 (high mitigation), SSP3-7.0 (limited mitigation), and SSP5-8.5 (no mitigation). We integrated the land-use harmonization (LUH2) and patch-generating land-use simulation (PLUS) models to project forest cover change, and the Lund–Potsdam–Jena managed land (LPJmL) model to simulate carbon dynamics. The results showed stronger mitigation efforts led to higher sequestration, with annual rates of 0.49, 0.48, and 0.20 Pg yr−1 across the scenarios. SSP1-2.6 achieved the highest carbon density (17.75 kg m−2) and sequestration (56.95 Pg), driven by the greatest increases in the carbon density of existing forests (+41.56%) and soil carbon (+39.94%). SSP3-7.0, despite the highest forest cover (34.74%), had a lower carbon density (17.19 kg m−2) and sequestration (56.84 Pg). SSP5-8.5 recorded the lowest forest cover (27.12%) and sequestration (45.62 Pg). Increasing carbon density, rather than expanding forest area, could be more effective for carbon sequestration in China. The carbon density and annual sequestration in existing forests were 2.36 and 2.89 times higher than in new forests. We recommend prioritizing SSP1-2.6 to maximize sequestration, focusing on protecting southwest forests and soil carbon.

LandVol. 14(3)
Ministry of Natural Resources (CN), Wuhan University (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Forest Management and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.