• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
griscom_rel_e_kali
 

griscom_rel_e_kali

on

  • 396 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
396
Views on SlideShare
390
Embed Views
6

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

1 Embed 6

http://www.theredddesk.org 6

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Let’s consider reference region method 2 because:Seems to be relatively accurate.Pretty intuitive (even though some geeky stats).Facilitates nesting to national scale.Might encourage competition to reduce deforestation rates.

griscom_rel_e_kali griscom_rel_e_kali Presentation Transcript

  • REDDeX Conference, Cancun, July 14, 2010
    Comparison of REL Methods for Districts of East Kalimantan, Indonesia.
    Bronson Griscom, Sr. Scientist Forest Carbon
    John Kerkering, Conservation Analyst
  • Question: What is the most accurate method for predicting the amount of deforestation within districts of East Kalimantan?
  • Alternative methods for predicting deforestation (i.e. REL) at sub-national scale
    Complex
    Simple
    Historical Rate
    (with adjustments)
    Forward Looking
    Historical Rate
    of project area
    1
    • Non-spatially explicit model (e.g. population-forest fraction)
    • Trend analysis.
    • Rate derived from “reference region.”
    • Spatially explicit modeling
    3
    “Planned”
    (e.g. legal license
    to log/convert)
    2
  • 1
    Predicted deforestation in each district =
    Historic rate in each district
    2000
    2005
  • 2
    Predicted deforestation in each district =
    Historic rate of reference region
    …where reference regions are determined by cluster analysis
    Cluster
    Anal.
  • 3
    Predicted deforestation in each district =
    Modeled future rate in each district
    …using spatially explicit model at regional (province) scale.
  • Here’s how…
    3
    Prior Deforestation
    Vulnerability
    LCM
    • neural network
    2000
    • no dynamic variables
    “Driver” Variables
    2005
    Projections
    2020
    2015
    dist. roads
    dist. converted areas
    spatial plan
    soils
    forest types
    slope
    dist. sawmills
    dist. towns
    dist. cities
    topography
    2009
    Note: projections assume historic rate at province scale
    dist. navigable rivers
  • Selection of Model “Drivers”
    3
  • Selection of Model “Drivers”
    3
  • 3
    Model Performance
  • Comparison of Three Methods
    Predicted area deforested from
    2006-2009
    minus
    Actual area
    deforested from
    2006-2009
    (as % of actual area deforested)
    3
    2
    1
  • Comparison of Three Methods
    3
    2
    1
  • Comparison of Three Methods
    3
    2
    1
  • Why do cluster reference regions
    seem to work?
    2
  • Question: What is the most accurate method for predicting the amount of deforestation within districts of East Kalimantan?
    • More complex doesn’t mean better.
    • I suggest reference region method
    2
  • Nested RELs
    National Scale:
    Historic mean, with negotiated adjustments?
    Sub-National Scale
    (e.g. State/Province):
    Modeled projection, to determine proportion of national emissions pie? Separate models for deforestation vs. degradation?
    Project Scale:
    Mixed. Modeled projection for unplanned events? Book-keeping for planned events / strategies?
  • thanks!
    Bronson Griscom
    bgriscom@tnc.org