Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 197

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

New estimates of CO2 forest emissions and removals: 1990–2015

Open access
Federici, Sandro, Tubiello, Francesco N., Salvatore, Mirella, Jacobs, Heather, Schmidhuber, Josef·2015·Forest Ecology and Management

Abstract

Using newly available data from the 2015 Forest Resources Assessment (FRA), we refined the information, currently available through the IPCC AR5 and FAOSTAT, on recent trends in global and regional net CO2 emissions and removals from forest land, including from net forest conversion (used as a proxy for deforestation) and forest remaining forest. The new analysis is based on the simplified forest carbon stock method of the FAOSTAT Emissions database, equivalent to a Tier 1, Approach 1 IPCC methodology, limited to biomass carbon stocks. Our results indicated that CO2 emissions from net forest conversion decreased significantly, from an average of 4.0 Gt CO2 yr−1 during 2001–2010 to 2.9 Gt CO2 yr−1 during 2011–2015. More than half of the estimated reductions over the last five years, some 0.6 Gt CO2 yr−1, took place in Brazil. Detailed analyses further indicated that remaining forests continued to function as a net carbon sink globally, with an average net removal of −2.2 Gt CO2 yr−1 during 2001–2010, and −2.1 Gt CO2 yr−1 during 2011–2015. Annex I Parties represented the bulk of this sink, contributing 60% of the total in 2011–2015, down from 65% in 2001–2010. Compared to previous FAOSTAT assessments for the period 2001–2010, based on the 2010 FRA and published in the IPCC AR5, the use of FRA 2015 data led to estimates of net forest conversion that were consistent with previous ones (4.0 vs. 3.8 Gt CO2 yr−1), while the estimated forest sinks were 22% larger (−2.2 vs. −1.8 Gt CO2 yr−1). The net contribution of forests to anthropogenic forcing based on FRA2015 data was thus smaller than previously estimated by the IPCC AR5. Finally, we separated for the first time net emissions and removals from forest land into a sink component and a degradation component. Results indicated that, contrary to CO2 emissions from deforestation, CO2 emissions from forest degradation increased significantly, from 0.4 Gt CO2 yr−1 in the 1990s, to 1.1 Gt CO2 yr−1 in 2001–2010 and 1.0 Gt CO2 yr−1 in 2011–2015. Emissions from forest degradation were thus one-fourth of those from deforestation in 2001–2010, increasing to one-third in 2011–2015.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foreco.2015.04.022

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 197

Metadata

Authors
Federici, S., Tubiello, F. N., Salvatore, M., Jacobs, H., & Schmidhuber, J.
Venue
Forest Ecology and Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-09
Volume
352
Pages
89-98
ISSN
0378-1127 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1264638184
Cited by
197
References
0
FWCI
14.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: New estimates of CO2 forest emissions and removals: 1990–2015. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.04.022
The paper
Federici, S., Tubiello, F. N., Salvatore, M., Jacobs, H., & Schmidhuber, J. (2015). New estimates of CO2 forest emissions and removals: 1990–2015. Forest Ecology and Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.04.022

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.