Cited by 727Forest Management and PolicyForest ecology and managementLand Use and Ecosystem Services

Unexpectedly large impact of forest management and grazing on global vegetation biomass

Open access
Erb, Karl-Heinz, Kastner, Thomas, Plutzar, Christoph, Bais, Anna Liza S., Carvalhais, Nuno, Fetzel, Tamara, Gingrich, Simone, Haberl, Helmut +5 more·2018·Nature

Abstract

Carbon stocks in vegetation have a key role in the climate system. However, the magnitude, patterns and uncertainties of carbon stocks and the effect of land use on the stocks remain poorly quantified. Here we show, using state-of-the-art datasets, that vegetation currently stores around 450 petagrams of carbon. In the hypothetical absence of land use, potential vegetation would store around 916 petagrams of carbon, under current climate conditions. This difference highlights the massive effect of land use on biomass stocks. Deforestation and other land-cover changes are responsible for 53-58% of the difference between current and potential biomass stocks. Land management effects (the biomass stock changes induced by land use within the same land cover) contribute 42-47%, but have been underestimated in the literature. Therefore, avoiding deforestation is necessary but not sufficient for mitigation of climate change. Our results imply that trade-offs exist between conserving carbon stocks on managed land and raising the contribution of biomass to raw material and energy supply for the mitigation of climate change. Efforts to raise biomass stocks are currently verifiable only in temperate forests, where their potential is limited. By contrast, large uncertainties hinder verification in the tropical forest, where the largest potential is located, pointing to challenges for the upcoming stocktaking exercises under the Paris agreement.

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 · 10.1038/nature25138

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The biomass of the world's vegetation has halved over human history.

    “The biomass of the world ' s vegetation ( 25 ) has halved over human history”

    From Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change (2019) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Abstract compares current vegetation biomass (450 PgC) with potential biomass under current conditions (920 PgC) and attributes the difference to land use. Extended Data Figure 2 explicitly says this comparison must not be interpreted as a stock change between two points in time, so it does not establish that vegetation biomass halved over human history. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The total biomass of crops cultivated by humans is estimated at approximately 10 Gt C, accounting for only approximately 2% of the extant total plant biomass.

    “The total biomass of crops cultivated by humans is estimated at ≈10 Gt C, which accounts for only ≈2% of the extant total plant biomass (17).”

    From The biomass distribution on Earth (2018) · cites this paper as [17]

    The paper reports about 450 PgC of biomass in currently prevailing vegetation (Abstract, page not provided) and describes how it estimates cropland biomass stocks (Methods, “Actual biomass stock maps 1 and 2,” page not provided). These passages do not give a global crop-biomass total of approximately 10 Gt C, so the claimed approximately 2% share is not established by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Combining data from independent sources enables a robust assessment of the total plant biomass.

    “Combining data from independent sources such as these enables a robust assessment of the total plant biomass (17).”

    From The biomass distribution on Earth (2018) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Methods describe combining multiple datasets and types of evidence to estimate global vegetation biomass stocks. But the paper also says global stocks remain uncertain, reports uncertainty ranges around 35% of the median estimate, and describes more robust estimates as a future prospect. It therefore supports the use of independent sources for an assessment, but not the unqualified characterization of that assessment as robust. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Grassland established after deforestation is estimated at 11.3 Mkm2 in 2000.

    “The latter is estimated at 11.3 Mkm 2 in 2000 (9)”

    From Restoring Degraded Lands (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

    Extended Data Table 1 gives an area of 11.3 Mkm² for artificial grasslands, and Methods (‘Actual biomass stock maps 1 and 2’) defines these as grasslands on potentially forested areas. The paper describes the underlying land-use dataset as present-day and derived from a year-2000 dataset, but does not explicitly date the 11.3 Mkm² estimate to 2000. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Approximately 450 Gt of C is bound up in terrestrial biota, primarily in plants, while only about 6 Gt of C is found in ocean biota.

    “Approximately 450 Gt of C is bound up in terrestrial biota, primarily in plants (86), while only ~6 Gt of C is found in ocean biota (87).”

    From Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries (2023) · cites this paper as [86]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [49]Avitabile V An integrated pan-tropical biomass map using multiple reference datasets Glob Change Biol 2016 22 1406 1420 26499288
  2. [55]Ajtay GL Ketner P Duvigneaud P Terrestrial primary production and phytomass The global carbon cycle. SCOPE 13 John Wiley & Sons 1979 129 182
  3. [56]Cannell MGR World forest biomass and primary production data Academic Press New York 1982 67
  4. [62]Pan Y Birdsey RA Phillips OL Jackson RB The Structure, Distribution, and Biomass of the World’s Forests Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 2013 44 593 622
  5. [63]Prentice IC Harrison SP Bartlein PJ Global vegetation and terrestrial carbon cycle changes after the last ice age New Phytologist 2011 189 988 998 21288244

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Erb, K.-H., Kastner, T., Plutzar, C., Bais, A. L. S., Carvalhais, N., Fetzel, T., Gingrich, S., Haberl, H., Lauk, C., Niedertscheider, M., Pongratz, J., Thurner, M., & Luyssaert, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Klagenfurt (AT)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry (DE)
  • Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (DE)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Erb, Karl-Heinz
Venue
Nature
Published
2017-12-20
Volume
553
Issue
7686
Pages
73-76
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2780388729
Cited by
727
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 56 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 111 · 2023: 101 · 2022: 131 · 2021: 78 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 31
FWCI
32.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Space Agency
  • European Commission (640176, H2020, 263522, UID/AMB/04085/2013)
  • Vetenskapsrådet (621‐2014‐4266)
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (640176)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Forest ecology and management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Keywords
terrestrial carbon stocks, plant biomass, land use change, deforestation, forest management, grazing, carbon loss, climate change mitigation, biomass energy, tropical forests, temperate forests, carbon verification
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Husbandry, Carbon, Conservation of Natural Resources, Human Activities, Plants, Trees, Tropical Climate, Forestry, Biomass, Uncertainty, Internationality, Global Warming, Carbon Sequestration, Forests

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