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

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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

Open access

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.

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 · 10.1038/nature25138

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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?

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 79 references

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Ajtay, G. L., Ketner, P. & Duvigneaud, P. in The Global Carbon Cycle, SCOPE Report 13 129–182 (John Wiley & Sons, 1979)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 726

Metadata

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
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Forest Management and Policy
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › 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