Carbon Sequestration Schemes on Pasture Land

The Kyoto protocol authorised the creation of an international market in carbon sequestration schemes whereby developed countries can purchase the externally certified reductions in emissions of developing countries and use them to meet their own national emission limits. To date this concept has been applied to forest conservation and reforestation schemes, most notably in Costa Rica, and even there experience is limited. Recent scientific research however, shows that improved deep-rooted pastures, and pasture-tree combinations, can also be significant in carbon sequestration. Economic analysis has shown that, at least at certain world price levels for carbon, pasture improvement for a combination of carbon sequestration and livestock production could be profitable.

Such findings can be translated into working schemes of payment for pasture improvement. Clearly, this concerns the replacement of poor or degraded pasture by improved pasture and cannot apply to the replacement of forest by any form of pasture. Designing and implementing such schemes still requires work, but some of the requirements, based on experience with forest-based schemes, are as follows:

- Countries seeking to enter the carbon market must guarantee their credibility by possessing satisfactory forestry and energy policies and a clear institutional framework for the management of the programme
- They must have good inventories of resources, and an information system allowing the exact and frequent measurement of levels of carbon storage
- A broker must be appointed to market carbon sequestration services to developed countries and raise awareness of market opportunities within the country concerned
- Insurance schemes are needed against fire, which would lead to the loss of sequestered carbon and mean violation of the contract.

If such schemes can be designed for pasture improvement where the technical issues involving plant biomass, soil, livestock and people are more complex, the costs of measuring and verifying carbon sequestration are likely to be higher, and the institutional framework needed is likely to be more complex. This will mean a lower price per tonne of carbon sequestered than for forest-based schemes. Similar issues of transaction costs mean that carbon sequestration schemes will be more easily managed and more profitable for large management units than for small farms, so carbon sequestration schemes will not necessarily have positive equity impacts.

See Also

- Creating and strengthening Carbon Sinks
- Creating and strenghtening Carbon Sinks: Pressure State Response Indicators
- Greenhouse Gasses and Global warming
- Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Fossil Fuels and Taxes

Key References

Pomareda, C. 1999. Carbon Sequestration through Pasture Intensification: Technical, Economic and Management Issues" Unpublished paper for the Livestock-Environment Initiative, San Jose.

Fisher, M.J. et al. 1994. Carbon Storage by Introduced Deep-Rooted Grasses in the South American Savannas. Nature 1994, 236-238.

Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework on Climate Change. (Click here to view as an Acrobat file)
Grubb, M., Vrolijk, C. & Brack, D. 1999. The Kyoto Protocol: A Guide to Assessment. The Royal Institute of International Affairs and Earthscan Publications. ISBN 1 85383 580 3.

OECD 1997. Agriculture and Forestry: Identification of Options for Net Greenhouse Gas Reduction. Expert Group on the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Working Paper No.7. Click here to view this document in Acrobat format (252KB)

Storey, M. 1997. The Climate Implications of Agricultural Policy Reform. OECD. Policies and Measures for Common Action: Workign Paper No.16. Click here to view this document in Acrobat format (252KB)

> > [Livestock & Environment Toolbox Home]