Report by UK

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU):
UK
In general, this is an excellent chapter and a real "tour de force" of all the critical issues on AFOLU. Mostly, the specific comments are simply recogninisng taht there are biodiversity considerations, alongside emision considerations, of AFOLU mitigation options
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU):
UK
The explanatory notes need to state what is included here, especially whether it includes plantations.
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU):
UK
Explain "technical potential" in teh footnote
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU):
UK
Smithers, R.J.; Cowan C.; Harley, M.; Hopkins, J.J.; Pontier, H. and Watts, O. (2008) England Biodiversity Strategy: Climate Change Adaptation Principles. Conserving biodiversity in a changing climate. Defra, London. 16pp.
View full comment by Richard Smithers...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU):
UK
In general, I think the chapter is well-balanced among different approaches. It is an improvement from AR4 to combine forest and agriculture in mitigation efforts related to land use, they are indivisible in practice and it is good to see an integrated holistic approach to those.
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 1
UK
General comment: this chapter pulls a great deal of very useful information in one place. I think it is a move forward to have all AFOLU together and the authros have done a great job in complining much information. It still neds more synthesis in pulling the different information together but this is a great start
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 1
UK
General comment: I would like to see a discussion of land availability before numbers are given for potenial mitigation. Also where numbers are given for potential mitigation I would like to see wherever possible the amount of land impled to be used for this mitigation, particualrly for afforestation, reforestation bioenergy. This would help to judge trade off of different otpions and conflicts with other land use (e.g. food). Having land availablility first would help tp
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 10 , Line 15
UK
This section has several issues that I would be happy to help resolve in more detail. Ther is poor explanations or confusion here between co2 emissions from forest area change versus all land use change, between global and torpical only estimates, between gross and net emissions, and between fluxes due to human activity (LUC) versus fluxes due to indirect human induced change cliamte and CO2. The most up do date and comprehensive model results are not being used. I can pro
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 10 , Line 6
UK
Needs some recongnition here that although new forests take up carbon, there's a time lag between C emissions from deforestation and C uptake. Soemthing like "However, this net approach may mask differences in the C content of newly regrowing forests, to that lost from deforestation of old growth forest".
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 11 , Line 27 To Page 11 , Line 28
UK
what is the reference for this?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 11 , Line 31 To Page 11 , Line 32
UK
this does not seem relevant
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 12
UK
Need looking at carefully, not clear where all data comes from, lots of overlap (double counting), not comparable sources. Total LUC, Le quere et al result is houghton model, richeter and houghton is update, piao only on other estiamtes but lots out there, pan not LUC but forests only. USe Houghton et al 2012 synthesis or WG1 data (I can liaise). Pan paper itself in temepratue and boreal forests this is not LUC but all forest biomass change from inventories (ie LUC plus res
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 12 , Line 18
UK
what results, net sink?? Higher than what?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 12 , Line 18 To Page 12 , Line 31
UK
Inversions of atmopsheric measurments capture the total net flux from alnd ude to all drivers, it cannot distinguish LUC from indirect environmental change drivers (Cliamte and CO2). It cannot distinguish forest from non-forest. This is not comparable to Pan without explanation fo the fact that Pan is just forests, although forest LUC and sinks are the largest factors there is also other LUC and sinks.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 12 , Line 19
UK
Again compared to what?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 13
UK
see earlier comments about pan et al data that should be explained better here than was in the original paper
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 13 , Line 12
UK
according to houghton modelling results presented in Friedlingstein et al 2010 (global carbon project budget calcualtion) LUC total is about 12% of net emissions in the 2000s. This would be consistent with other data you present here e.g. le Quere (fireldingstein was the update o fle quere). stick to that data
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 13 , Line 13
UK
Maybe add here that forest degradation leads to increased vulnerability to drought and fire in some forests, such as teh Amazon (Nepstad, D.C., Stickler, C.M.,Soares, B.& Merry, F. 2008. Interactions among Amazon land use, forests and climate: Prospects for a near-term forest tipping point. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 363:1737–1746. Ray, D.; Nepstad, D. C. & Mourinho, P. 2005. Micrometeorological and canopy controls of fire susceptibility in mature
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 13 , Line 13 To Page 13 , Line 18
UK
forest degradation should have its own paragraph. See also Imai et al 2009, archard et al., 2004 an d Putz et al 2012 synthsis in conservation letters http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00242.x/abstract
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 13 , Line 36 To Page 13 , Line 37
UK
is this really correct, what is meant by this number. My undesrtanting from memory of the shevliakova paper is they do LUC but do not really model croplands in terms of their emissions, it is merely conversion between forest PFT, and grassland PFT and possibly some very generic crop PFT, but not emissions for extant/permanent croplands. I suspsect this is the LUC emission from conversion of natural lands to croplands and if so is double counting with deforestation emissions
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 13 , Line 6 To Page 13 , Line 13
UK
I would put this text earlier up front with information onf orest area change on page 9 line 18
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 14 , Line 1 To Page 14 , Line 2
UK
compared with?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 14 , Line 13 To Page 14 , Line 15
UK
this is the only place in this whole section you talk about mitigation potnetial, belongs later as my understanding is this part is about trends
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 14 , Line 16
UK
suggest add text to make clear there si ahole carbon balance on peatlands: "while CO2 UPTAKE AND CO2 and CH4 release…."
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 14 , Line 27 To Page 14 , Line 20
UK
this is the only place in this whole sectionw here you talk about future cliamte impacts on ecosystem, well there is a bit on croplands. Be consistent. I think it is fine to have it here. For peatland futures Also refer to Joanna Clarke et al papers and recent Gallego sala nature cliamte change paper on global boglands
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 14 , Line 31 To Page 14 , Line 40
UK
delete frost sentence and give subheading of mangroves and put ins eparate paragraph from text below
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 14 , Line 40 To Page 14 , Line 47
UK
New paragraph on disolved organic carbon in lakes and rivers. Presuming that is that the lake emissions being referred to are DOC, but may also be due to plant die back and exposed carbon rich soil? This is all about future, do we have anything on trends. Some disussion there may be a lot of DOC in river run off that is not accunted for in budgets, or is emitted elswehere from where the carbon is sequestered. I seem to rememebr a paper a long time ago by pacala that estiamt
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 14 , Line 6
UK
again I assume this is due to LUC and thus has some overlap witht eh forest number and the crop number, no problem there as long as it is clear.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 15 , Line 1
UK
when you do have data…I would like to see some total numbers here not just %. Becomes confusing. First you have % global totals, then % agric emissions. But don’t know what total emissiosn and total agric emissions are.. Have the numbers presented been checked for consistency with WG1?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 15 , Line 2 To Page 3
UK
again the question , is this CO2 emissiosn from LUC and from established corplands (LU)
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 15 , Line 20
UK
wy are crop residues a N source in particualr, why is this in addition to crop production?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 15 , Line 24
UK
suggest instead ot "rpduction cycle" to say "trends in"
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 15 , Line 33
UK
eems odd that in this section you give mitigation potential for AFOLU sections not icnluded in comparable AR4 chanpter in past, but you don’t give the updated mitigation ptoential of things that were presented in AR4, even though there must be newer estaimtes. SOme people will jsut look to heare and will not want to look back to AR4 so at least summarise and update what was in AR4, rather than merely present totally new sectors. However I also appreciate this hcapter is
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 16
UK
"Forest management in plantations". Not clear why this is a mitigigation option
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 16
UK
row 2, afforestation, reforestation, needs more up to date refs.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 16
UK
row 4. forest management in plantations. Surely this is overlap with section above Also how will improving productivity of fruits, cofee, gum etc improve carbon balance
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 16
UK
sustaitnable management in native forests, this is not so much management but conservation really it is REDD and more clear to state as such.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 16 , Line 26
UK
suggest instead of "harvest rice" to say "rice production".
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 16 , Line 26
UK
should you make the point here that carbon realeased as CH4 was taken up as CO2 so small net change in carbon, but methane greater raditive forcing effect in the short term. (in the longer term the CH4 turns back to CO2)
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 17
UK
row 6, not sure if you need LUC here
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 17
UK
row 7. biochar. Not sure this fits here quite as biochar probably produced from wood products, like timber in long lived prodcuts where you store it may not be so critical. I guess it may icnrease crop productivity, but this is a side issue to the carbon storage.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 17
UK
Croplands - nutrient management. Missing remark about organic fertiliser inputs. Fertiliser input can minimised GHG emissions if they are from organic sources or from green manure, for example. Beneficial in economically poor regions and low yielding locations. Ref. “Increased carbon sequestration by a management practice may increase other GHG emissions and, as such, decrease or even negate the sequestered CO2 in the soil. The application of synthetic fertilizer, for ex
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 17
UK
""Biochar favours C sequestration, but does not increase soil fertility."" Galvez et al. 2012. Galvez, A., Sinicco, T., Cayuela, M. L., Mingorance, M. D., Fornasier, F. & Mondini, C. 2012. Short term effects of bioenergy by-products on soil C and N dynamics, nutrient availability and biochemical properties. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 160: 3-14.
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 18
UK
row 4, bioenergy from forestry residues, column 2. The last logn sentence is a qulifying statement that is otut of line with the rest of the table which describes the category, but does not discuss its effects. This belongs in main text discussions
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 18
UK
Manure management - What is missing In my opinion, also in AR4, is an analysis on how much GHG emissions could be saved in N fertilisers production, distribution, etc, if all manure would be managed and used efficiently for food production, i.e. substituting emissions from some % of synthetic N, even when emissions from manure remains similar. Globally, about 50% of manure is not returned to agriculture land, so if they were and synthetic N inputs adjusted accordingly, there
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 20
UK
Bioenergy from crop residues - Crop residues are not considered wastes in many situations. For example, in econonmically poor rural regions, crop residues as wheat and rice straw are used for animal feed, construction, etc. In addtion, maintaining or increasing SOM need returning of crop residues to soils. Seems essential to add these concerns and further analyse (here or elsewhere) how much global agriculture residue is left for bioenergy generation once other uses are taken
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 20 , Line 13 To Page 20 , Line 17
UK
language needs improving here
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 20 , Line 17
UK
suggest replace "supports" with "indicates"
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 20 , Line 19
UK
I am not sure what this means
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 20 , Line 19
UK
Assumed increases in productivity are very uncertain. See for example: "Biochar favours C sequestration, but does not increase soil fertility." Galvez et al. 2012. Galvez, A., Sinicco, T., Cayuela, M. L., Mingorance, M. D., Fornasier, F. & Mondini, C. 2012. Short term effects of bioenergy by-products on soil C and N dynamics, nutrient availability and biochemical properties. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 160: 3-14.
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 21 , Line 29
UK
LUC bioenergy schemes may be large. Maybe add "and entail negative biodiversity impacts if natural ecosystems are converted to cropland"
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 21 , Line 38
UK
ditto. Again maybe need to add that when forests are convented to croplands - biodiversity is negatively affected although albedo maybe increase.
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 22 , Line 1
UK
"Primary and secondary residues". I couldn't find where these were defined. Maybe add a definition?
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 22 , Line 19
UK
"other products" maybe add e.g. food
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 22 , Line 20 To Page 22 , Line 23
UK
Harley, M. and Hodgson, N. (2008) Review of existing international and national guidance on adaptation to climate change: with a focus on biodiversity issues. AEA report to Bern Convention Group of Experts on Biodiversity and Climate Change, Council of Europe. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/nature/bern/ClimateChange/default_en.asp
View full comment by Richard Smithers...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 22 , Line 20 To Page 22 , Line 23
UK
Smithers, R.J.; Cowan C.; Harley, M.; Hopkins, J.J.; Pontier, H. and Watts, O. (2008) England Biodiversity Strategy: Climate Change Adaptation Principles. Conserving biodiversity in a changing climate. Defra, London. 16pp. www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13168-ebs-ccap-081203.pdf
View full comment by Richard Smithers...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 23 , Line 43
UK
biodiversity considerations are important here - especially with the conversion of old growth forsets to planted production forests. Suggest add at end "In addition, conversion of old-growth forests to plantations generally entails negative impact biodiversity.
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 26 , Line 12 To Page 27 , Line 2
UK
It should mention that other analysis suggest available abandoned / degraded land does not amount to a very significant potential for bioenergy production and could impact food security and biodiversity conservation. Eg. Field, C. B., Campbell, J. E. & Lobell, D. B. 2008. Biomass energy: the scale of the potential resource. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 23: 65-72.
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 29 , Line 4
UK
Suggest adding a recent quantified account of consumer-demand mitigation in Europe: For example, a recent analysis of the potential mitigation from various reductions in animal protein consumption including land use change emissions, calculated savings between 2 and 30% of total European emissions from livestock. From Bellarby et al. 2012. Bellarby, J., Tirado, R., Leip, A., Weiss, F., Lesschen, J. P. & Smith, P. 2012. Livestock greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation potent
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 12
UK
surely it is as much carbon as is usually lost due to LUC or fire in a certain ecosystem type
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 15 To Page 31 , Line 16
UK
run these two sentences together and delete "The natural events that affect yields"
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 16
UK
add example of fire
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 17
UK
whether it is a reveral or not depends wha thappens after e.g. if there is a fire and the forest not replanted, or if the r is disease and the forest cannot regrow, then it is a reversal. The stored carbon is gone and not rpelaced.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 25 To Page 26
UK
change order of sentence and give example what you mean (e.g. afforestation) and (e.g. fossil fuel substitution with bioenergy). Culd be owrth noting at end of this paragraph that peatlands sinks may not saturate, but C uptake very slow.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 31
UK
This paragraphs confuses natural drivers with indirect human drivers. Ie . A direct human driver is an intentional activity that affects C balance such as LUC. A Natural driver of GHG flux would be cliamte variability, fires, wind throw disease. If a natural driver is changing, e.g. due to human induced claimte change or pollution , then this would be an indirect humn induced change. So see line 25, future changes in clumate are not natural changes, they are indirect huma
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 41
UK
delete "the emissions
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 41
UK
the net reduction might not be zero, it might be lower than one is aiming for, or it might even be negative (ie reduction elsewhere is greater than gain by activity) this would be perverse mitigation. I would suggest to say, net reduction in emissions would be lwoer than that of the planned activity alone
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 46
UK
ther are many publciations not on this patter of which Serchinger is at one extreme. In fact the jury is still very much out on quantifying iLUC. Needs some more thoughtful and in depth discussion as this is a critical point for this chapter.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 6
UK
this section needs some work, it is disjointed and a little confusing
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 31 , Line 8
UK
other types of what?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 32 , Line 30
UK
Need to add here that ecosystem services are underpinned by biodiversity, e.g. "ecosystem services, which are underpinned by biodiversity".
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 35 , Line 15
UK
"land sparing" might also have rebound effects at the farm level. As yields increase, economic benefit per piece of land increase, and there is higher pressure to expand farmlands. Ref: Matson, P. A. & Vitousek, P. M. 2006. Agricultural Intensification: Will Land Spared from Farming be Land Spared for Nature? Conservation Biology, 20: 709-710.
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 35 , Line 21
UK
"rebound effects" need to expand what these might be, e.g. increased deforestation for crop land.
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 37 , Line 27 To Page 37 , Line 28
UK
http://www.maweb.org/en/index.aspx
View full comment by Richard Smithers...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 37 , Line 28 To Page 37 , Line 31
UK
Sajwaj, T et al (2008) The Eliasch Review: Forest management impacts on ecosystem services, AEA http://www.ibcperu.org/doc/isis/11528.pdf
View full comment by Richard Smithers...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 1 To Page 5 , Line 26
UK
Exec summary general comment: obviously it is hard to write this until all the numbers are in. I would like to see sub headings for difference AFOLU sectiors (e.g. REDD, Aff/ref, agric, livestock,bioenergy. Numbers in each sector.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 10
UK
this is not the range of ucnertainty, see comments on that section later
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 13 To Page 4 , Line 14
UK
biomass burning often little net emission as carbon taken up during growth (apart from land clearing fires and peatland fires).land clearing firest in forets already covered by deforestation. Need to be careful about different types of fire in the main text, see comments there. But if you are going to have smaller additional contributions then there are others. E.g could add in land use change other than deforestation here such as expansion of agricultural land into grass
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 16 To Page 4 , Line 19
UK
I find the separation by demand and supply side measures a bit odd and prefer just to see sectorial. E.g. some of reducing losses of waste in food seems to be production rather than demand. It is not clear where bioenergy and Aff/ref fit as they are produced in response to a demand for mitigation. REDD is reducing demand and relocationg production. i would prefer just to see by option without this separation. howevr ican see a lot of work has gone into this thinking so al
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 21 To Page 4 , Line 22
UK
sentence doesn’t tell us much unless more information given. Also this is just true for the different options regardless of semand or suplly side. "May" is a weak term, trade offs are inevitable, synergies exist and will be ciritcal to exploit
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 28 To Page 4 , Line 30
UK
does this sentence need a confidence qualification.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 3 To Page 4 , Line 4
UK
I don’t think you make the right case for it being a unique case, after all energy has a central role in providing energy security. It is rather that use of land for cliamte mitigation comeptes with other uses or priorities of land such as food production and natural capital
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 30
UK
"Sustainable management of agriculture, forests...". Excellent statement. Completely agree.
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 41 To Page 4 , Line 42
UK
suggest delete as unecesary: "for instance, between….rdeveloping regions"
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 43 To Page 4 , Line 44
UK
true but link to rest of text e.g by saying at end "COMPARED TO DEVELOPED REGIONS"
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 45
UK
"..is difficult TO ESTIAMTE...""
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 49
UK
suggest: "…cliamte change impacts on LAND COVER, carbon stocks in PLANT BIOMASS AND SOILS, and future HUMAN land use.." because climate change could lead to e.g. forest dieback or expansion, as well as loss of soil carbon, etc in natural vegetation as well as deliberate activity changing land use in the future
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 4 , Line 7
UK
suggest add: as well as the OTHER COMPETING ecosystem services
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 43 , Line 36
UK
Please add something to the effect of: For the Amazon at least, Intact forest is more resilient to climate change than fragmented forest. Malhi, Y., Aragão, L.E.O.C., Galbraith, D., Huntingford, C., Fisher, R., Zelazowski, P., Sitch, S., McSweeney, C. & Meir, P. 2009. Exploring the likelihood and mechanism of a climate-change-induced dieback of the Amazon rainforest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106: 20610-20615.
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 43 , Line 36
UK
Please add something to the effect of: Fragmentation increases susceptibility to drought-induced forest fire, leading to a descructive positive feedback loop between fragmentation, forest fire and drought. Nepstad, D.C., Stickler, C.M.,Soares, B.& Merry, F. 2008. Interactions among Amazon land use, forests and climate: Prospects for a near-term forest tipping point. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 363:1737–1746. Ray, D.; Nepstad, D. C. & Mourinho, P.
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 5 , Line 1
UK
should this be ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 5 , Line 13 To Page 5 , Line 14
UK
"will likely increase" increase from what? I would say its more than likely. Use of land for bioenergy and sequestration does comepte with other land uses. Of course the parger the scale the greater the competition. (this is aprtly also covered in paragraph above. Could say this stronger and earlier.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 5 , Line 20 To Page 5 , Line 23
UK
REDD should have its own paragraph. The sentence above is general to all mitigation and not specific to REDD
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 5 , Line 7
UK
DUE TO limited availability of productive land, INCREASING demand for both food and bioenegy may induce…...
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 56 , Line 40 To Page 56 , Line 41
UK
This section omits important health co-benefits from reduction of ischaemic heart disease as a result of reduction in animal source saturated fat consumption and reduction in large bowle cancer from reduced red and processed meat consumption. There are also benefits from increased fruit and vegetable consumption. Friel S, Dangour AD, Garnett T, Lock K, Chalabi Z, Roberts I, Butler A, Butler CD, Waage J, McMichael AJ, Haines A. Public health benefits of strategies to reduce gr
View full comment by Andy Haines...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 59
UK
There is no mention of any health co-benefits in this table
View full comment by Andy Haines...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 6 , Line 17 To Page 6 , Line 19
UK
I would liketo see a slightly improved definition of what is meant by "bottom up " and top down". often bottom up studies are not necessarily small scale, they could be large scale but based in just one sector. May be something like…scale up from site to regional scale sector or resource specific studies" (ie start with land availability and regional tree productivity, or corp productivity. The top down studies: the riginal RCPs actually started with different bottom
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 6 , Line 22
UK
rangeD
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 6 , Line 28 To Page 29
UK
could delete first sentence as title says it.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 6 , Line 4 To Page 6 , Line 8
UK
these two sentances could be combined
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 6 , Line 8
UK
suggest to delete "also"
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7
UK
I have a major problem with this figure regarding the LUC and deforestation data. LUC is mostly driven be deforestation yet we see in panel b LUC results show a decline in emission since the 1980s and in panel a deforestation emissions increase substantially abetween the 1980s and later decades. You cannot compare ramankutty and Piao with Pan like this, it is mixing apples and oranges. Among other things, Pan treats temeprate and tropical forests differently, their temepra
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7
UK
re. fires. In panel a. Can you be clear what type fo fires, and whether these are gross or net emissions ie. . The GFEd database includes emissions from deforestation fires which would double count with deforestation emissions. It includes natural fires in forests and grasslands which have annual gross emissions but small net emissions due to regrwoth of vegetation. peatland fires will have large net emissions which are not otherwise cvered under deforestation or LUC.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7
UK
panel b: the SD between the model results hown does nto represent the uncertainty. This is also not the full range of reults. For WG1 we asked modelling groups to do runs up to and including 2009 to get decadal averages that are comparable acorss decades going up to the 2000s. It would be good to use these numbers for consistency. Ican check with hte WG1 LAs and the model contributers that they ae happy for this to be done. Alternatively, use the synthesis results in Houg
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7 , Line 21 To Page 7 , Line 22
UK
the share has remained stable but what has the land area done?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7 , Line 23 To Page 7 , Line 24
UK
better as introductory sentence to paragraph??
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7 , Line 26 To Page 7 , Line 28
UK
so agric is 15% of the 40% mentioned above?are these numbers from same data source?. Bit confusing
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7 , Line 33
UK
add comma after "poor regions,…."
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 7 , Line 34 To Page 7 , Line 36
UK
sentence could be worded better and sswap 200s and 1970s. Would be good to know absolute numbers in terms of land area as well as % increase per capita as gives sense of what is to do with pper capita increase and hwat to do with population. But also note that a lot of the land for agriculture in developing countries isfor the export market to develpoped countries, so increase in per captial land does not imply people have more food. may be owrth making this point
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 8 , Line 11
UK
"M head" maybe better as million head first time as people may get confused
View full comment by Janet Cotter...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 8 , Line 22
UK
would be good to make the point somewhere in this para or the one below that amount of land and agric cops needed to sustain livestock production, ie. not just a matter of increasing pasture land, but of feed production.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 8 , Line 36
UK
see point above, again it would be useful in the context of this para to have data on crop yeild/ha in the past, currently and potential for increase.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 8 , Line 4
UK
Missing parallel comparison to food yields. 700% increase in chemical fertilizer use and 70% increase in irrigation (ok). But this resulted in non-proportional increases in food production. For example, grain yields increase by 1.5-fold from 1961 to 2006 (FAO stats). Suggest adding this comparison inputs vs. yields increases (to highlight innefficiencies and impacts of GR technologies).
View full comment by Reyes Tirado...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 8 , Line 6
UK
it would also be good to have information on yield/ha in different regions over time to see past icnrease and potential for further yield icnreases.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 8 , Line 6
UK
delete : in THE Southern Asia
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 8 , Line 9
UK
would be good to make the point htat this is linked to both increasing population,a nd increasing meat onsumption per capita in developing nations. There is mor eon this in the next para though so may not be necessary
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 9
UK
I have a slight preference for absolute numbers rather than % change. I understand this allows you to plot all on one figure but I think it is interesting to see relatively how much land is in crops and forests etc. Anyway, I see the rational of doing it both ways.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 9 , Line 10
UK
Is it just warming (ie heat stress) or also reduced ppt (drought). May be better to be specific (ie rising heat stress) or to say "due to climate change"
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 9 , Line 12
UK
add some text at beginning of sentence to clarify but also to make it make sense e.g. "MODELLED ESTIMATES OF future changes…." and to clarify, is this in the US?
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 9 , Line 13 To Page 9 , Line 14
UK
I would prefer to see the range after the best estiamte in a racket, use "to, be careful of commas versus decimal points, and put the crop type with the number rather than list them all and say respectively as this way it is easier to follow e.g.wheat +1.6% (-4.1 to +6.7); maize -14.1% (-28.0 to +4.3).....etc
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 9 , Line 15
UK
surely everywhere not just temerate regions, especially since the next number is a global one.
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 9 , Line 18
UK
I would prefer to start by giving global numbers then breaking down regionally. But I think there also needs to be some explanation where the data comes from ie. FAO FRA reporting happens every 5 years, relies on country reporting, many uncertainties (grainger paper),. Increasing use of setellite data is improving estiamtes, FAO now including this.Has led to substantial reduction of FAOs past estimates of deforestation rates between FAO FRA 2010 and FAO FRA 2005. Satellite
View full comment by Jo House...

First Order Draft, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU): From Page 9 , Line 8
UK
Need an introductory sentence here explaining why claimte affects agric production.
View full comment by Jo House...

Breakdown for UK