Go to  Advanced Search

Please note that cIRcle is currently being upgraded to DSpace v5.1. The upgrade means that the cIRcle service will not be accepting new submissions from 5:00 PM on September 1/15 until 5:00 PM on September 4/15. All cIRcle material will still be accessible during this period. Apologies for any inconvenience.

Seeing the trees for the carbon: agroforestry for development and carbon mitigation

Show full item record

Files in this item

Files Size Format Description   View
Anderson & Zerriffi - Climatic Change 2012 - post-print.pdf 1.136Mb Adobe Portable Document Format Post-print, Anderson and Zerriffi 2012   View/Open
Title: Seeing the trees for the carbon: agroforestry for development and carbon mitigation
Author: Anderson, Emily K.; Zerriffi, Hisham
Supervisor: Zerriffi, Hisham
Subject Keywords agroforestry;rural development;climate change mitigation;smallholder
Issue Date: 2012-04-03
Publicly Available in cIRcle 2012-12-05
Publisher SpringerLink
Citation: Anderson, E.K. and H. Zerriffi. 2012. Seeing the trees for the carbon: agroforestry for development and carbon mitigation. Climatic Change, 115(3-4), 741-757. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0456-y. The final publication is available at www.springerlink.com.
Abstract: Land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities will play an important role in global climate change mitigation. Many carbon schemes require the delivery of both climate and rural development benefits by mitigation activities conducted in developing countries. Agroforestry is a LULUCF activity that is gaining attention because of its potential to deliver climate benefits as well as rural development benefits to smallholders. There is hope that agroforestry can deliver co-benefits for climate and development; however experience with early projects suggests co-benefits are difficult to achieve in practice. We review the literature on agroforestry, participatory rural development, tree-based carbon projects and co-benefit carbon projects to look at how recommended project characteristics align when trying to generate different types of benefits. We conclude that there is considerable tension inherent in designing co-benefit smallholder agroforestry projects. We suggest that designing projects to seek ancillary benefits rather than co-benefits may help to reduce this tension.
Affiliation: Liu Institute for Global Issues (LIGI)Science, Faculty ofResources, Environment and Sustainability, Institute for (IRES)
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2429/43646
Peer Review Status: Reviewed
Scholarly Level: Faculty

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record

UBC Library
1961 East Mall
Vancouver, B.C.
Canada V6T 1Z1
Tel: 604-822-6375
Fax: 604-822-3893