Role of Forest Carbon Change in Shaping Future Land Use and Land Cover Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Global change, particularly the changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration, climatic variables, and nitrogen deposition, has been widely recognized and examined to have worldwide impacts on forest carbon. However, its influence on forest area required to meet the demand for timber and carbon storage and subsequent land use and land cover change (LULCC) is rarely studied. This study explores the role of global change‐driven forest carbon change in shaping future global LULCC projections and investigates underlying drivers. We incorporated the global change impacts on forest carbon from the Canadian Land Surface Scheme Including Biogeochemical Cycles model simulations (driven by meteorological forcing projections from two Earth system models [ESMs]) into the Global Change Analysis Model, under three combinations of shared socioeconomic pathways and representative concentration pathways (SSP126, SSP370, and SSP585). Including forest carbon change decreases the projected expansion of managed forest and managed pasture, reduces the loss of unmanaged pastures and forests, and provides more cropland. The relative change in managed forest by 2100 is −4.0%, −21.7%, and −31.9%, under SSP126, SSP370, and SSP585, respectively, when forest carbon change is considered. CO2 fertilization is the dominant driver, increasing forest vegetation and soil carbon by 37% and 4.1%, and leading to 78.6% of the total area with a change in land use types by 2100 under SSP585. In comparison, climate change reduces forest vegetation and soil carbon by −3.5% and −0.8%, influencing 23.9% of the total area with a change in land use types by 2100 under SSP585, while nitrogen deposition has minor impacts. Using meteorological forcing data from two ESMs leads to similar impacts of forest carbon change on LULCC in terms of sign and trend but different magnitudes. This study highlights the large impact of forest carbon change on shaping future LULCC dynamics and the critical role of CO2 fertilization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".