High Carbon Stock (HCS) Study

of the Sustainable Palm Oil Manifesto:

A detailed description

Updated as at 22 October 2014

High Carbon Stock (HCS) Study of the Sustainable Palm Oil Manifesto
Updated as at 22 October 2014. Note that this document will be updated as the study evolves during
the next year.

1. Background
The study originates from the Sustainable Palm Oil Manifesto (available at
(www.carbonstockstudy.com). The Manifesto is a commitment to achieve common objectives held by
a group of key stakeholders in the palm oil industry: growers, traders, processors, and end-users, to
set higher standards for sustainability.
Signatories of the Manifesto aim to enhance the work of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil
(RSPO) in three key areas:

Building traceable and transparent supply chains;

Accelerating the journey to no deforestation through the conservation of High Carbon Stock
(HCS) forests and the protection of peat areas regardless of depth; and
Increasing the focus on driving beneficial economic change, ensuring a positive social impact
on people and communities.

A key commitment in the Manifesto is the funding of a scientific study to define HCS forests,
determining thresholds that take account of regional variations in socio-economic conditions.
A steering committee (SC), independently co-chaired by Founder Director of Forum for the Future, Sir
Jonathon Porritt, and Chief Research Scientist from Australias Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Research Organisation (CSIRO), Dr John Raison, has been established to oversee the HCS Study.
Members of the Steering Committee represent key players in the palm oil value chain which includes
the signatories of the Manifesto as well as Wilmar International. They are joined by independent
economic advisor for the agribusiness sector, Dr James Fry, Chairman of LMC International, who lends
his expertise in international commodities to the process. Observers include representatives from the
RSPO, Sustainable Trade Initiative (IDH), Neste Oil and several other organizations (in the process of
joining) who will actively contribute to ensure a transparent, objective and holistic approach.
A Technical Committee (TC) has been established to guide and contribute to the study. The TC is
comprised of seven highly experienced scientists with expertise in the following areas:

Above and below ground biomass

Soil carbon
Remote-sensing
Socio-economics and sustainable development
The global oil palm industry
Sustainability assessment

The TC will work closely with a group of Research Consultants, and their work will be reported as a set
of independent and publicly available reports. An independent and publicly available Synthesis Report,
prepared by the TC, will recommend thresholds for acceptable levels of GHG emissions, taking into
account environmental concerns, regional socio-economic contexts, and the practical considerations
in developing and managing economically viable oil palm plantations.

A Secretariat has been set up to support the Steering Committee in carrying out its duties, while two
sub-committees have been established to oversee administrative tasks, namely the Communications
Committee and a Finance Committee.
The relationship between the different components of the study is shown in the following diagram.

A website (www.carbonstockstudy.com) has been established to provide updated information to all

interested stakeholders.

2. Proposed study
A well-resourced and fully independent study will commence on 1 November, 2014 and will run for
one year. It will have a geographical focus of Southeast Asia and West and Central Africa. The study
aims to provide:

A definition of HCS forests that is based on potential GHG emissions from biomass and soils; as
well as a practical method for identifying and delineating HCS forests on the ground.
Suggested threshold values for GHG emissions from HCS forests, that take account of the
regional socio-economic context in SE Asian and African countries where new oil palm
developments are planned.
Guidance on how to accommodate the rights and livelihoods of local communities and
indigenous peoples when implementing a future HCS approach to land use planning.

Details of the new study are provided below in sections 4 and 5.

3. The HCS approach proposed by Golden Agri-Resources/The Forest Trust/Greenpeace

The initial HCS approach proposed by Golden Agri-Resources/The Forest Trust/Greenpeace (Golden
Agri-Resources and SMART, 2012; subsequently referred to here as the GAR/TFT/GP approach) seeks
to use the carbon stock in above-ground biomass as a way of identifying forest, and thus as a basis
for avoiding deforestation. The GAR/TFT/GP approach proposes that a single threshold of ~ 40 t C/ha
can be used to delineate forest from non-forest. We feel that the above approach has conceptual and
practical limitations for the following reasons:
(a) There are already well established definitions of forest based on the crown cover and
height of woody vegetation. The UNFCCC (16/CMP.1) defines Forest as a minimum area
of land of 0.051.0 hectare with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more
than 1030 per cent with trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 25
metres at maturity in situ. A forest may consist either of closed forest formations where
trees of various storeys and undergrowth cover a high proportion of the ground or open
forest. Young natural stands and all plantations which have yet to reach a crown density
of 1030 per cent or tree height of 25 metres are included under forest, as are areas
normally forming part of the forest area which are temporarily unstocked as a result of
human intervention such as harvesting or natural causes but which are expected to revert
to forest. An oil palm plantation will generally meet the above definition of a forest and
thus where such plantations are established on land already carrying forest, may best be
considered as forest conversion and not as deforestation.
The FAO uses similar criteria to define a forest, but in contrast to UNFCCC explicitly
excludes stands of trees established primarily for agricultural production, for example
fruit tree plantations and trees planted in agro-forestry systems. In contrast, rubber wood
plantations and cork oak stands are included in the FAO concept of a forest (FAO FRA
2010).
Thus, a disturbed forest should still be considered as a forest even if it currently has low
carbon stock in biomass (e.g. young re-growth or scrub). Thus the conversion of such a
forest to a plantation of oil palm should, technically, be considered as deforestation under
the GAR/TFT/GP approach.
(b) Following from the above point, there is a conceptual problem in trying to define forest,
indirectly, by using a measure of carbon stock determined at one point in time. The
current carbon stock can be just a measure of a particular stage of the forest recovery
cycle after disturbance and not a useful way to separate forest from non-forest. As
shown in Figure 1, carbon stocks increase in growing forests, so there is a continuum from
very low in recently disturbed forest or degraded forest, to higher values as regrowth
develops, to maximum values in mature stands. Thus, what might be considered as low
carbon stock today, may not be in the future as the forest re-grows.

Stand biomass carbon

Time
Figure 1. Example of differing patterns of accumulation of biomass carbon in forests. Biomass
carbon stock at any point in time reflects both rates of forest growth (including re-growth
following disturbance) and removals of carbon during disturbances such as harvesting or fire.

(c) Over time, the GHG emissions from organic soils (not just peat) can dominate the shorterterm emissions from biomass. Thus there is a need to take these into account where the
objective is to properly consider emissions from conversion of forests to oil palm
plantations. Focusing only on above-ground biomass carbon, as the GAR/TFT/GP
approach does, is not sufficient.
(d) The regional context needs to be taken into account when deciding the acceptable degree
of any further native forest conversion/deforestation. For example, in already heavily
deforested landscapes, further forest loss (even of degraded forest with a low current
carbon stock, but with potential for slow recovery) may be undesirable. Whereas in
heavily forested landscapes, there can be more options for forest conversion whilst still
meeting agreed regional forest conservation targets. The countries/regions where oil
palm expansion is proposed differ markedly in this regard.
(e) Loss of carbon stock (resulting in GHG emissions) is unlikely to be the sole factor in
determining whether a forest should be converted to oil palm or not other factors such
as a range of conservation values and socio-economic factors also need to taken into
account. For example at the local scale, cleared or partially cleared land with lower carbon
stock may have higher economic value.

4. Conceptual Framework for the new HCS study

Our study differs from that of GAR/TFT/GP in that it does not use carbon stock as a basis for defining
forest, or loss of carbon stock as a basis for defining deforestation. Rather, our study will produce
methods and guidance on how to:

Make reliable estimates of the potential GHG emissions derived not only from biomass and
soils associated with the conversion of forests to oil palm plantations, but also from
subsequent plantation management.

Provide information on the socio-economic implications of setting differing levels (thresholds)

of acceptable GHG emissions per unit of plantation area, for key locations where future
expansion of oil palm plantations is proposed.

Both of these outputs can be used as key inputs to inform multi-stakeholder processes (involving
governments, local communities, growers, civil society, others) deciding upon the location and
magnitude of future forest conversions to oil palm.
The information will also be useful in helping to develop an integrated approach (involving estimation,
evaluation and mitigation) to GHG emissions. To this end we are working closely with the RSPO who
are currently further developing their approach to GHG emissions.
We see a clear need to integrate our HCS approach with HCV and FPIC processes. We will endeavour
to work with the HCV Resource Network in developing clear cost-effective ways to achieve this. HCS
can be seen as another conservation value that aims to protect forest areas that would emit
unacceptably large amounts of GHGs (derived from both biomass and soils) resulting from forest
conversion and on-going plantation management. To achieve this, peat and other soils (especially
those of high carbon content) must be an integral part of the HCS conceptual framework. A key HCS
outcome, the area of forest excluded from development under varying GHG emissions thresholds that
take into consideration local economic development consequences, would need to be a key input (as
part of the Informed) into the FPIC process, in a similar manner to how HCV feeds into FPIC. Thus,
HCS analysis clearly cannot follow sequentially after HCV and FPIC are concluded. All these analyses
need to be considered in making final land use planning and development decisions.
Whilst HCS areas may clearly have important biodiversity value, it seems more sensible to deal with
all biodiversity issues under HCV, rather than to try to account for further biodiversity considerations
under the banner of HCS. Our study will take account of two of the values identified under the existing
HCV approach. These relate to the socio-economic aspects of our work, and are HCV 5 which deals
with community needs, and HCV 6 which deals with cultural values. Other HCVs, including those
relating to protection of biodiversity and other environmental values, will not explicitly be part of our
study.

5. Key components and outputs from the new study

The study is divided into 5 key activities, and within these there are a range of specific tasks as
described below.
5.1

Estimation and mapping of above- and below-ground biomass carbon stocks

This activity aims to provide reliable estimates of the amount of carbon contained in aboveand below-ground biomass at spatial scales useful for management planning. Biomass carbon
is likely to be released to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide during the conversion of forests
to oil palm plantations.
Key Tasks:

5.2

At spatial scale relevant for management planning, review the reliability of existing
biomass maps derived from remote sensing compared with ground surveys.
Review the reliability of available allometric equations that can be used to convert forest
inventory data into estimates of live biomass carbon stock.
Recommend appropriate forest sampling methods (permanent sampling plots, taxonomic
surveys, tree height measurements) to ensure the best aboveground carbon stock
estimates
Recommend appropriate forest sampling intensity (number and size of sample plots per
unit area for important forest strata identified) for estimation of above- and below-ground
biomass carbon stock at scales relevant to forest planning.
Define the likely level of uncertainty in estimates of biomass carbon stocks made using
alternative methods, at a range of spatial scales.
Synthesise existing data to define average biomass carbon stock for categories of forest
(e.g. undisturbed forest, secondary forest of varying density, scrub etc) that can be
mapped using remote-sensing.
Provide estimate of the rates of carbon accumulation in biomass by forests re-growing
after a range of disturbances, and by plantations of oil palm

Mapping of soil carbon stocks and estimation of GHG emissions following disturbance
This activity will establish cost-effective ways of mapping soil carbon stocks in the field, and
of estimating their vulnerability to loss following conversion to oil palm plantations and their
on-going management. Focus will be on organic soils (not just peat) because of the potential
for significant on-going GHG emissions.
Key Tasks:

Summarise available global information on the effects of conversion of tropical native

forests to plantations/agricultural crops, and of subsequent land management practices
(e.g. drainage, cultivation, fertilizer application) on rates of temporal change in soil carbon
stocks. Explore derivation of default emissions factors for soils following forest
conversion/management.
Describe the nature of existing soil maps (covering both mineral and organic soils) for each
of the forest regions covered by the HCS study. Comment on their utility for estimation of
soil carbon stocks, and the vulnerability to loss of carbon following disturbance.
6

5.3

At spatial scale relevant for management planning, develop guidance for surveying (and
targeted sampling) of soils for estimation of soil carbon stocks. Such information can be
used to identify areas not to be converted to oil palm.
Review the reliability of remote sensing to map soils with high organic carbon content
(especially peat land areas)
Evaluate the potential for using vegetation, topography and local climatic conditions for
making reliable spatial estimates of soil carbon stocks, and their vulnerability to loss after
disturbance.

Linking remote-sensing and ground data to improve spatial estimation of forest carbon
stocks and potential GHG emissions after conversion to oil palm
Remotely-sensed data, appropriately calibrated to ground observations, provides the only
practical option for mapping forest carbon stocks over the extensive areas that need to be
examined in this study. Remote sensing allows the discrimination of forest types, forest
degradation stages, the precise location and spatial extent of forest, as well as the up-scaling
of ground based carbon stock assessment with reduced uncertainty.
Key Tasks:

5.4

Review the existing Earth Observation products that could be used to produce carbon
maps, and evaluate their accuracy and reliability
Evaluate the potential for remote sensing to improve the reliability and costeffectiveness of estimates of biomass and soil carbon stocks.
Building on the work of the biomass and soil carbon tasks (as above), develop a
methodology that combines remotely-sensed data and ground observations for
delineating forest (biomass and soil) carbon stocks on the ground at appropriate scales
for decision making.
Develop maps of forest potentially available for conversion to oil palm under differing
HCS thresholds, for selected case regions in southeast Asian and West Africa
Provide guidelines for users how to apply remote sensing methodology to assess HCS
forests

Defining the socio-economic consequences, including accommodating the rights and

livelihoods of local communities and indigenous peoples, of applying differing GHG emission
thresholds in selected countries in south east Asia and west/central Africa
This activity will examine the socio-economic implications of setting varying thresholds for
acceptable GHG emissions (approx. equivalent to loss of carbon stocks)/unit of land area in a
range of contrasting locations. This will provide valuable information to guide improved land
use planning and management. This work area is the most challenging component of the HCS
study. The following is a list of possible activities that is likely to evolve during the next few
months.

Key Tasks:
(a) Overview of regulatory mechanisms and actors
Key objective to provide a comprehensive picture of existing regulatory
mechanisms and actors at all levels.
In addition to a global overview of regulatory mechanisms and actors, case
studies will be conducted to examine the evolution and effectiveness of
certification processes and other mechanisms at national and local levels,
exploring which factors contribute to relative success or failure of
implementation.
Case studies will include Indonesia, covering its recent legislative innovations, and
an African case, perhaps Cameroon or Liberia/Mano River sub-region.
The study will be based on the collation and synthesis of existing information and
relevant studies, supplemented possibly by fieldwork on case studies
A key output will be recommendations regarding which mechanisms are most
effective in addressing expected socio-economic impacts of emissions thresholds,
including land rights, smallholder access to markets, and impacts on local
livelihoods.
(b) Comparative studies of socio-economic impacts

Key objective is to deepen understanding of the positive and negative impacts of

palm oil as a basis for recommendations on future development. Case studies will
be selected from Indonesia/Malaysia and an African case, again possibly
Cameroon or Mano River sub-region.
A macro level overview will be conducted of the role of palm oil in each countrys
broader economy. This aspect will cover historical patterns and growth
trajectories; current production levels, contribution to national accounts,
employment, poverty reduction; supply chain impacts; land-use patterns;
projections and plans for future growth; key challenges.
This will be complemented by micro-level analysis of impacts at local levels,
drawing on a range of examples in each case. This aspect will look at earlier and
more recent experience as increased regulation has come on-stream; economic,
social, political and environmental impacts, positive and negative; and views of
local communities.
The study will involve a survey of existing literature relevant to case studies, using
a wide range of sources to capture various different aspects.
An econometric analysis may also be conducted looking at the current economic
contributions of the palm oil sector in the relevant countries and the potential
impacts of different emission thresholds.

(c) Role of small-holders

Key objective to deepen understanding of the role of smallholders, both

historically and currently in maximising the positive socio-economic impacts of
palm oil.
The study will provide an overview of the role of smallholders, both historically
and as it has evolved recently. Case studies will be conducted of the approaches

used in Malaysia and Indonesia in the FELDA and NES schemes, as well as the less
organized small-holder sector in Nigeria and possibly another African case.
Case studies will explore how the small-holder economy works in practice,
including rights/tenure/livelihood aspects; the different relationships of smallholders to large companies and how these affect impacts; how small-holders are
affected by the changing regulatory environment; and how their role is viewed
by different stakeholders including local communities, industry players,
governments.
Case studies will be based on a survey of existing literature, supplemented by
fieldwork if necessary.

(d) Survey of stake-holder views on commitments to greater accommodation of local rights

and livelihoods

The objective of this survey is to provide an overview of the relevant issues and
controversies in each country in relation to evolving industry commitments on
local rights and livelihoods
It will explore issues relating to land access and tenure; crop compensation;
employment conditions; CSR projects; and broader livelihood aspects. It aims to
gather the views of a range of stakeholders on these issues and on the likely
impacts of the introduction of new emissions thresholds in each country on land
rights and access and livelihoods.
The methodology will involve the construction of a set of semi-structured
questions to form the basis of open-ended interviews to explore these issues, and
the identification of a range of stakeholders to interview in selected case study
countries. This will be followed by an interpretation and analysis of responses and
their implications for implementing these commitments to rights and livelihoods.
Recommendations will be made regarding the most effective approaches to
emissions thresholds that respect local land rights and ensure livelihood
protection.

(e) Environmental impacts on local communities

Key objective is to understand negative local and regional environmental impacts

of palm oil development and ways to minimize these.
This study will comprise an assessment of the impacts of oil palm development
on air and water quality in different countries. It will look at existing regulatory
and certification approaches that address environmental impacts in selected case
studies, assess the effectiveness of different management practices, and explore
the reasons for relative success and failure.
Recommendations will be made regarding effective management practices that
minimize negative environmental impacts on local and regional communities.

5.5 Synthesis work to be jointly undertaken by the Technical Committee and the Research
Consultants working together
Key Tasks:

Provide a definition/description of HCS forests for each region that takes account of
potential GHG emissions from biomass and soils during and after conversion to oil palm.
Develop a practical method for identifying and delineating HCS forests on the ground for
each region.
For the purposes of informing the socio-economic analyses, determine the approximate area
and location (develop a map) of forests that might be excluded from future conversion to oil
palm under differing GHG emission thresholds in selected contrasting case study regions.
The maps should be seen as a tool to support scientific analysis, and do not represent
proposed future forest boundaries. The possible socio-economic implications of exclusion of
forest from conversion to oil palm in these case study regions will be taken into account
when suggesting thresholds for acceptable levels of GHG emissions.
Recommend ranges for acceptable levels of GHG emissions that take account of the regional
socio-economic context in those SE Asian and African countries where new oil palm
developments are planned, and the practical considerations in developing and managing
economically viable plantations of oil palm. The threshold ranges will be refined based on
detailed discussion and feedback from the SC and a broader range of external stake-holders.
Identify key uncertainties, and briefly outline subsequent work that can be conducted to
reduce them.

References

FAO (2010). Forest Resources Assessment. FAO Forest Paper 163. FAO, Rome.
Golden Agri-Resources and SMART (2012). High Carbon Stock Study Report Defining and
identifying high carbon stock forest areas for possible conservation. Published by Golden AgriResources and SMART, in collaboration with The Forest Trust and Greenpeace. Pp. 45.
UNFCCC decision (16/CMP.1)

10