Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Environ. Sci.
Sec. Environmental Economics and Management
Volume 12 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2024.1379630

Forest Conservation as a CO2 Offset Measure: A Case of an Urban Development Project in Finland

Provisionally accepted
Mikko Järveläinen Mikko Järveläinen 1*Sampo Pihlainen Sampo Pihlainen 2Kristiina Karhu Kristiina Karhu 1,3Nico Österberg Nico Österberg 4Raisa Mäkipää Raisa Mäkipää 5
  • 1 Department of Forest Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland
  • 2 Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland
  • 3 Helsinki Institute of Life Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland
  • 4 AFRY, Vantaa, Uusimaa, Finland
  • 5 Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    This study investigates carbon offset potential in Espoo, Finland, by comparing a constructionimpacted deforestation site with a larger, conserved forest area. Our research quantifies the carbon stock and sequestration impacts, revealing that the conserved forest's (79 ha) carbon stock increased by 26 Mg ha -1 in soil and 65 Mg ha -1 in biomass compared to the baseline scenario. This enhancement is sufficient to compensate for the deforestation site's (19 ha) stock loss of 186 Mg ha -1 and 43 Mg ha -1 , respectively, showcasing forest conservation as a viable method for offsetting carbon stock losses in the context of urban development. This study illuminates the complexities of CO2 compensation regulation and emphasizes the necessity for robust, transparent carbon accounting practices. The insights offer a valuable perspective on integrating nature-based solutions in urban planning to achieve broader ecological and climate goals. This study investigates the carbon offset potential in Espoo, Finland, by comparing a constructionimpacted deforestation site with a larger conserved forest area. Addressing a knowledge gap in localized forest conservation as a CO2 offset method, our research quantifies the carbon stock and sequestration impacts under both baseline and alternative scenarios for the two study sites. The baseline scenario for offset site reflects standard forest management practices, while the alternative scenario involves complete forest conservation without active management. Our findings reveal that the conserved forest (79 ha), dominated by Norway spruce (Picea abies) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), increased its carbon stock by 26 Mg ha-1 in soil and 65 Mg ha-1 in biomass. This enhancement is sufficient to compensate for the smaller deforestation site's (19 ha), also containing a mix of Norway spruce and Scots pine, stock loss of 186 Mg ha-1 in soil and 43 Mg ha-1 in biomass. Furthermore, this study illuminates the complexities of CO2 compensation regulation and emphasizes the necessity for robust, transparent carbon accounting practices. The insights offer a valuable perspective on integrating nature-based solutions in urban planning to achieve broader ecological and climate goals.

    Keywords: CO2 compensation1, CO2 offset2, urban development3, land-use change4, forest conservation5, climate change mitigation6, public sector net-zero7 (Min.5-Max. 8

    Received: 31 Jan 2024; Accepted: 30 Jul 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Järveläinen, Pihlainen, Karhu, Österberg and Mäkipää. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Mikko Järveläinen, Department of Forest Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, FI-00014, Uusimaa, Finland

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.