Climatic Change

, 97:123 | Cite as

The importance of three centuries of land-use change for the global and regional terrestrial carbon cycle

  • Jelle G. Van Minnen
  • Kees Klein Goldewijk
  • Elke Stehfest
  • Bas Eickhout
  • Gerard van Drecht
  • Rik Leemans


Large amounts of carbon (C) have been released into the atmosphere over the past centuries. Less than half of this C stays in the atmosphere. The remainder is taken up by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. Where does the C come from and where and when does this uptake occur? We address these questions by providing new estimates of regional land-use emissions and natural carbon fluxes for the 1700–2000 period, simultaneously considering multiple anthropogenic (e.g. land and energy demand) and biochemical factors in a geographically explicit manner. The observed historical atmospheric CO2 concentration profile for the 1700 to 2000 period has been reproduced well. The terrestrial natural biosphere has been a major carbon sink, due to changes in climate, atmospheric CO2, nitrogen and management. Due to land-use change large amounts of carbon have been emitted into the atmosphere. The net effect was an emission of 35 Pg C into the atmosphere for the 1700 to 2000 period. If land use had remained constant at its distribution in 1700, then the terrestrial C uptake would have increased by 142 Pg C. This overall difference of including or excluding land-use changes (i.e. 177 Pg C) comes to more than half of the historical fossil-fuel related emissions of 308 Pg C. Historically, global land-use emissions were predominantly caused by the expansion of cropland and pasture, while wood harvesting (for timber and fuel wood) only played a minor role. These findings are robust even when changing some of the important drivers like the extent of historical land-use changes. Under varying assumptions, land-use emissions over the past three centuries could have increased up to 20%, but remained significantly lower than from other sources. Combining the regional land-use and natural C fluxes, North America and Europe were net C sources before 1900, but turned into sinks during the twentieth century. Nowadays, these fluxes are a magnitude smaller than energy- and industry-related emissions. Tropical regions were C neutral prior to 1950, but then accelerated deforestation turned these regions into major C sources. The energy- and industry-related emissions are currently increasing in many tropical regions, but are still less than the land-use emissions. Based on the presented relevance of the land-use and natural fluxes for the historical C cycle and the significance of fossil-fuel emissions nowadays, there is a need for an integrated approach for energy, nature and land use in evaluating possible climate change mitigation policies.


Fuel Wood Glob Chang Biol Terrestrial Biosphere Wood Harvest Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Achard F, Eva HD, Stibig HJ, Mayaux P, Gallego J, Richards T, Malingreau J-P (2002) Determination of deforestation rates of the world’s humid tropical forests. Science 297:999–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bala G, Caldeira K, Wickett M, Phillips TJ, Lobell DB, Delire C, Mirin A (2007) Combined climate and carbon-cycle effects of large-scale deforestation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:6550–6555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartholome E, Belward AS, Achard F, Bartalev S, Carmonamoreno C, Eva H, Fritz S, Gregoire J-M, Mayaux P, Stibig H-J (2002) Global land cover mapping for the year 2000. Joint Research Centre, ISPRA, Italy, p 63Google Scholar
  4. Brovkin V, Claussen M, Driesschaert E, Fichefet T, Kicklighter D, Loutre MF, Matthews HD, Ramankutty N, Schaeffer M, Sokolov A (2006) Biogeophysical effects of historical land cover changes simulated by six earth system models of intermediate complexity. Clim Dyn 26:587–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Churkina G, Schimel D, Braswell BH, Xiao X (2005) Spatial analysis of growing season length control over net ecosystem exchange. Glob Chang Biol 11:1777–1787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cramer W, Bondeau A, Woodward I, Prentice IC, Betts R, Brovkin V, Cox P, Fisher V, Foley JA, Friend AD, Kucharik C, Lomas M, Sitch S, Smith B, White A, Young MC (2001) Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change: results from six dynamic global vegetation models. Glob Chang Biol 7:357–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DeFries RS, Houghton RA, Hansen MC, Field CB, Skole D, Townshend J (2002) Carbon emissions from tropical deforestation and regrowth based on satellite observations for the 1980s and 1990s. PNAS 99:14256–14261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Vries WIM, Reinds GJ, Gundersen PER, Sterba H (2006) The impact of nitrogen deposition on carbon sequestration in European forests and forest soils. Glob Chang Biol 12:1151–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Denman KL, Brasseur G, Chidthaisong A, Ciais P, Cox P, Dickinson RE, Hauglustaine D, Heinze C, Holland E, Jacob D, Lohmann U, Ramachandran S, Dias PLdS, Wofsy SC, Zhang X (2007) Couplings between changes in the climate system and biogeochemistry. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt K, Tignor MMB, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis, working group 1 contribution to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC), pp 499–588Google Scholar
  10. FAO (2006) FAOSTAT database collections. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  11. Fearnside PM (2000a) Accounting for time in mitigation global warming through land-use change and forestry. Mitig Adapt Strategies Glob Chang 5:239–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fearnside PM (2000b) Global warming and tropical land-use change: greenhouse gas emissions from biomass burning, decomposition and soils in forest conversion, shifting cultivation and secondary vegetation. Clim Change 46:115–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fearnside PM (2001) The potential of Brazil forest sector for mitigating global warming under the Kyoto protocol. Mitig Adapt Strategies Glob Chang 6:355–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fischlin A, Midgley GF, Price J, Leemans R, Gopal B, Turley C, Rounsevell M, Dube P, Tarazona J, Velichko A (2007) Ecosystems, their properties, goods, and services. In: Parry M, Canziani O, Palutikof J, Hanson C, Linden Pvd, Pritchard N (eds) Climate change 2007: impacts, vulnerability and adaptation, working group 2 contribution to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC), pp 211–272Google Scholar
  15. Hegerl GC, Zwiers FW, Braconnot P, Gillett NP, Luo Y, Marengo J, Nicholls N, Penner JE, Stott PA (2007) Understanding and attributing climate change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt K, Tignor MMB, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis, working group 1 contribution to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on cimate change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 663–746Google Scholar
  16. Houghton RA (1991) Tropical deforestation and atmospheric carbon dioxide. Clim Change 19:99–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Houghton RA (2003) Revised estimates of the annual flux of carbon to the atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 1950–2000. Tellus B 55:378–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Houghton RA, Hobbie JE, Meilillo JM (1983) Changes in the carbon content of terrestrial biota and soils between 1860 and 1980: a net release of CO2 to the atmosphere. Ecol Monogr 53(3):235–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. House JI, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Houghton RA, Heimann M (2003) Reconciling apparent inconsistencies in estimates of terrestrial CO2 sources and sinks. Tellus B 55B:345–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hurtt GC, Frolking S, Fearon MG, Moore B, Shevliakova E, Malyshev S, Pacala SW, Houghton RA (2006) The underpinnings of land-use history: three centuries of global gridded land-use transitions, wood-harvest activity, and resulting secondary lands. Glob Chang Biol 12:1208–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Janssens IA, Freibauer A, Ciais P, Smith P, Nabuurs G-J, Folberth G, Schlamadinger B, Hutjes RWA, Ceulemans R, Schulze E-D, Valentini R, Dolman AJ (2003) Europe’s terrestrial biosphere absorbs 7 to 12% of European anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Science 300:1538–1542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaipainen T, Liski J, Pussinen A, Karjalainen T (2004) Managing carbon sinks by changing rotation length in European forests. Environ Sci Policy 7:205–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keeling RF, Piper SC, Bollenbacher AF, Walker JS (2008) Atmospheric CO2 records from sites in the SIO air sampling network. In: Trends: a compendium of data on global change. Carbon dioxide information analysis center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, US Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., USAGoogle Scholar
  24. Klein Goldewijk K (2001) Estimating global land use change over the past 300 years: the Hyde database. Glob Biogeochem Cycle 15:417–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klein Goldewijk K (2005) Three centuries of global population growth: a spatial referenced population density database for 1700–2000. Popul Environ 26:343–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klein Goldewijk K, Van Drecht G, Bouwman AF (2007) Mapping contemporary global cropland and rangeland on a 5 resolution grid. J Land Use Sci 2:167–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Klein Goldewijk K, Van Minnen JG, Kreileman GJJ, Vloedbeld M, Leemans R (1994) Simulation of the carbon flux between the terrestrial environment and the atmosphere. Water Air Soil Pollut 76:199–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leemans R, van den Born GJ (1994) Determining the potential global distribution of natural vegetation, crops and agricultural productivity. Water Air Soil Pollut 76:133–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leemans R, Eickhout BJ, Strengers B, Bouwman AF, Schaeffer M (2002) The consequences for the terrestrial carbon cycle of uncertainties in land use, climate and vegetation responses in the IPCC SRES scenarios. Sci China 43:1–15Google Scholar
  30. Levy PE, Friend AD, White A, Cannell MGR (2004) The influence of land use change on global-scale fluxes of carbon from terrestrial ecosystems. Clim Change 67:185–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Loveland TR, Reed BC, Brown JF, Ohlen DO, Zhu Z, Yang L, Merchant JW (2000) Development of a global land cover characteristics database and IGBP DISCover from 1 km AVHRR data. Int J Rem Sens 21:1303–1330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mann ME (2002) Climate reconstruction: the value of multiple proxies. Science 297:1481–1482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marland G, Boden TA, Andres RJ (2008) Global, regional, and national CO2 emissions. Trends: a compendium of data on global change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, US Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., USAGoogle Scholar
  34. McGuire AD, Sitch S, Clein JS, Dargaville R, Esser G, Foley JA, Heimann M, Joos F, Kaplan J, Kicklighter DW, Meier RA, Melillo JM, Moore BI, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Recheneau T, Schloss A, Tian HQ, Williams LJ, Wittenberg U (2001) Carbon balance of the terrestrial biosphere in the 20th century: analyses of the CO2, climate and land use effects with four process-based ecosystem models. Glob Biol Cycle 15:183–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Milne R, van Oijen M (2005) A comparison of two modelling studies of environmental effects on forest carbon stocks across Europe. Ann For Sci 62:911–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitchell BR (1993) International historical statistics, the Americas: 1750–1988. MacMillan, Indianapolis, Ind., p 817Google Scholar
  37. Mitchell BR (1998a) International historical statistics, Africa, Asia & Oceania: 1750–1993. MacMillan, Indianapolis, Ind., p 1113Google Scholar
  38. Mitchell BR (1998b) International historical statistics, Europe: 1750–1993. MacMillan, Indianapolis, Ind., p 959Google Scholar
  39. MNP (2006) In: Bouwman AF, Kram T, Klein Goldewijk K (eds) Integrated modelling of global environmental change. An overview of IMAGE 2.4. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven, the Netherlands, p 228Google Scholar
  40. Nemani RR, Keeling CD, Hashimoto H, Jolly WM, Piper SC, Tucker CJ, Myneni RB, Running SW (2003) Climate-driven increases in global terrestrial net primary production from 1982 to 1999. Science 300:1560–1563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. New MG, Hulme M, Jones PD (2000) Representing twentieth century space-time climate variability. Part II: development of 1901–96 monthly grids of terrestrial surface climate. J Clim 13:2217–2238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nowak RS, Elsswoth DS, Smith SD (2004) Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2. Do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions? New Phytol 162:253–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Phat NK, Knorr W, Kim S (2004) Appropriate measures for conservation of terrestrial carbon stocks—analysis of trends of forest management in Southeast Asia. For Ecol Man 191:283–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ramankutty N, Foley JA (1998) Characterizing patterns of global land use: an analysis of global croplands data. Glob Biogeochem Cycle 12:667–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ramankutty N, Gibbs HK, Achard F, Defries R, Foley JA, Houghton RA (2007) Challenges to estimating carbon emissions from tropical deforestation. Glob Chang Biol 13:51–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Richards JF (1990) Land transformation. In: Turner BL, Clark WC, Kates RW, Richards JF, Mathews JT, Meyer WB (eds) The earth as transformed by human action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 163–178Google Scholar
  47. Richards JF, Flint E (1994) Historic land use and carbon estimates for South and Southeast Asia 1880–1980. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, US, p Data set NDP-046 CDIAC/ORNLGoogle Scholar
  48. Schaeffer M, Eickhout B, Hoogwijk M, Strengers B, Van Vuuren D, Leemans R, Opsteegh T (2006) CO2 and albedo climate impacts of extratropical carbon and biomass plantations. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 20:GB2020. doi: 10-1029/2005GB002581 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stephens BB, Gurney KR, Tans PP, Sweeney C, Peters W, Bruhwiler L, Ciais P, Ramonet M, Bousquet P, Nakazawa T, Aoki S, Machida T, Inoue G, Vinnichenko N, Lloyd J, Jordan A, Heimann M, Shibistova O, Langenfelds RL, Steele LP, Francey RJ, Denning AS (2007) Weak northern and strong tropical land carbon uptake from vertical profiles of atmospheric CO2. Science 316:1732–1735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Minnen JG, Leemans R, Ihle F (2000) Assessing consequences of dynamic changes in global vegetation patterns, using the IMAGE 2.1 model. Glob Chang Biol 6:595–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Van Minnen JG, Strengers B, Eickhout B, Klein Goldewijk K (2006) Simulating carbon exchange between the terrestrial biosphere and atmosphere. In: Bouwman AF, Kram T, Klein Goldewijk K (eds) Integrated modelling of global environmental change. An overview of IMAGE 2.4. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, pp 113–130Google Scholar
  52. Zaehle S, Sitch S, Smith B, Hatterman F (2005) Effects of parameter uncertainties on the modeling of terrestrial biosphere dynamics. Glob Biogeochem Cycle 19:16CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jelle G. Van Minnen
    • 1
  • Kees Klein Goldewijk
    • 1
  • Elke Stehfest
    • 1
  • Bas Eickhout
    • 1
  • Gerard van Drecht
    • 1
  • Rik Leemans
    • 2
  1. 1.Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL)BilthovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Environmental Systems Analysis GroupWageningen University & Research (WUR)WageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations