1) The document describes a modeling system used to simulate spatially explicit baselines of deforestation and forest degradation in the Brazilian Amazon to support REDD projects. 2) The model is calibrated using historical deforestation patterns and considers factors like protected areas, infrastructure, and soil quality. It generates baselines at different resolutions from 100m to 1km. 3) The model allows simulation of different policy scenarios like full enforcement of forest code or state-level zoning plans to estimate reduced emissions and carbon stocks compared to business-as-usual baselines.

1. Centro de Sensoriamento Remoto UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE MINAS GERAIS Modelling spatially explicit forward-looking baselines Claudia Stickler REDDex, July 13-15, 2010

3. Surui (Rondonia indigenous land project)**

4. State of Acre

5. Northwestern MatoGrosso project**

6. Xingu Social-environmental Carbon

7. Brazilian Amazon** Used model results not developed for reference level estimation

9. MatoGrosso REDD targets within a national program Annual Deforestation (km2)

10. Indigenous Lands ~60% of area Protected Areas Sustainable Use Areas ~98% of deforestation Private Lands 508,474 km2 >95% of possible REDD+ participant nations

11. Historical average 3.3% = 10,502 ha/yr 2.3% = 216,376 ha/yr 1.3% = 483,380 ha/yr 0.0035% = 3791 ha/yr Nepstad et al. 2010

13. High to medium resolution (100-m to 1-km)

14. Calibrated and run at nested sub-basin levels

15. Regrows forests and cerradoStickler et al. 2009 GCB; Stickler 2009

16. Sub-basins (2nd order) Variable types for calibration clearing roads topography population centers streams protected areas soils/suitability

17. Basic units of change Microbasins (7th order +) 7572 watersheds mean = 5981 ha range: 1 – 70,766 ha Cells 2940 x 7434 cells 4 ha (200 x 200-m)

18. Scenarios Business as Usual historical rate and pattern of deforestation continues historical level of compliance with environmental legislation continues low, high, average varying weight of historical protection of PAs, ILs, etc. Current Forest Code 80% “legal reserve” (RL) in forest biome; 35% RL in cerrado; 100% forest in riparian zone Varying protection of indigenous lands, protected areas State Zoning Plans 4 zones: 80% forest RL in 2 zones; 50% forest RL in 1 zone; 35% cerrado RL in 3 zones; 100% forest in riparian zone Varying protection of indigenous lands, protected areas Stickler 2009; Nepstad et al. 2010

19. High Low Nepstad et al. 2010

20. Comparison of modeled baselines with historical average, Xingu River Basin Nepstad et al. 2010

21. Initial (2007) BAU Average (2037) BAU Low (2037) BAU High (2037)

22. Comparison of modeled baselines with policy intervention scenarios Nepstad et al. 2010

23. BAU Average (2037) Forest Code (2037) Zoning (2037) Forest Code + 20% in ILs (2037)

24. Comparison of modeled baselines for private lands in the Xingu River basin Nepstad et al. 2010

25. Comparison of modeled baselines for indigenous lands in the Xingu River basin Nepstad et al. 2010

26. Carbon stocks & emissionsonindigenouslands in theBrazilian Amazon Nivel de amenaza Priorización de áreas protegidas Soares-Filho et al. 2010 PNAS

28. Climate

29. Water Quality: Basic indicators (Neill et al. 2006, Nepstad et al. 2007; Macedo et al., in prep.)

30. Habitat Quality & Biodiversity Potential

31. Fire Incidence (and associated CO2 emissions) (Silvestrini et al. 2009, Stickler et al. in prep)

32. Carbon sequestration potential

33. Opportunity cost

35. Sample of REDD-Relevant Publications from Amazon Scenarios Program Merry, F., B. Soares-Filho, D. Nepstad, G. Amacher, and H. Rodrigues. 2009. Balancing conservation and economic stability: the future of the Amazon timber industry. Environmental Management Nepstad, D., B. Soares-Filho, F. Merry, A. Lima, P. Moutinho, et al. 2009. The end of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 326: 1350-1351. Nepstad, D, A. Veríssimo, A. Alencar, etal. 1999. Large-scale impoverishment of Amazonian forests by logging and fire. Nature. 398:505-508. Soares-Filho, B. S., P. Moutinho, D. Nepstad, et al. 2010. Role of Brazilian Amazon protected areas in climate mitigation. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. Soares-Filho, B., D. Nepstad, L. Curran, et al. 2006. Modeling Amazon conservation. Nature 440: 520-523. Stickler, C.M., D.C. Nepstad, M.T. Coe, D.G. McGrath, H.O. Rodrigues, et al. 2009. The potential ecological costs and cobenefits of REDD: a critical review and case study from the Amazon region. Global Change Biology 15:2803–2824 Vera-Diaz, M. del C., R. K. Kaufmann, D. C. Nepstad, P. Schlesinger. 2007. An interdisciplinary model of soybean yield in the Amazon Basin: the climatic, edaphic, and economic determinants. Ecological Economics

37. Proposal for distribution of benefits within nested levels Lima et al. 2010; Nepstad et al. 2010

38. Potential nesting of the Xingu “Socio-environmental Carbon” Project C-REDDs Allocated to Amazon States Mato Grosso C-REDD Allocation C-REDD Allocation to Other States State Institutions/ Governance C-REDD Buffer Private Land Program Protected Area Program Farm Settlement Program Indigenous Land Program 100 MtCO2e $ Regulated Entities, Other Investors Indigenous Land Fund “C-REDDs” Indigenous Land Projects (Xingu, NW, etc.) Mato Grosso Indigenous Land Systemic Program

39. Historical average extended into future Nepstad et al. 2010