Forests have always played an important role in agreeing on accounting rules during the past two decades of international climate policy development. Starting from activity-based gross–net accounting of selected forestry activities to mandatory accounting against a baseline—rules have changed quite rapidly and with significant consequences for accounted credits and debits. Such changes have direct consequences on incentives for climate-investments in forestry. There have also been strong arguments not to include forests into the accounting system by considering large uncertainties, procedural challenges and a fear of unearned credits corrupting the overall accounting system, among others. This paper reflects the development of respective accounting approaches and reviews the progress made on core challenges and resulting incentives. The historic development of forest management accounting rules is analysed in the light of the Paris Agreement. Pros and cons of different approaches are discussed with specific focus on the challenge to maintain integrity of the accounting approach and on resulting incentives for additional human induced investments to increase growth for future substitution and increased C storage by forest management. The review is solely based on scientific publications and official IPCC and UNFCC documents. Some rather political statements of non-scientific stakeholders are considered to reflect criticism. Such sources are indicated accordingly. Remaining and emerging requirements for an accounting system for post 2030 are highlighted. The Paris Agreement is interpreted as a “game changer” for the role of forests in climate change mitigation. Many countries rely on forests in their NDCs to achieve their self-set targets. In fact, the agreement “to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century” puts pressure on the entire land sector to contribute to overall GHG emission reductions. This also concerns forests as a resource for the bio-based economy and wood products, and for increasing carbon reservoirs. By discussing the existing elements of forest accounting rules and conditions for establishing an accounting system post 2030, it is concluded that core requirements like factoring out direct human-induced from indirect human-induced and natural impacts on managed lands, a facilitation of incentives for management changes and providing safeguards for the integrity of the accounting system are not sufficiently secured by currently discussed accounting rules. A responsibility to fulfil these basic requirements is transferred to Nationally Determined Contributions. Increased incentives for additional human induced investments are not stipulated by the accounting approach but rather by the political decision to make use of the substitution effect and potential net removals from LULUCF to contribute to self-set targets.

中文翻译：

---

森林管理中温室气体排放和清除的核算：从京都到巴黎的漫漫长路。

在过去二十年的国际气候政策制定过程中，森林一直在就会计规则达成一致方面发挥着重要作用。从选定林业活动的基于活动的毛净额核算到基于基线的强制性核算，规则发生了相当迅速的变化，并对记账的贷方和借方产生了重大影响。这些变化对林业气候投资的激励措施产生直接影响。考虑到巨大的不确定性、程序上的挑战以及对不劳而获的信用会破坏整个会计体系等因素的担忧，也有强烈的论据不将森林纳入会计体系。本文反映了各自会计方法的发展，并回顾了在核心挑战和由此产生的激励措施方面取得的进展。根据《巴黎协定》分析森林经营会计制度的历史发展。讨论了不同方法的优缺点，特别关注保持会计方法完整性的挑战以及由此产生的额外人为投资的激励措施，以增加未来替代的增长和森林管理增加的碳储存。审查完全基于科学出版物和官方 IPCC 和 UNFCC 文件。非科学利益相关者的一些相当政治性的声明被认为反映了批评。相应地指出了这些来源。强调了 2030 年后会计系统的剩余和新出现的要求。《巴黎协定》被解释为森林在减缓气候变化方面的作用的“游戏规则改变者”。许多国家依靠其国家自主贡献中的森林来实现自己设定的目标。事实上，“在本世纪下半叶实现温室气体人为源排放量和汇清除量之间的平衡”的协议给整个土地部门带来了压力，要求它们为整体温室气体减排做出贡献。这也涉及森林作为生物经济和木材产品的资源，以及增加碳储量。通过讨论森林核算规则的现有要素和建立 2030 年后核算体系的条件，得出的结论是核心要求，如从对管理土地的间接人为和自然影响中剔除直接人为因素，目前讨论的会计规则没有充分保证促进管理变革的激励措施和为会计制度的完整性提供保障。满足这些基本要求的责任转移到国家自主贡献。会计方法并未规定增加额外的人为投资的激励措施，而是通过利用替代效应和 LULUCF 的潜在净清除来促进自我设定目标的政治决策。