TY - JOUR
T1 - Tree Biomass Estimation in Agroforestry for Carbon Farming
T2 - A Comparative Analysis of Timing, Costs, and Methods
AU - Conti, Niccolò
AU - Della Rocca, Gianni
AU - Franciamore, Federico
AU - Marra, Elena
AU - Nigro, Francesco
AU - Nigrone, Emanuele
AU - Ramadhan, Ramadhan
AU - Paris, Pierluigi
AU - Tárraga-Martínez, Gema
AU - Belenguer-Ballester, José
AU - Scatena, Lorenzo
AU - Lombardi, Eleonora
AU - Garosi, Cesare
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 by the authors.
PY - 2025/8
Y1 - 2025/8
N2 - Agroforestry systems (AFSs) enhance long-term carbon sequestration through tree biomass accumulation. As the European Union’s Carbon Farming Certification (CRCF) Regulation now recognizes AFSs in carbon farming (CF) schemes, accurate tree biomass estimation becomes essential for certification. This review examines field-destructive and remote sensing methods for estimating tree aboveground biomass (AGB) in AFSs, with a specific focus on their advantages, limitations, timing, and associated costs. Destructive methods, although accurate and necessary for developing and validating allometric equations, are time-consuming, costly, and labour-intensive. Conversely, satellite- and drone-based remote sensing offer scalable and non-invasive alternatives, increasingly supported by advances in machine learning and high-resolution imagery. Using data from the INNO4CFIs project, which conducted parallel destructive and remote measurements in an AFS in Tuscany (Italy), this study provides a novel quantitative comparison of the resources each method requires. The findings highlight that while destructive measurements remain indispensable for model calibration and new species assessment, their feasibility is limited by practical constraints. Meanwhile, remote sensing approaches, despite some accuracy challenges in heterogeneous AFSs, offer a promising path forward for cost-effective, repeatable biomass monitoring but in turn require reliable field data. The integration of both approaches might represent a valid strategy to optimize precision and resource efficiency in carbon farming applications.
AB - Agroforestry systems (AFSs) enhance long-term carbon sequestration through tree biomass accumulation. As the European Union’s Carbon Farming Certification (CRCF) Regulation now recognizes AFSs in carbon farming (CF) schemes, accurate tree biomass estimation becomes essential for certification. This review examines field-destructive and remote sensing methods for estimating tree aboveground biomass (AGB) in AFSs, with a specific focus on their advantages, limitations, timing, and associated costs. Destructive methods, although accurate and necessary for developing and validating allometric equations, are time-consuming, costly, and labour-intensive. Conversely, satellite- and drone-based remote sensing offer scalable and non-invasive alternatives, increasingly supported by advances in machine learning and high-resolution imagery. Using data from the INNO4CFIs project, which conducted parallel destructive and remote measurements in an AFS in Tuscany (Italy), this study provides a novel quantitative comparison of the resources each method requires. The findings highlight that while destructive measurements remain indispensable for model calibration and new species assessment, their feasibility is limited by practical constraints. Meanwhile, remote sensing approaches, despite some accuracy challenges in heterogeneous AFSs, offer a promising path forward for cost-effective, repeatable biomass monitoring but in turn require reliable field data. The integration of both approaches might represent a valid strategy to optimize precision and resource efficiency in carbon farming applications.
KW - aboveground biomass
KW - costs
KW - destructive measurements
KW - remote sensing
KW - satellite
KW - timing
KW - UAVs
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105014499861
UR - https://res.slu.se/id/publ/41419bed-84f1-415e-a46e-6c7be5da3faa
U2 - 10.3390/f16081287
DO - 10.3390/f16081287
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:105014499861
SN - 1999-4907
VL - 16
JO - Forests
JF - Forests
IS - 8
M1 - 1287
ER -