New Analysis Reveals Australia’s Forest Cover Data Misleading

Recent research indicates that Australia’s official statistics on forest cover may mask the true extent of deforestation, raising concerns about the ecological impact and sustainability of the nation’s forests. While official reports suggest that Australia’s forest area has been increasing since 2008, a new analysis asserts that this positive portrayal does not accurately reflect the reality on the ground.

The study, led by researchers from Griffith University, critiques the methodology used by the Australian government to report forest cover. According to the report, forest cover is calculated as a net figure, where losses from deforestation are offset by gains from new forest growth. This approach has drawn criticism for failing to account for the ecological differences between established forests and newly planted areas.

Professor Brendan Mackey, a co-author of the study, described this method as “an accounting sleight of hand.” He emphasized the need for a gross measurement of forest losses and gains, along with improved data collection on both deforestation and regeneration. This is crucial for assessing Australia’s compliance with international climate obligations and protecting biodiversity.

Australia signed the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration in 2021, committing to reverse forest loss and land degradation. Yet, the latest state of the forests report from the federal government, published in 2023, claims that “Australia’s total forest area increased by 0.75 million ha” from 2016 to 2021. The new analysis questions the validity of these figures, suggesting that the datasets used may exaggerate the reported increases in forest area.

The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), which commissioned the research, found that most deforestation is occurring in biodiverse forests, while the areas seeing regrowth are often in drier regions with limited vegetation. This disparity raises concerns, as the carbon absorption capacity of new forests typically falls short of that of older, established forests.

The report estimates that land clearing in productive regions can release up to 120 times more greenhouse gas emissions per hectare than can be absorbed by the thickening of vegetation in less productive areas. This discrepancy suggests that the apparent net increase in forest cover may be concealing significant biodiversity losses and greater greenhouse gas emissions than previously acknowledged.

ACF’s Nathaniel Pelle highlighted Australia’s unique position among wealthy nations regarding deforestation. “No other rich countries in the world destroy forests like Australia does,” he stated. Speaking from the Cop30 climate summit in Brazil, Pelle expressed disappointment at Australia’s lack of substantial action on deforestation, especially as the country considers hosting future climate conferences.

The long-held argument that as long as forests are regrowing, it compensates for those being destroyed, is increasingly challenged. Pelle pointed out the need to protect high-carbon-stock forests to prevent extinctions and achieve net-zero emissions. He emphasized the importance of continuing Brazil’s progress in reducing deforestation, which has seen a significant decline since Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva resumed the presidency.

The federal Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has yet to respond to requests for comment regarding these findings. As the debate over deforestation continues, the call for a more transparent and accurate representation of forest data in Australia becomes increasingly urgent.