ARTICLE IN PRESS

Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

www.elsevier.com/locate/biombioe

Biomass energy demand and supply for South and South-East

Asia––assessing the resource base
A. Koopmans
Greenfields International Ltd. P.O. Box 167, San Pa Koi 50000, Chiangmai, Thailand
Available online 12 October 2004

Abstract

One of the many activities undertaken by the FAO—Regional Wood Energy Development Program has been to shed
more light on the wood and other biomass energy situation in its 16 member countries in Asia. Analyzing the demand
for and supply of biomass energy is important if these sources of energy are to be used on a sustainable basis. One of the
conclusions drawn, based on the results of these efforts, was that biomass played an important role as a source of
energy in the region and this would remain so in the near future. In fact, although the importance of biomass was
declining in relative terms, in absolute terms its use appears to be increasing.
Another conclusion drawn is that reliable information on the demand for biomass energy is hard to come by and in
some cases is non-existent. Much of the available data is aggregated with few time-series available; many uncertainties
exist with regard to definitions used while many organizations active in the biomass energy field make use of each-others
data. With regard to the biomass energy supply situation the picture is even more fuzzy—very little if any information,
other than generalizations, is available on the source of the biomass used as a source of energy. In order to be able to
determine the sustainability of biomass energy demand and supply, a resource base analysis was carried out. While this
analysis showed that in most of the member countries the potential supply will be sufficient to sustain the demand for
some time to come, for some countries the situation in the near future is expected to change to a potential deficit.
However, much depends on the underlying assumptions that were made and a more detailed analysis is needed, using
demand and supply more attuned to the real situation on the ground.
r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Biomass; Resource base; Demand and supply analysis; Woodfuels; Residues

Tel./fax: +66-53-338-242.
E-mail address: koopmans@loxinfo.co.th (A. Koopmans).

0961-9534/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.08.004
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
134 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150
1. Introduction
Virtually all countries in South and Southeast
Asia are major biomass energy1 consumers as well
as producers. At present some 25–26% of the total
energy consumption in 16 Asian countries, mem-
ber of the Regional Wood Energy Development
Program (RWEDP),2 consists of biomass fuels.
Available statistics indicate that in absolute terms
biomass energy consumption is increasing even
though its share in overall energy consumption is
declining.
In countries like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambo-
dia, Laos, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Vietnam biomass
fuels are the most significant indigenous source of
energy. Despite this importance, little is under-
stood of the ways in which these sources of energy
are grown, harvested, traded and consumed. As a
result, much uncertainty exists over the environ-
mental consequences of widespread biomass use
and the sustainability of this resource.
RWEDP, over its lifetime, has spent consider-
able time and efforts quantifying biomass energy
demand and supply at the regional, national and
sub-national level. Misconceptions and uncertain-
ties regarding wood extraction and use in each
country had to be addressed first. Besides addres-
1
The term ‘‘biomass’’ in this paper includes wood in all its
forms such as waste wood, driftwood, demolition wood, wood
products like charcoal, black liquor, etc. as well as agricultural
residues, leaves, dung, etc.
2
The Regional Wood Energy Development Programme in
Asia (RWEDP), which started in 1984 and was terminated at
the end of 2001, was implemented by the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) of the Unite Nations (UN) and funded by
the Government of the Netherlands. It had the aim to assist 16
developing countries in South and Southeast Asia in establish-
ing and strengthening their capabilities to: (a) assess wood
energy situations, (b) plan wood energy development strategies,
and (c) implement wood energy supply and utilization
programes. The program promoted the integration of wood
energy in the planning and implementation of national energy
and forestry programs. The 16 countries combined are home to
about 3 billion people or about 50% of the population of the
entire world with some 63% living in rural areas. The total land
area of the 16 countries accounts for only 14% of the world,
making it a heavily populated area. Its forest cover is about
25% but accounts for only 12% of that of the world—in fact
the average woody biomass supply per capita of Asia is only
one-fourth that of Africa and less than one tenth that of Latin
America and the Caribbean.
sing the misconceptions, these efforts were also
considered useful to identify particular regions of a
country that experienced localized biomass energy
problems due to a combination of environmental,
demographic and socio-economic factors. From
there, more focused studies of patterns of biomass
production and use were undertaken in those
regions, and strategies for improving the situation
in those areas were developed.
2. Biomass energy demand
An extensive literature survey was undertaken
to collect as much information as possible on
biomass energy use within the RWEDP member
countries. Several database systems were identified
which contained relevant information. Initially
RWEDP considered using existing database sys-
tems as published by FAO, UN and the Interna-
tional Energy Agency (IEA). However, it soon
became clear that these were not always reflecting
the reality in the field. Comparisons between
energy consumption data published by the coun-
tries themselves showed large discrepancies from
those published by the international organizations.
The reasons for these differences are manifold:
using different country sources for the informa-
tion, uncertainties about definitions used, varia-
tion in conversion factors (volume to energy,
volume to weight, etc.), lack of regular surveys
on biomass energy supply and consumption and
differences in the way biomass energy data were
presented. In addition, many international orga-
nizations share data and information (without
checking or cross-checking with other sources of
information), cover only one type of biomass and/
or cover a limited number of countries.3 Consider-
ing that these other types of biomass energy are
important in the region and that substitution does
take place (from wood to other biomass and
vice-versa, etc.)—an important input for policy
3
For instance: FAO publishes only data on wood, charcoal
and wood derivatives use. The UN, besides wood fuels has also
data on bagasse as a source of energy while IEA covers all types
of biomass used as a source of energy. Both the UN and IEA
cover only part of the countries.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150 135

Table 1
Biomass energy use in RWEDP member countries (RWEDPdatabase)

1999 Woodfuels Transform Fuelwood Charcoal Other biomass Total biomass Remarks source
Country (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton)

Bangladesh 1170 0 1170 0 24,601 25,772 IEA Pers. Com.

Bhutan 916 0 916 0 0 916 Estimate
Cambodia 6184 209 5974 42 133 6317 Country data
China 267,269 0 267,269 0 404,693 671,962 IEA Pers. Com.
India 304,398 0 304,398 0 310,521 614,919 IEA Pers. Com.
Indonesia 104,407 624 103,783 65 32,627 137,035 IEA Pers. Com.
Laos 3144 14 3130 3 0 3144 Country data
Malaysia 6705 3643 3062 419 237 6942 IEA Pers. Com.
Maldives 125 0 125 0 0 125 Estimate
Myanmar 24,992 1348 23,645 217 1925 26,918 Country data
Nepal 14,826 27 14,799 0 2,585 17,410 Country data
Pakistan 37,075 1745 35,330 212 35,530 72,605 IEA Pers. Com.
Philippines 15,715 7260 8454 880 13,032 28,747 IEA Pers. Com.
Sri Lanka 11,411 0 11,411 0 354 11,765 Country data
Thailand 25,121 19,889 8664 3245 17,118 42,239 Country data
Vietnam 32,250 3197 29,053 589 37,648 69,898 IEA Pers. Com.
Total 855,706 37,955 821,183 5677 881,005 1,736,711

considerations—as well as the data discrepancies,
RWEDP decided to try to compile all the different
sources. The results of these efforts were stored in
a database which is accessible to anyone through
the RWEDP website.4
Although the RWEDP database contains a lot
of information it was found to be quite difficult to
extract a regional overview due to the various
factors identified earlier. An added problem is that
very few time series data are available for biomass
energy use (only 4 out of the 16 member countries
published regular biomass energy consumption
data), in some cases only data for a few years is
available while other countries have almost
nothing on biomass energy. In order to draw up
a regional overview, estimates from data published
by other organizations and extrapolation were
resorted to. Table 1 gives a brief overview of
biomass energy use among RWEDP member
countries. RWEDP considered this at the time
4
See http://www.rwedp.org. The website contains, besides the
biomass energy database, also a wealth of information on
biomass energy related issues in the form of publications,
papers, etc. However, due to the fact that RWEDP has been
terminated, the database has not been updated even though
data collection and storage is ongoing (in an informal capacity).
the ‘‘most reliable’’ information since most of the
data are based on energy-related statistics i.e.
energy balances obtained from the countries
themselves. It should be noted that, when using
other sources, a different picture emerges as is
evident in Table 2. This table is taken from the
updated FAO website using results from the
recently completed modelling efforts by the FAO
Forestry Policy and Planning Division (see Box 1).
While the differences between Tables 1 and 2are
glaring (over 300 million tons of woodfuels5), it is
rather academic to argue which data are more
reliable in terms of reflecting better the actual
situation in the field. This is even more so as it is
known that data supplied by the countries
themselves are also often based on extrapolation,
modelling, among others.
This is not to say that the large differences in
data do not matter. Any further work on for
instance emissions and global warming issues from
biomass energy use, energy planning, resource
management just to name a few, will be wrought
5
The term woodfuels include wood as well as charcoal and
black liquor while the term fuelwood denotes wood used as a
source of energy (does not include charcoal).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

136 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

Table 2
Biomass energy use in RWEDP member countries (FAO-STAT website)

1999 Woodfuels Transform Fuelwood Charcoal Other biomass Total biomass Remarks source
Country (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton) (*000 ton)

Bangladesh 18,571 1431 17,140 286 18,571 FAO STAT Website

Bhutan
Cambodia 6881 162 6719 32 6881 FAO STAT Website
China 127,431 277 127,154 55 127,431 FAO STAT Website
India 196,930 8253 188,678 1651 196,930 FAO STAT Website
Indonesia 60,308 1003 59,305 201 60,308 FAO STAT Website
Laos 3897 82 3815 16 3,897 FAO STAT Website
Malaysia 2,256 277 1979 55 2256 FAO STAT Website
Maldives
Myanmar 12,824 125 12,699 25 12,824 FAO STAT Website
Nepal 8457 309 8148 62 8457 FAO STAT Website
Pakistan 20,457 265 20,192 53 20,457 FAO STAT Website
Philippines 9151 199 8952 40 9151 FAO STAT Website
Sri Lanka 3972 45 3927 9 3972 FAO STAT Website
Thailand 13,705 6029 7677 1206 13,705 FAO STAT Website
Vietnam 17,806 570 17,236 114 17,806 FAO STAT Website
Total 502,646 19,025 483,621 3805 502,646

Box 1
Past trends and future prospects for the utilization of wood energy.
Most global database systems of woodfuel consumption, trade and production have made
use of FAO forest products statistics (FAOSTAT). Of the 225 countries covered by the series,
some 30–40 countries have each year been supplying information on fuelwood while on
average 13 countries provide information on charcoal. For countries that do not provide
information, FAO figures were based on national per capita estimates formulated sometime
in the 1960s. This implies that woodfuel modelling exercises, using the FAO figures as a
basis, have been using ‘‘base-case’’ data which itself is already 80% based on models.
During the last few years, the Forestry Policy and Planning Division of FAO has carried out
a major revision of woodfuel data, and has developed more rigorous and realistic analytical
and projection models. The new figures use the non-modelled FAO data between 1970 and
1998 as a starting point (1056 records or about 20% of FAO’s fuelwood figures and 370
records or about 6% of the charcoal figures). An extensive search of a wide variety of sources
was also undertaken to unearth as many records of actual use as could be located. These
were used to develop new analytical models to arrive at revised estimates of per capita
consumption. For countries where sufficient total national consumption data were available,
models of total national consumption were used whereas for other countries estimates of
non-household use were added to modelled household consumption to arrive at estimates
of total national consumption [1,2].

with uncertainties when using these ‘‘global’’ actual demand situation with regard to biomass
sources of information. There is therefore a clear energy—preferably area-based with the area being
need to come to a better understanding on the considered as small as possible (country—region—
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150 137

province—municipality—village) in order to ac-
count for the countless local variations in demand
and/or use.
3. Biomass energy supply
3.1. Woody biomass
Even though the previous pages have shown
that efforts to obtain reliable biomass energy
demand information have uncertainties, these
problems can be considered as ‘‘insignificant’’ in
comparison to getting a grip on the biomass
energy supply side.
According to the prevalent belief in the late 1970s
and early 1980s, all fuelwood originated from the
forests. Any gap between fuelwood demand and
what the forests could supply on a sustainable basis
would lead to deforestation and ultimately lead to
the disappearance of all forests (see Box 2). As a
result, several activities were undertaken such as
fuel substitution, introducing improved stoves and
other wood/biomass energy conservation efforts
and—last but not least—adding to the forest
resource base through tree planting.
The magnitude of the prospective shortages led
to the need to identify hot-spots (areas with the
largest gap between demand and supply) and, as a
preparation for the 1981 UN Conference on New
and Renewable Source of Energy (Nairobi), FAO
made efforts to develop fuelwood balances for all
countries [4]. It was estimated that in 1980:
 in aggregate some 2 billion people depended on
fuelwood and other biomass fuel;
 more than half of these 2 billion people were
unable to meet their minimum energy require-
ments without over-cutting; and
 about 100 million were living in situations of
acute energy shortage.
The study indicated that ‘‘extrapolation of
present trends in population, deforestation and
plantation work produces a picture of a gigantic
problem by the year 2000 y some 2.7 billion people
dependent on traditional fuels, of which 2.4 billion
would be in situations of acute scarcity or deficit’’.
The estimated annual shortfall in fuelwood sup-
plies could possibly rise to 1 billion cubic meter by
2000 and the study warned that by the year 2000
‘‘in vast zones of Western and Eastern Africa and in
the Indian sub-continent, fuelwood may well be
playing no more than a marginal role’’ as the forests
would have disappeared.
Despite these predictions, the future turned out
somewhat different as by the late 1980s it became
already clear that the massive tree planting efforts,
endorsed by the Nairobi conference, did not have
the intended results. Even though the tree planting
did lead to an increase in tree resources, it did little
to increase woodfuel supplies to the rural users.
The majority of these efforts, usually under the
guidance, if not management, of forest depart-
ments, were geared more towards commercial than
subsistence products while the use of communal
land for tree planting often deprived the subsis-
tence users of the wood and other biomass supplies
that these communal lands had provided earlier
[5]. Where the efforts were geared towards tree
planting solely for fuelwood production, problems
were also encountered as it was difficult to sell as

Box 2
Forestry for local community development.
As the poor often had no alternative to woodfuel or other locally available materials, ‘‘one
consequence of the growing population, in particular in rural areas, would be an inexorable
growth in the pressures on locally available forest resources and other sources of woody
material’’. It was argued that the woodfuel source was expected to extend progressively
from collecting deadwood to the lopping of live trees, the felling of trees, the total
destruction of tree cover, the loss of organic matter to the soil, and eventually to the
uprooting of stumps and removal of shrubs [3].
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

138 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

the wood had to compete with ‘‘freely gathered’’ Table 3

fuelwood supplies or with other types of fuel which Fuelwood production from forest and non-forest land [9]
were often subsidized in order to ‘‘wean’’ people of Country Area/ Forests Non-forests Unknown
fuelwood [6]. level % (1) (%) (%)
It was also pointed out that projecting con-
sumption in line with population growth, ignoring Bangladesh National 13 87 —
Bangladesh Local 75 25 —
the adjustments that people would make with
Bangladesh National N.A. 82 N.A.
regard to biomass fuel use in case the gap between Bhutan Local 84 16
demand and supply were really increasing as Cambodia National N.A. N.A. N.A.
projected, were a sure way to overestimate future China Province N.A. 26 N.A.
demand. India National 51 49 —
India National 17 83 —
At the same time evidence was also forthcoming
Indonesia Urban 6 65 29
that the shortages were not widening nor emerging Laos Province 490 o10 —
to the extent that had been predicted in the early Malaysia National N.A. N.A. N.A.
1980s. Many argued that the ‘‘gap approach’’ was Maldives National N.A. N.A. N.A.
liable to grossly underestimate the actual situation Myanmar Province 60 40 —
Myanmar National N.A. 24 N.A.
because the original estimates only took forests
Nepal National 82.5 17.5 —
into account. In reality a large amount of Nepal National 73 N.A. N.A.
woodfuels are obtained from other areas such as Pakistan National 12.6 84.1 3.3
agricultural land, communal land, homesteads, Philippines National 13.7 86.3 —
trees growing along roads, railroads, canals as well Sri Lanka National 11 75 14
Sri Lanka National 12 69 20
as wood processing residues (sawmill offcuts,
Thailand National — 93 7
sawdust, wood shavings, etc.) and wood recovered Vietnam National 80 20 —
from various sites (wood from demolition of
buildings, construction projects, scrap wood from Remarks: Forests include Forest plantations. Non-forest land
includes private farms, homesteads, community managed lands,
packing crates, drift wood, just to name a few), etc.
shrub, scrub and waste lands, linear and scattered tree
Besides, wood obtained from the forests often plantations, recovered wood, wood processing waste, etc.
consisted of deadwood, lopped branches, twigs,
etc. rather than direct felling of the trees so the
forest stock and yield was not directly affected. In called Trees Outside the Forests or TOF [10]) as
addition substitution of woodfuels by other types well as other woodfuel sources such as those from
of biomass as well as commercial fuels influences commercial crops (palm oil, coconuts, etc.),
the situation [6–8]. recovered wood and wood processing wastes
Evidence gathered from various sources showed should also be considered.
that indeed other sources did play a major role in
the supply picture of woodfuels and in fact in 3.2. Other biomass
many cases are more important than forests as a
source of biomass energy. Table 3 provides an Besides wood, other biomass such as agricultur-
overview of some of the woodfuel supply sources al residues like ricehusks, straw, bagasse, corn-
for RWEDP member countries [2,9]. cobs, among many others also play an important
The table provides a general indication that role in the biomass energy supply picture. Un-
forests are an important source of woodfuels but fortunately, little is known with regard to the
at the same time in most cases is not the most overall importance of these types of biomass other
important source of woodfuels in the RWEDP than in terms of estimates of the total amounts
member countries. A major conclusion which can used as a source of energy. Table 1 indicates that
be drawn is that in any woodfuel resource on an annual basis some 880 million tons are used
assessment, tree resources growing on agricultural in the 16 member countries of RWEDP versus 850
lands and other non-forest lands (sometimes also million tons of woodfuels. Part of the residues are
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150
used as a source of energy for domestic cooking
and heating while another part—such as those
available in large quantities in one place—is
generally used by agro-based industries (sugar,
rice, palm oil) for generating power and/or heat.
Two methods can be used to determine how
much biomass residues are produced. First is the
residue to area ratio (RAR) or the amount of
residues generated from crops grown on a defined
area. The other method is the residue to product
ratio (RPR), which is the amount of residues
generated from a defined quantity of crops. The
latter is more commonly used since double- or
triple cropping is often practiced (2 or 3 crop
cycles within 1 year). Multiple cropping will be
confusing if the RAR is resorted to.
For commercial crops like palm oil, coconuts,
rubber, coffee, tea, cocoa, and others, both ratios
are used, RPR is used for the crop itself while
RAR is applied for the amount of woody residues
obtained such as those in the form of palm fronds,
pruning of tea bushes and wood obtained from
replanting for those trees that have reached the
end of their productive life cycle.
4. Woody biomass resource assessment
Whatever quantity of biomass has been used as
a source of energy, must have been produced
somewhere, somehow. Unfortunately this has
often been, and still is the principle used to derive
biomass energy supply data in many cases. The
situation of fossil fuels like oil, gas, coal or
electricity is different since real supply data are
available. The supplies required in the future are
governed by current consumption data so that
demand forecasts allows for more accurate plan-
ning.
By contrast, fine-tuning of woodfuel demand
forecasts remains an academic exercise since no
reliable and up to date information on present and
future woodfuel supplies are available. Besides, the
demand picture with regard to biomass energy use
is clouded which makes any demand-supply
forecasting more a case of guesstimating rather
than estimating. A solution to improve this
situation is not easy and that may well be the
139
reason that no regional wood- or biomass energy
supply estimates existed for Asia.
However, in 1996 the Asia-Pacific Forestry
Commission (APFC) at its meeting in Yangon,
Myanmar agreed that the Forestry Sector Outlook
Study for the Asia Pacific region should include
scenarios for wood energy demand and supply as
part of the overall wood/timber demand and
supply outlook.
The request to include wood energy was based
upon the Global Forest Products Outlook studies
that are carried out by FAO once every 5 years.
The provisional study, published in 1996 for the
period 1994–2010 included a section on woodfuels.
However, at that time it was still assumed that all
wood used for fuel was a forest product and for
that reason had a direct bearing on the forest
cover. This is also reflected in the data as the
woodfuel supply was stated to be equal to the
demand (see Box 3). The consumption data
projections were then used for modelling purposes.
FAO however, realized that extrapolating the
woodfuel data using population projections as the
only driving factor were inappropriate. It therefore
considered carrying out a separate study on the
demand and supply of wood as a source of energy.
The inclusion of a section on woodfuels in the Asia
Pacific Forest Outlook study was considered as a
first step to gain experience in this field.
Subsequently, RWEDP was requested to prepare
these scenarios for the period 1994–2010 by making
use of its own as well as the FAO database on
forestry. The results were published as an APFC
Working Paper entitled ‘‘Regional Study on Wood
Energy Today and Tomorrow in Asia [12].
At the time the work started, data for wood/
biomass energy use for 1994 were more or less
complete for the 16 member countries and it was
decided that these be used as the basis for further
calculations.6 And since at that time large varia-
tions existed between the different wood/biomass
energy demand data, the ‘‘Best Estimate’’ ap-
proach became the alternative. In other words, use
was made of demand data obtained from a variety
6
Other biomass resources were only partly covered as they
were of no or only minor interest to the Asia Pacific Forestry
Commission.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

140 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

Box 3
To address these problems (systematic errors for some products), a study was initiated in
1996 to improve the FAO global forest products outlook projection system. The approach
used was a dynamic spatial equilibrium model to simulate the world forest sector. The
model was applied to project forest product consumption, production and trade under
provisional scenarios of economic growth and timber supply. A key feature of the model is
that the projected demand for final products in the world cannot exceed the global wood
supply, after allowing for trade in raw materials or finished products between countries.
Therefore, the assumptions regarding economic growth and timber supply are critical in the
projections [11].

of sources that were considered as ‘‘most likely’’
reflecting the actual situation.
At the same time, crucial assumptions had to be
made i.e. land use changes, accessibility and
availability factors of wood from forests, yield
from forests and non-forest lands, among other
things. The following section gives an overview of
the methods and assumptions used in the 1997
projection of consumption and potential supply of
woodfuels.
4.1. Land use and woody biomass production
Information and data on land use data for 1990
was obtained from the ‘‘Forest Resources Assess-
ment 1990: Tropical Countries’’ [13] while for 1995
data came from ‘‘State of the World’s Forests’’
[14]. However, land use data for 1994 was required
because data on woodfuel consumption was
available only up to 1994. The 1994 land use data
was obtained by interpolating 1990 and 1995 data,
assuming a constant annual growth rate during the
5 year interval.
Since data on the ‘‘Other wooded land’’ area in
1995 (required to estimate the amount of wood-
fuels coming from non-forest lands) were not
available, it was assumed to have been constant
since 1990. The area with coconut, rubber and oil
palm plantations, which is considered as ‘‘Other
wooded land’’ in the FAO terminology, was
considered as a separate land use type. This was
done because, unlike for the category ‘‘Other land
use’’, data and wood production can be derived
from specific data on coconut, rubber and palm-oil
production, productivity and residue-to-product
ratios, the amount of wood generated when trees
reach the end of their productive life as well as the
amount of other woody biomass generated on an
annual basis (fronds, etc. as measured in the
field—see Table 4).
In order to arrive at land use figures for the year
2010 several assumptions had to be made: The
natural forest area was projected by assuming the
same average annual growth rate as during
1990–1995 while the area of plantations was
projected by assuming the same average annual
increase during 1990–1995. Likewise, the area of
other wooded land was assumed constant, while
the figures for coconut, rubber and oil palm
plantations were obtained from prior production
projections.
On the other hand, data on wood productivity
of natural forests was derived from FAO data on
biomass density for natural forest per country [13].
It was assumed that these forests would have an
average annual yield of 1% of the biomass density
(excluding leaves—assumed to be 5% of total
biomass). For plantations and other wooded land
constant figures (respectively 600 and 100 m3/km2/
year) was assumed across the board, with the
estimates based on a variety of sources. However,
not all wood from the resources will be available as
fuel, so assumptions were made on the percentage
of wood available for fuel (80% for all land use
types).7 These assumptions were then used to
calculate the potential supply of woodfuels from
7
When standing trees in the forest are converted to sawn
wood, some 80% can be considered as waste in the form of
logging waste, sawdust, off-cuts, planer shavings, etc.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150 141

Table 4
Wood supply from rubber, palm-oil and coconut plantations [http://www.rwedp.org]

Plantation crop Wood type Productive life years Amount of wood Amount of wood per
(ton/km2) year (ton/km2/year)

Rubber Trees 25 6480 259

Palm-oil Trunks 30 6600 220
Palm-oil Fronds 30 1440 48
Palm-oil Fronds Annual Unknown
Coconut Trunks 50 8000 160
Coconut Fronds Annual 234

Table 5
Wood supply from cocoa, teas and coffee plantations [http://www.rwedp.org]

Other tree crop Wood type Productive life years Amount of wood Amount of wood per
(ton/km2) year (ton/km2/year)

Cocoa Trees 25 5760 230

Cocoa Prunings Annual 2520
Tea Bushes 70 Unknown Unknown
Tea Prunings Annual 39
Coffee Trees Unknown Unknown Unknown

forests, plantations and other wooded land for
1994 as well as 2010. Wood available from annual
deforestation was assumed more or less in the
same way. However, instead of the annual yield,
80% of the total stock (less 5% for leaves) of the
deforested area was assumed to be available for
woodfuel production.
Data on the agricultural area for 1984 and 1994
were obtained from FAO statistics [15]. The
agricultural area for 2010 was projected based on
the assumption that the area will remain constant
in the case of a decrease during 1984–1994,
otherwise it increases with the same average
annual increase as during 1984–1994. The figures
for coffee, tea and cocoa was determined since the
wood production for these land use types can be
derived from data on crop production, productiv-
ity and residue-to-product ratios. These were the
amount of wood obtained from pruning and
uprooting at the end of the productive life (see
Table 5—amount of wood available is based on
measurements in the field). It was assumed that
agricultural lands could yield on average 100 m3/
km2/year with 80% of the wood potentially
available for woodfuels.
Besides the forests, forest plantations, other
wooded land and agricultural lands, there are also
other land uses (land used for infrastructure, waste
lands, common lands, etc.). These land areas also
supply wood in addition to existing known land
uses; hence, representing additional potential
supply of wood(fuels) from these areas.
In addition there are also woodfuel supplies
from the so-called ‘‘recovered wood’’ obtained
from construction sites, demolished buildings,
scrap wood, packing crates, pallets, drift wood
and so on. However, as very little, if any, reliable
information on these sources is available, no
attempt was made to quantify the amount.
4.2. Woodfuel consumption
As mentioned earlier, the woodfuel consump-
tion data for 1994 were adopted from the ‘‘best
estimates’’ available to RWEDP. By making use of
population projections from the World Resources
Institute and by assuming a correlation of 1 to 1
between population growth and woodfuel con-
sumption, the woodfuel consumption in the year
2010 was projected.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
142 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150
As the Asia Pacific Forestry Commission was
interested in how woodfuel use would influence
forest cover, an estimate was made on the amount
of wood obtained from the forests. For those
countries for which data on sources of woodfuel
were available from publications, i.e. the share of
woodfuel from forests, these data were used to
estimate the origin of the consumed woodfuel.
Countries where such data were not available a
regional average of 32%8 coming from forest areas
was applied.
Using all the information and assumptions, the
amount of potentially available woodfuels for each
of the RWEDP member countries was calculated.
Table 6 gives an overview of the woodfuel balances
(demand and potential supply) for the year 1994
for each country as well as for the RWEDP
member countries combined. Although partly
based on assumptions regarding trends and
natural resources productivity, it was concluded
that for the region as a whole and for most
countries, the potential supply could meet aggre-
gate consumption. In cases where other biomass
(other than wood) was being considered, the
situation became more positive. Fuel switching
from wood to other biomass forms and vice-versa
was observed to be a common occurrence.
There is a gap between supply and demand for
Bangladesh, Maldives, Nepal and Pakistan so
much so that these countries will need special
attention with respect to wood energy. Based upon
the calculations and assumptions made, India, Sri
Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam, may face a critical
situation sometime after the year 2010.
How large the actual gap will be is not clear
since many assumptions are made that could either
result to under or overestimations of the amount
of potential wood energy supplies. Besides,
considering the large differences between the
demand estimates when different information
sources are used, there will also be inaccuracies
in the demand data (either under or over estimate
demand).
8
This figure of 32% is based upon the average share of
fuelwood coming from forests for those countries which at that
time provided this type of information.
5. Evaluating the resource assessment method used
It should be emphasized that the wood balances
derived at during the resource assessment discussed
in the previous section are based on aggregated
national data, which can hide local variations such
as scarcity or abundance. Owing to new information
coming in, there is a strong need to re-visit and
evaluate the results obtained in 1997 and analyze
whether the assumptions made at the time of
preparation are still reasonable or completely wrong
or should be refined and/or adjusted.
5.1. Land use and woody biomass production
New information on land use is now available
with the publication of the Global Forest Re-
source Assessment 2000 or FRA 2000 [16]. The
data for the FRA 1990 were thoroughly reviewed
and, where necessary, adjusted to make them
comparable to 2000 data. The review and adjust-
ment was necessary due to various reasons and/or
changes made during the period 1990–2000 like for
instance:
 re-definition of what constitutes forests for
developed countries (crown cover of 20%
changed to 10% as was the practice for
developing countries);
 availability of new national forest inventory
data which improved the estimates for 1990;
 adjustment of existing 1990 data to the FRA
2000 definitions, and improved reclassification
of national vegetation categories in accordance
with these definitions;
 adjustment based on other new reliable data and
information not available in 1990;
 redefined political country boundaries.
The adjusted data for 1990 as well as those for
the year 2000 in addition to the ‘‘old or previous’’
1990 data are reproduced in Table 7. It is clear
from this table that changes in forest area (natural
forests+forest plantations) between the updated
and the ‘‘old or previous’’ 1990 data are quite
substantial for most countries.
In fact for 9 out of the 16 countries, the forest
area is stated to be larger than initially indicated
Table 6
Summary of sustainable wood/biomass energy supplies in RWEDP member countries

Country Woodfuel Potential sustainable supplies in kton Waste from Potential total Balance in 50% of Total biomass
consumption deforestation wood kton 6-1 process based fuels in kton
in kton in kton available in residues in

A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

kton kton
Forest land Agricultural Other wooded
areas land

ARTICLE IN PRESS
Column no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Bangladesh 9396 1765 5593 215 1426 8999 397 5604 14,602
Bhutan 819 3822 239 206 1678 5946 5127 19 5965
Cambodia 5375 14,029 3394 831 63,311 81,565 76,190 457 82,022
China 219,122 235,541 288,700 15,957 58,347 598,546 379,424 78,003 676,549
India 173,412 85,695 125,323 5150 18,999 235,167 61,755 70,267 305,434
Indonesia 54,474 183,106 67,744 6673 181,526 439,049 384,575 20,421 459,470
Laos 2329 18,472 979 4788 21,767 46,006 43,677 343 46,349
Malaysia 6187 31,737 17,809 — 87,754 137,301 131,114 2470 139,771
Maldives 80 — 34 — — 34 46 4 38
Myanmar 23,058 45,928 6884 11,782 65,341 129,935 106,877 4350 134,285
Nepal 12,787 4188 2608 390 4258 11,444 1343 1021 12,465
Pakistan 34,687 1960 15,371 640 4598 22,569 12,118 7806 30,375
Philippines 23,051 12,962 30,819 — 45,486 89,267 66,216 9821 99,088
Sri Lanka 5681 1923 5273 239 1529 8963 3282 1114 10,076
Thailand 46,069 12,741 23,243 — 31,046 67,030 20,961 10,863 77,893
Vietnam 29,368 15,943 7396 7124 18,498 48,960 19,592 6352 55,312
RWEDP 645,895 669,812 601,407 53,994 605,565 1,930,778 1,284,883 218,915 2,149,693

143
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

144 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

Table 7
Review of data of forest land use and total above ground biomass in ton/km2 [13,16]

Country/area Total forest Total forest Forest volume and biomass 2000 Total forest Forest biomass
1990 (km2) 2000 (km2) (ton/km2) 1990 (km2) 1990 (ton/km2)

Source/note 1 1 1 1 2 2

Bangladesh 11,690 13,340 2300 3900 10,040 12,900

Bhutan 30,160 30,160 16,300 17,800 28,130 17,200
Cambodia 98,960 93,350 4000 6900 121,700 16,900
China 1,454,170 1,634,800 5200 6100 1,337,990 14,900
India 637,320 641,130 4300 7300 649,590 8800
Indonesia 1,181,100 1,049,860 7900 13,600 1,156,740 19,300
Laos 130,880 125,610 2900 3100 131,770 18,300
Malaysia 216,610 192,920 11,900 20,500 176,640 24,800
Maldives 10 10
Myanmar 395,880 344,190 3300 5700 290,910 20,600
Nepal 46,830 39,000 10,000 10,900 50,790 10,400
Pakistan 27,550 23,610 2200 2700 20,230 10,500
Philippines 66,760 57,890 6600 11,400 80,340 22,400
Sri Lanka 22,880 19,400 3400 5900 18,850 10,700
Thailand 158,860 147,620 1700 2900 132,640 11,900
Viet Nam 93,030 98,190 3800 6600 97,820 17,400

(1) Total forest includes natural forests and forest plantations. Forest volume is total volume over bark of living trees over 10 cm at
DBH excluding branches. Biomass is the above ground mass of the woody part (stem, bark, branches, twigs) of trees, alive or dead,
shrubs and bushes. It excludes stumps, roots, foliage, flowers and seed [16].
(2) Total forest includes natural forests and forest plantations. Biomass is the oven-dry weight of all species of trees to a minimum
DBH of 10 cm, above ground only, and includes main stems, branches, twigs but excludes foliage, fruits, etc. [13].

for 1990. This will influence the results of the
RWEDP calculations of the total amount of
sustainable wood supply from forest areas as
shown in Table 6.
Even though the forest area has changed, the
principle of using areas as a basis for resource base
calculations still holds and is basically sound. Pre-
requisite of course will be that the types of land use
considered are homogeneous i.e. they should be in
the same type of ecological zone with the same
type of management practice. The location of the
forests in relation to the ecological zone is
important as this will determine to a large extent
the standing stock as well as the productivity of
the trees in that particular area.
The ecological conditions substantially affect
the pattern of energy consumption too. In
temperate or colder climates, space heating be-
comes an important type of energy use. In the 16
RWEDP member countries, fuelwood is a major
fuel used for space heating, thus increasing fuel-
wood consumption substantially in those areas,
compared to warmer areas where fuelwood is
generally used only for cooking purposes.
Any woodfuel resource assessment will therefore
have to take into account the growing conditions
in forests and other areas considered as potential
woodfuel supply sources. However, this is easier
said than done as a thorough assessment of even a
relatively small area can be rather costly depend-
ing on the type of tools used [17].
A nation-wide study which included a woodfuel
resource assessment, carried out in Pakistan in the
early nineties for the Pakistan Household Energy
Strategy Study or HESS [18] was said to cost some
2–3 million US$. It involved a rather comprehen-
sive resource assessment exercise for the whole of
Pakistan (877,277 km2) using advanced very high
resolution radiometer or AVHRR imagery with a
pixel size of 4 km.9 The first stage consisted of
9
Monthly composites of daily images covering six annual grow-
ing seasons, converted to a standard index of vegetation activity—
Normalized Vegetation Difference Index or NVDI, were used.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150
determining the various agro-ecological zones.
Initially, 14 different zones were identified which
later were partly merged and/or split into 8 zones.
Hereafter, a multi-stage sampling process was used
involving the use of 12 Landsat Thematic Mapper
imageries each covering 185 by 170 km with a
resolution of 30 m. These formed later the basis for
the selection of 573 primary sampling units (PSU)
each measuring 400  400 m, which were then
used to measure the amount and type of biomass
vegetation (trees, shrubs, bushes, etc. with a visible
diameter at breast height or DBH) including
destructive sampling, etc.10 The results showed a
total standing stock of trees, branches, twigs,
bushes, shrubs, etc. of 211 million tons with an
annual productivity of 22.7 million tons for the
whole of Pakistan. Out of the 22.7 million tons
some 20.13 million tons were considered as ‘‘Total
Fuel Growth’’.
In contrast, the results of the FRA 2000 [16]
show the standing stock (DBH410 cm) in terms of
total amount of biomass for Pakistan as 63 million
tons in 2000 for the forests and forest plantations
alone (forest area of 23,610 km2 equal to 2.7% of
the total land area) while the previous 1990 figure
[13] would be about 212 million tons (20,230 km2
or about 2.3% of the total land area).
Comparing these results, albeit for one country
only, it is clear that obtaining reliable information
on the standing stock (and amount of biomass) is
something that should not be underestimated and
any resource assessment for purposes of woodfuel
demand and supply balancing should keep this in
mind. In fact, in case the new data for total
amount of biomass in forests and forest planta-
tions, which generally is considerably, lower than
assumed in 1997 (see Table 7) the conclusions of
the RWEDP study would have been different.
In addition to the problems related to standing
stock/total amount of biomass, the issue of
accessibility should be considered. Four factors
should be considered: economic and financial
accessibility; environment accessibility; physical
accessibility; and legal accessibility.
10
See www.fao.org/montes/foda/wforcong/publi/v3/t16e/
3-2.HTM for a more complete description of the method used.
145
5.1.1. Economic/financial
The distance a woodfuel user will go to collect
wood for own use as fuel either direct or converted
to charcoal, will depend to a large extent on how
she or he values their time and consequently how
far she or he is prepared to travel to gather the
wood. Much also depends on opportunities she or
he may have for paid work and the cost and/or the
availability of alternative sources of energy,
among other considerations.
People involved in woodfuel trade will also
consider demand elasticity in relation to the price
of fuelwood and charcoal when considering the
radius of the woodfuel catchment area. Much
depends on local infrastructure like the condition
of roads, railways, competition in the transport
sector and so on. Woodfuel price is also influenced
by the type of end-use whether it is for household
cooking only or for industrial purposes (brick
making, etc.) where large quantities are needed.
Another factor, which influences the economic
accessibility of woodfuel supplies, is the cost,
availability and reliability of supply of competing
fuels like kerosene and liquid propane gas (LPG).
Where the cost of woodfuels approaches that of
the competing fuels the market for woodfuels may
be limited.
Environment: Environmental considerations
should also be taken into account. Water catch-
ment areas, preservation of soil and flora and bio-
diversity, protected areas such as wildlife reserves,
national parks are all factors that can limit the
accessibility of forests and other tree resources for
woodfuel production. For example, out of the
94,000 km2 natural forests in Vietnam some
31,000 km2 are considered as production forests
and the remainder as protection and special use
forests. Only the first type (production forest area)
in addition to forest plantations is in principle
available for woodfuel production although in
practice people do obtain woodfuels from pro-
tected and special use forests.
Physical: High mountain ridges, steep slopes,
wide rivers, a lack of infrastructure, etc. are all
factors that limit the physical accessibility of
people to woodfuels. Related to the physical as
well as economic constraints are areas which
would be able to supply a large amount of
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

146 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

Table 8
Forest areas available for wood supply [16]

Country Total forest Forest available for wood supply with different distance limits to infrastructure (in%)
2000 (km2)
No limit 50 km 30 km 20 km 10 km

Bangladesh 13,340 83 83 82 82 76
Bhutan 30,160 52 52 52 52 43
Cambodia 93,350 78 78 78 77 62
China 1,634,800 83 83 82 79 64
India 641,130 88 88 88 88 80
Indonesia 1,049,860 80 65 57 49 34
Laos 125,610 81 81 81 79 68
Malaysia 192,920 90 79 67 55 36
Maldives 10 — — — — —
Myanmar 344,190 93 93 93 90 78
Nepal 39,000 76 76 76 76 68
Pakistan 23,610 80 80 79 78 64
Philippines 57,890 95 95 95 91 67
Sri Lanka 19,400 75 75 75 75 72
Thailand 147,620 72 72 71 68 54
Viet Nam 98,190 90 90 90 89 77

woodfuels but which have low population densi-
ties. An example is the island of Kalimantan in
Indonesia. Large amounts of saw-milling wastes
are available but these are often incinerated due to
a lack of local demand. However, other areas in
Indonesia like the islands of Java and Bali do face
woodfuel shortages but transport makes the wood
waste too expensive for use.
Legal: In addition there are legal constraints to
accessibility to forest, tree resources as well as
other biomass like agro-residues. These legal
constraints can be in the form of laws (access to
protected areas, national parks, etc.) but in many
cases are rooted in customs. Access to a village
woodlot may be open to villagers but not to
outsiders even though this may not have been laid
down in law. However, these customary rights
may change over time. Landless people often are
allowed to collect their wood or biomass supplies
from land owned by the more well off people.
However, when prices of these wood/biomass fuels
rise, these customary rights may be withdrawn and
as a result it may well be that people with little or
no land face severe shortages even though locally
there appears to be a surplus [19].
FAO in its Forest Resource Assessment 2000
[16] has included a brief overview of accessibility in
the form of ‘‘Forest available for wood supply’’.
Any forest inside protected area is considered legal
inaccessible while any forest above an altitude
threshold (3000 m for tropical, 2500 m for sub-
tropical, 2000 m for temperate and 1000 m for
boreal domain) were considered as economically
inaccessible. The remaining forest was measured
within different distances to existing infrastructure
(roads and railways but not rivers) and the results
reported for distances of 10, 20, 30, and 50 km and
unlimited distance (see Table 8).
Accessibility, as described above, depends on
many factors and in practice will be difficult to
account for, as it is very much a ‘‘local issue’’. It is
something that definitely should not be ignored
but which, when carrying out regional resource
assessments studies, is difficult to integrate or
taken into account. For that reason it was not
included in the resource assessment carried out by
RWEDP for its member countries.
The regional resource assessment for the 16
RWEDP member countries described in the
previous section based its calculations for the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150 147

Table 9
Wood supplies available from Eucalyptus plantations in Laos [20]

Site Saw logs Poles Branch wood Twigs Leaves Lops and tops
(m3/km2) (m3/km2) (ton/km2) (ton/km2) (ton/km2) (ton/km2)

I 30 3850 190 160 210 700

II 2760 2740 530 210 250 850
III 410 4550 280 160 130 430

sustainable woodfuel supply from forests, planta- Table 10

tions, other wooded land and agricultural land Forest/land use and production in Nepal, 1995
using FAO data for the biomass density of natural Types of forest/land use Annual yield
forests. (ton/km2)

It was assumed that on average an annual
sustainable yield of 1% of the forest biomass
density (excluding leaves) would be available.
For plantations and other wooded land
constant figures (respectively, 600 and
100 m3 km–2 y–1) was assumed for all countries,
while 100 m3 km–2 y–1 was assumed to be avail-
able from agricultural land.
The principle of using a certain amount
(percentage, weight or volume per hectare) to
calculate the amount of wood in whatever form
which can be obtained from a certain area is
basically sound, assuming that the resource base
(standing stock, amount of biomass in a certain
area, etc.) has been estimated in the right manner
and is homogeneous.
The big question mark that should be put at the
use of this method is whether these amounts can
indeed be obtained in a sustainable manner from
these areas or do they need to be adjusted?
Unfortunately, in developing countries very little
information is generally available on the avail-
ability of trees/wood on different land types. The
16 RWEDP member countries are no exception.
However, several wood/biomass energy as well as
other studies have been carried out in the region
and some of these give some information on the
availability of wood. The following section pro-
vides a per country background.
Laos: In 1999 a study was carried in Laos on the
productivity of Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldu-
lensis) plantations with emphasis on the amount
for biomass that would be available as fuel. Three
Tropical mixed hardwoods (TMH) 275
Lower mixed hardwood (LMH) 119
Pine 70
Upper mixed hardwoods (UMH) and other 206
Plantations 319
Arable land 38
Urban areas 60
different areas were investigated: Site 1 had a
spacing of 2  2 m, no soil preparation and no
fertilizer application; Site 2 had a spacing of 2 
3 m, soil preparation by tractor, no fertilizer
application while Site 3 had a spacing of 3 
3 m and soil preparation as well as fertilizer
application. All three sites were regular maintained
for the first 2 years. The yield of the different sites
at the time of harvesting is shown in Table 9. The
weight of the branches, twigs, leaves and lops and
tops are in oven-dry weight. Lops and tops are
basically the tops of the trees as well as stem wood
which can not be used for saw logs nor as poles
(bent, etc.) [20].
Nepal: In the Country Case Study for Wood
Energy Planning [21] the growth projections are
given in Table 10.
The same study quotes information from the,
‘‘District, Regional and National Forest Cover
Classes Summary of the Area, Fuelwood Yield
and Wood Volume for the Kingdom of Nepal,
1988,’’ giving the national average sustainable
yield from the land use types shown in Table 11.
Pakistan: The Pakistan Household Energy
Strategy Study [18] indicated the following
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

148 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150

figures – shown in Table 12—as standing stock,
the amount of wood growth per year as well as the
quantity that would be available as a source of
energy on an annual basis.
Sri Lanka: Daranagama [22] indicates that
home gardens are a major supply source of
fuelwood (in 1995 some 26% of fuelwood was
estimated to come from home gardens) and can
supply 265 m3/km2/year of saw logs, poles and
fuelwood of which some 60% or about 160 m3
would be fuelwood. In addition the fences of these
home gardens would be able to supply another
100 m3/km2/year.
All the countries cited (with the exception of
Laos for which only data on plantations are
available) provide information on the amount of
woodfuels that can be obtained from non-forest
land such as agricultural land, homesteads, grass-
lands, etc. This is an indication that at least in
these countries such areas are being recognized as
potential sources of sustainable woodfuel supplies.
Table 11
Sustainable yield of fuelwood in Nepal, 1998
Land-use types Annual yield
(ton/km2)
Forest land 210
Shrub land 69
Grass land 10
Non-cultivated inclusions 69
Cultivated (farm) land 350
More and more information is becoming avail-
able on these non-forest tree/wood resources,
sometimes also called ‘‘Trees Outside the Forests’’
or TOF and the Global Forest Resource Assess-
ment 2000 [16] has devoted a chapter on these
resources. This chapter shows that for instance in
the state of Kerala in India some 83% of the 14.6
million m3 of wood produced were obtained from
homesteads, 10% from estates (rubber, tea, etc.)
and only 7% from the forests even though Kerala
has a forest cover of about 26%. In the state of
Haryana (India) with 3.8% of the area classified as
forest land but only 2% under actual forest cover,
some 41% of the total growing stock consists of
farm-forestry. Another 22–23% of the growing
stock is found along roads and canals, 24% as
village woodlots and small block plantations
(o1000 m2) accounted for 10–11%.
Another source indicates that in West Bengal
(India) an estimated 125 million trees are being
considered as TOF (in average about 2540 trees/
km2). However, there are large variations between
different agro-ecological zones with the Eastern
Coastal Plain having over 22 million trees (6700
trees/km2) and the Humid Eastern Himalayas
having slightly more than 7 million trees (close to
900 trees/km2). The semi-humid Chhota Nagpur
and the humid alluvial Bengal Plain, respectively,
have 18.8 million trees (2040 trees/km2) and close
to 77 million trees (2670 trees/km2). In the state of
Karnataka it is estimated that there are some 134
million TOF (average 1580 treestrees/km2) with
some 77 million trees with a DBH of 10–20 cm, 40

Table 12
Standing stock and total growth of woody biomass in Pakistan [18]

Type of area /agro-ecological Total area Standing stock Standing stock Total wood growth Available as fuel
zone (km2) (million ton) trees (km2) (million ton) (million ton)

Irrigated high north 91,848 59.19 3514 7.08 5.98

Irrigated high south 19,870 11.02 1174 0.91 0.82
Irrigated low north 31,864 26.78 5893 3.98 3.51
Irrigated low south 44,609 8.66 783 2.66 2.55
Rain-fed agriculture 27,878 4.46 991 0.42 0.42
Forest, scrub, highlands 129,966 81.66 3820 5.22 4.56
Semi-arid 253.832 11.16 531 0.94 0.80
Desert 252,342 7.85 27 1.48 1.48
Pakistan 877,227 210.78 1408 22.70 20.13
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150
million trees with a DBH of 20–30 cm, 13 million
trees with a DBH of 30–40 cm and finally some 4
million trees with a DBH440 cm [23].
While the data on the sustainable yield of
woodfuel from various land-use types does pro-
vide insight in the appropriateness of the sustain-
able yield data assumed by RWEDP for its
regional resource assessment study, it should also
be noted that these average national figures may
hide more than they reveal. The actual situation on
the ground may well and no doubt will show
variations from the national average considering
that there will be large differences within the
countries concerned.
Nevertheless comparing these figures as well as
information obtained from other sources11 it
appears that the figures used by RWEDP in 1997
were to a certain extent more or less correct. More
specifically, the assumption made for the amount
of woodfuels that can be obtained from non-forest
areas now appears to be too low while that assumed
for plantations may be too high judging from the
Laos data only. The assumption of 1% of standing
stock available from forests on a sustainable basis
when using the new FAO data for the total amount
standing stock/biomass available, now appears to
be too low while, with the previous data for total
amount of biomass available the figure for some
countries would be more or less correct, and too
high or too low for other countries This is not
surprising seen the wide diversity of climatic
conditions from alpine (Nepal, Bhutan, parts of
China, India and Pakistan) to hot and humid in
most of the countries and dry desert like conditions
in areas of Pakistan, India and China.
6. Concluding remarks
At the time when initiatives for a regional
woodfuel demand and supply study for the 16
member countries of RWEDP began, there was a
11
In fact quite a few sources of information have been quoted
in studies, etc. but in almost all cases the supporting evidence
for the yield of wood from various land types is not given. It
appears that in many countries, besides the official data there is
also a large amount of ‘‘un-official’’ data in the form of
‘‘informed estimates’’.
149
general belief that while such a regional resource
assessment, would suffice to paint a broad picture
of the situation in the region, it would nonetheless
hide more than it would reveal.
Experience has shown that woodfuel demand
and supply depends much on local conditions and
traditions and in practice is dynamic rather than
static. Besides, knowing that many of the available
figures and data were based (and in most of the
cases still are based) upon ‘‘informed estimates’’,
and in some cases even guesstimates, hence, the
validity of the results obtained is questionable.
However, since part of the objectives was to see
how far available information would suffice to
draw a ‘‘relatively reliable’’ wood/biomass energy
demand and supply overview for the region, it can be
concluded that the objective has been achieved.
Another objective of the study—to draw more
definite conclusions on further action that need to
be taken to redress the demand and supply balance
(specific recommendations) using the study as a
basis—the answer has to be negative. In hindsight,
this part of the objective appears to be too ambitious
considering that most of the data and information
was based on estimates and/or assumptions. Even in
the case where more up to date and reliable
information for both demand and supply existed, it
is doubtful if this objective could have been reached
since many unknown factors remain.
However, the results and the assumptions made
for the study do provide an indication as to what
information on demand and still needs to be
collected in order to make reasonable woodfuel
demand and supply forecasts possible. For the
time being, the results help to identify broad policy
issues. However, it should be emphasized that
regional and even national aggregate data bear
little meaning as they hide too many local
variations. Ultimately, any supply and demand
balancing exercise should be area-based with the
study area being as small as possible.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the
assistance given by the staff of the Forestry Group
at the regional office of FAO for Asia and the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
150 A. Koopmans / Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 133–150
Pacific by providing various published and un-
published sources of information on woodfuel-
related issues.
References
[1] Broadhead J, Bahdon J, Whiteman A. Past trends and
future prospects for the utilisation of wood for energy—
Annex 1 ‘‘Summary of qualitative and quantitative
information’’ (Draft 28/09/01) and Annex 2 ‘‘Woodfuel
consumption modelling and results’’, FAO Working Paper
GFPOS/WP/05, FAO, Rome, 2001.
[2] Arnold M, Kohlin G, Persson R, Shepherd G. Fuelwood
revisited: what has changed in the last decade? Draft
Report, CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 39. 2002. Center for
International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
[3] Forestry for local community development, FAO Forestry
Paper 7, FAO, Rome, 1978.
[4] Fuelwood supplies in the developing countries, FAO
Forestry Paper 42, FAO, Rome, 1983.
[5] Saxena NC. The Saga of Participatory Forest Manage-
ment in India, CIFOR, 1997.
[6] Leach G, Mearns R. Beyond the Woodfuel Crisis: people,
land and trees in Africa. London: Earthscan Publications;
1988.
[7] Foley G. Exaggerating the Sahelian woodfuel problem?
Ambio 1987;16(6):367–71.
[8] Dewees PA. The Woodfuel Crisis reconsidered: observa-
tions on the dynamics of abundance and scarcity. World
Development 1989;17(8):1159–72.
[9] Woodfuel from non-forest areas. FAO-RWEDP Wood
Energy News 2000;15(1):27–30 (http://www.rwedp.org/
wen15–1.html).
[10] Trees outside the forests. FAO Forestry. Trees outside the
Forest. Unasylva Volume 51(1) Issue 200, 2000. Food and
Agriculture Organization, Rome.
[11] Global forest products consumption, production, trade
and prices: global forest products model projections to
2010, FAO, Rome, 1998.
[12] Regional Study on Wood Energy Today and Tomorrow in
Asia, FAO Working Paper APFSOS/WP/34, FAO-RAP,
Bangkok, 2001.
[13] Forest Resource Assessment 1990: Tropical Countries.
FAO Forestry Paper 112, FAO, Rome, 1993.
[14] State of the World’s Forests 1997. FAO, Rome, 1997.
[15] Production: 1994, vol. 48. FAO, Rome, 1995.
[16] Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000—Main Report,
FAO Forestry Paper 140, FAO, Rome, 2001.
[17] Assessment of Biomass Energy Resources: A Discussion
On its Need and Methodology. World Bank, Industry and
Energy Department Working Paper, Energy Series Paper
No. 48, December 1991.
[18] Biomass Resource Assessment, Pakistan Household
Energy Strategy Study, Pakistan, World Bank ESMAP,
1993.
[19] Mercer DE, Soussan J. Fuelwood: an analysis of problems
and solutions for less developed countries. Prepared
for the World Bank Forestry Policy Review, February
1991.
[20] Production, Utilization and Marketing of woodfuel in Lao
PDR, Report No. 45, FAO-RWEDP, Bangkok,
1999(http://www.rwedp.org/rm45.html).
[21] Country case study for wood energy planning. Study
prepared by Water and Energy Commission, Government
of Nepal for FAO-RWEDP, 2001 (unpublished).
[22] Daranagama U. Availability of fuelwood and other
agricultural residues as a source of energy in the industrial
sector of Sri Lanka—a study conducted for Sri Lanka
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Capacity Build-
ing Project—UNDP/GEF, 1999.
[23] Training Manual on Assessment of Trees Outside Forest.
Draft prepared by Forest Science Institute, India for FAO
Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, 2002
(unpublished).