土地利用、土地利用变化和林业（LULUCF）是联合国政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）国家温室气体清单的重要组成部分，由于不同国家的森林管理及清查能力不同，各国LULUCF林业碳核算的方法存在一定差异。京都议定书“伞形集团”国家林业碳评估方法学在全球具有重要影响，对比分析“伞形集团”国家林业碳核算模型，为建立或分析欧盟和中国的林业关联碳评估模型提供一定的借鉴。

通过对美国、加拿大和澳大利亚等“伞形集团”典型国家林业碳评估模型的比较分析，就各国碳模型在方法学层级、碳计量范围及模型优劣等方面的问题进行了系统归纳。

①当前LULUCF林业碳计量的主流核算方法以第3层级为主，通过利用地理信息系统来计算土地利用面积及其变化，减少数据收集过程中的数据缺失及不够准确等问题。②美国FASOM-GHG模型侧重于经济评价，加拿大CBM-CFS3模型基于地理信息系统来进行碳核算，澳大利亚FullCAM模型集成了美加两国模型优势，既实现了与地理信息系统相连接，又满足了对经济政策实施效果评估的要求。

①欧盟成员国建立统一土地利用的划分标准困难较大，但从方便今后碳核算来看，欧盟加快其统一的土地划分规则可能是未来趋势。②在进行林业碳储量计量时，将造林、采伐和毁林等干扰信息融入模型中，可以提高模型计算结果的准确性。③中国应通过加强林业可持续管理，改进并完善森林清查环节涉及的不同区域及不同树种的生物量和含碳率等碳排放因子数据库体系，为对接国际碳核算标准和科学评价LULUCF林业碳核算提供技术支持。

Land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) are an important part of the national greenhouse gas inventories for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Due to different forest management and inventory capabilities, there are various methods for forestry carbon accounting of LULUCF in different countries. The forestry carbon assessment methodology of typical “Umbrella Group” countries in Kyoto Protocol has an important impact on the model establishment and data collection of countries around the world. The comparisons between those carbon accounting models have important implications for future assessments in China and EU countries.

Based on the comparative analysis of “Umbrella Group” countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia, this paper systematically summarized carbon models based on methodological level, carbon measurement range, advantages, and disadvantages.

① Currently, the main accounting method of forestry carbon assessment for LULUCF is at the third level. The risk of missing data and inaccuracy in the process of data collection are reduced by using a geographic information system to calculate land use area and its changes. ② The FASOM-GHG model in the United States focuses on economic evaluation, the CBM-CFS3 model in Canada is based on a geographic information system for carbon accounting, and the FullCAM model in Australia integrates the models of the United States and Canada, connects with a geographic information system, meets the requirements of impact evaluation of economic policies, and has a broader application prospect.

Policy recommendations: ① It is difficult for EU member states to establish unified land-use allocation standards, but from the perspective of facilitating future carbon accounting, the EU may accelerate its unified land allocation rules in the future. ② Evaluating forestry carbon storage: during the measurement, disturbance information such as afforestation, logging, and deforestation should be incorporated into the model to improve the accuracy of the calculation results. ③ China should strengthen sustainable forestry management and improve the database system of carbon emission factors such as biomass and carbon content in different regions and for different tree species involved in forest inventory. Forestry carbon accounting provides technical support in order to connect with international carbon accounting standards and scientifically evaluate LULUCF.