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.