the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
JULES-Palm: Explicit representation of oil palm plantations in a land surface model for estimating land-use change carbon emissions in Indonesia
Abstract. Expansion of oil palm plantations is a dominant driver of land-use change in equatorial Asia and has contributed substantially to deforestation in Indonesia. Most dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs), however, still represent oil palm plantations as generic cropland, thereby contributing to uncertainty in carbon emissions from land-use change (ELUC). We develop a new oil palm plant functional type (PFT) using the JULES land surface model, called JULES-Palm. This PFT incorporates oil palm-specific physiological, structural and plantation-management traits, including rotation-based harvest/replanting cycles, and is parameterised from literature-derived values before calibration using eddy covariance (EC) and allometric observations, including leaf area index (LAI), above-ground biomass and canopy height. This calibration improves simulated photosynthesis and the vegetation structure. We then ran JULES-Palm to quantify the contribution of oil palm plantations to Indonesian ELUC, using land-use drivers from the Mapbiomas Indonesia 2.0 land cover maps (2000–2022). We investigated three scenarios: (i) oil palm represented as a generic crop, (ii) oil palm omitted and treated as natural vegetation and (iii) explicit oil palm PFT. The mean and interannual variability of Indonesian ELUC (without peat emissions) is 0.058 ± 0.012 PgC yr-1 with the oil palm PFT and 0.052 ± 0.010 PgC yr-1 when oil palm is omitted; representing oil palm as a generic cropland gives 0.066 ± 0.011 PgC yr-1. Cumulatively, the expansion of oil palm plantations by 10.5 Mha since 2000 contributed approximately 0.14 PgC, accounting for 10.3 % of Indonesia’s total ELUC including legacy fluxes, but approximately 89 % of land-use change attributable to conversions occurring during 2000–2022. Representing oil palm as a dedicated PFT reduces the estimated oil-palm-related ELUC relative to the generic-cropland representation by capturing plantation-specific biomass accumulation and carbon turnover. Thus, using a specific PFT for oil palm is preferable to providing a more accurate, process-based representation of plantation carbon dynamics, but treating oil palm as cropland still captures a first-order estimation of ELUC when a dedicated PFT is unavailable.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Geoscientific Model Development.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(1726 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(53 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 22 Sep 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-3689 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 08 Aug 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Ida B.M. Brasika, 12 Aug 2026
reply
Thank you for bringing these issues to our attention.
Regarding the code, the JULES configuration used in this study is maintained in the Met Office Science Repository Service (MOSRS) as Roses suite u-ea491. We note that a similar approach was used for previous JULES developments published in GMD, such as JULES-BE, where the exact JULES version and development branch were identified within the Met Office repository. We would therefore be grateful for confirmation as to whether the fixed MOSRS suite and revision are sufficient under the current GMD policy. if an additional persistent archive is required, we would be happy to deposit all JULE-Palm material that we are legally permitted to redistribute in (for example) Zenodo and provide a DOI. Before redistributing any Met Office/JULES files, however, we need to confirm that this is permitted under the license applicable to the exact version used.
Regarding the datasets, we similarly understand the requirement for persistent archives and identifiers. We would be happy to archive the exact datasets or subsets used in this study in Zenodo where redistribution is permitted. However, the Mapbiomas, EC and allometric data originate from third-party providers or collaborators, so we first need to confirm with the respective data owners and licenses whether redistribution through Zenodo is allowed. Where redistribution is not permitted, we will identify and cite the appropriate persistent archive or identifier provided by the original data owner, where available.
We will update the Code and Data availability section and the corresponding references accordingly once these points are confirmed.
We will also revise the manuscript title to include a specific JULES-Palm model version number, as requested.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3689-AC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 12 Aug 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Thanks for your reply, and for the information regarding the version number in MORS. We can confirm that this is enough in the case of the Jules-Palm model.
Also, please, reply with the additional information when you have solved the issues regarding the storage of the data.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3689-CEC2
-
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 12 Aug 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Ida B.M. Brasika, 12 Aug 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 159 | 104 | 17 | 280 | 33 | 13 | 18 |
- HTML: 159
- PDF: 104
- XML: 17
- Total: 280
- Supplement: 33
- BibTeX: 13
- EndNote: 18
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
First, although we are aware of the licensing issues with the MetOffice models, we need that you provide additional information on the measures taken to ensure the adequate storage and internal preservation of the Jules-Palm code, with specific information about how to locate and obtain it on the long-term. Additionally, it is necessary that you indicate in the title of your manuscript a model version number.
Also, the sites that you link in your Code and Data Policy statement to access the Mapbiomas, EC and allometric data are not valid as they do not fulfil GMD’s requirements for a persistent data archive because:
- They do not appear to have a published policy for data preservation over many years or decades (some flexibility exists over the precise length of preservation, but the policy must exist).
- They do not appear to have a published mechanism for preventing authors from unilaterally removing material. Archives must have a policy which makes removal of materials only possible in exceptional circumstances and subject to an independent curatorial decision,
- They do not appear to issue a persistent identifier such as a DOI or Handle for each precise dataset.
If we have missed a published policy which does in fact address this matter satisfactorily, please post a response linking to it. If you have any questions about this issue, please post them in a reply.
The GMD review and publication process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends, and on ensuring the provenance of replicability of the published papers for years after their publication. Please, therefore, provide the necessary information about the code and publish the data in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy.
Later, if the Topical Editor decides to continue with the review or publication process of your manuscript and you are requested to upload a new version of it, then The 'Code and Data Availability’ section of your manuscript must also be modified to cite the new information and repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor