# The Carbon Sequestration Potential of Degraded Agricultural Land in the Amhara Region of Ethiopia
## Results
### Gross and Net Carbon Sequestration Potential by Agro-Ecological Zone
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Land Use**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Age-Ecology**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**SailC\({}_{\text{i}}\) to Cha-\({}^{\text{th}}\)**1**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**AboveC\({}_{\text{i}}\) to Cha-\({}^{\text{th}}\)**1**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Minimalized**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Training 1**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Training 2**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**UnUnified**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Training 1**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Training 2**} \\ \cline{4-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{4-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Base tuned} & Highland-dry & 23.9 & 0 & 32.8 & 52.7 & 32.9 & 47.1 & 32.9 & 42.1 & 8.9 & 52.7 & 9.0 & 47.1 & 9.0 & 42.1 \\  & Highland-wet & 31.3 & 0 & 41.1 & 69.1 & 41.2 & 61.8 & 41.1 & 55.2 & 9.8 & 69.1 & 9.9 & 61.8 & 9.8 & 55.2 \\  & Highland-wet & 41.2 & 0 & 51.3 & 90.1 & 51.3 & 80.6 & 51.2 & 72.0 & 10.1 & 90.1 & 10.1 & 80.6 & 10.0 & 72.0 \\  & Midland-dry & 18.1 & 0 & 26.2 & 51.4 & 28.3 & 45.9 & 26.2 & 41.0 & 8.1 & 51.4 & 8.2 & 45.9 & 8.1 & 41.0 \\  & Midland-wet & 19.5 & 0 & 28.3 & 54.4 & 28.3 & 54.9 & 26.3 & 48.9 & 8.8 & 61.4 & 8.8 & 54.9 & 8.8 & 48.9 \\  & Midland-wet & 21.5 & 0 & 31.3 & 75.4 & 31.3 & 67.2 & 31.2 & 60.0 & 9.8 & 75.4 & 9.8 & 67.2 & 9.7 & 60.0 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Base tuned} & Highland-dry & 44.9 & 2.4 & 50.5 & 70.0 & 50.5 & 62.2 & 50.4 & 58.1 & 5.6 & 67.6 & 5.6 & 59.8 & 55.2 & 52.7 \\  & Highland-wet & 71.4 & 2.4 & 77.8 & 106.9 & 77.9 & 94.9 & 77.8 & 84.3 & 6.4 & 104.5 & 6.5 & 69.2 & 64.8 & 81.0 \\  & Midland-wet & 83.3 & 2.4 & 91.0 & 14.7 & 91.0 & 132.7 & 90.9 & 117.7 & 7.7 & 147.3 & 7.7 & 130.3 & 7.6 & 115.3 \\  & Midland-wet & 30.4 & 2.4 & 35.1 & 64.2 & 33.1 & 57.0 & 53.0 & 50.5 & 47 & 61.8 & 4.7 & 54.6 & 4.6 & 48.1 \\  & Midland-wet & 44.6 & 2.4 & 50.4 & 36.0 & 50.4 & 83.2 & 50.4 & 73.8 & 5.8 & 91.2 & 5.8 & 80.8 & 5.8 & 74.4 \\  & Midland-wet & 51.2 & 2.4 & 58.3 & 135.3 & 83.3 & 119.9 & 85.2 & 106.4 & 7.1 & 132.9 & 7.1 & 117.5 & 7.0 & 104.0 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Srub land} & Highland-dry & 69.9 & 7.1 & 73.9 & 92.9 & 73.9 & 82.5 & 73.9 & 7.1 & 4.0 & 85.8 & 4.0 & 75.4 & 4.0 & 66.0 \\  & Highland-wet & 82.2 & 7.1 & 86.2 & 115.0 & 86.3 & 102.2 & 86.3 & 90.7 & 4.0 & 107.9 & 4.1 & 95.1 & 4.1 & 83.6 \\  & Midland-wet & 76.1 & 7.1 & 80.7 & 143.1 & 80.8 & 126.8 & 80.8 & 112.5 & 4.6 & 136.0 & 4.7 An important step of the reforestation programs is the assessment of the expected change in stored carbon, the 'net' carbon storage. The net carbon stock (see Table 3) was calculated as the difference between the carbon stock and the corresponding initial carbon stocks for soil (SoilC\({}_{\text{I}}\)) and above ground (AboveC\({}_{\text{L}}\)), which were obtained from the published literature (Section 2.3.2, Table 1). Results of the net carbon storage by land use type, agro-ecological zone, and management scenario after 100 years following reforestation are shown in Table 3. In contrast to gross carbon, the highest net soil carbon stock is found on bare land, zone Highland-wet, (10.1 t C ha\({}^{-1}\), no thinning), and the lowest at shrub land, zone Midland-dry (2.6 t C ha\({}^{-1}\), no thinning), whereas the highest aboveground net carbon stock is again found in grass land, zone Highland-wet (147 t C ha\({}^{-1}\), no thinning), and the lowest in bare land, zone Midland-dry (51 t C ha\({}^{-1}\), no thinning).