Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:

http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Assessment of biomass and carbon stock of trees within the

campus of IGNOU, New Delhi (India)

Evaluación de biomasa y stock de carbono de árboles

dentro del campus de IGNOU, Nueva Delhi (India)

Kumari Anjali*1, YSC Khuman2, Jaswant Sokhi3, Amrita Nigam4

1- *Research Scholar (PhD), SOS, IGNOU, New Delhi, India, Email:

anjali20nov@gmail.com, Corresponding Author
2- Assistant Professor, SOITS, IGNOU, New Delhi, India.
3- Professor SOS, IGNOU, New Delhi, India.
4- Professor SOS, IGNOU, New Delhi, India.

ABSTRACT
This study aims to assess the biomass and carbon stock of the trees within
IGNOU campus situated at the Indian national capital, New Delhi for an enhanced
understanding about the carbon sequestration potential of the university campuses in
urban setting. The aim of the paper is centered on the need to assess terrestrial
carbon pools within a campus situated in the semi-arid forests of India which is
significant for building suitable action plans for the purpose of managing ecosystems
amidst the threat of anthropogenic climate change occurring due to rapid
urbanization. The assessment of the biomass and carbon stock of the trees of the
selected species within the campus was done by non-destructive method using
allometric equations used prominently in previous studies identifying a total of 20
species of the trees comprising 1260 individual trees belonging to 14 different families
of the trees. Findings of this study on identified campus trees, which comprised 1,260
individual trees, demonstrated to have moderate maturity in terms of storing carbon
in the form of their biomass with the average DBH 25.34 cm. The values of their
estimated total biomass and carbon stock were 75.26446 t/tree and 37.63223 tC/tree
respectively. The maximum value of the total biomass 13.01 t/tree was of Ficus
recemosa, and of the carbon stock 6.50tC/tree was of Ficus recemosa. Azadirachta
indica species were found to be the most dominant species and their sampled trees
were found to be able to sequester 537.526 tons of carbon in their standing biomass.
The Phyllanthus emblica had the lowest carbon sequestration potential with 10.9 tons.
This paper offers valuable insight with respect to the carbon sequestration potential of
university campus situated in urban settings of a semi-arid forest ecosystem of Delhi
by assessing the above- and below- ground carbon storage potential of the trees. The
findings are of significance for different stakeholders including primarily future
researchers, planners and decision-makers engaged in the process of urbanization.

Keywords: Biomass, Campus, Carbon Pool, Carbon Stock, Semi-arid forest,

Sequestration.
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

RESUMEN
Este estudio tiene como objetivo evaluar la biomasa y las reservas de carbono de
los árboles dentro del campus de IGNOU ubicado en la capital nacional de la India,
Nueva Delhi, para comprender mejor el potencial de secuestro de carbono de los campus
universitarios en entornos urbanos. El objetivo del artículo se centra en la necesidad de
evaluar los reservorios de carbono terrestre dentro de un campus ubicado en los bosques
semiáridos de la India, lo cual es importante para construir planes de acción adecuados
con el fin de gestionar los ecosistemas en medio de la amenaza del cambio climático
antropogénico que se produce debido a a la rápida urbanización. La evaluación de la
biomasa y las existencias de carbono de los árboles de las especies seleccionadas dentro
del campus se realizó mediante un método no destructivo utilizando ecuaciones
alométricas utilizadas de manera destacada en estudios previos identificando un total de
20 especies de árboles que comprenden 1260 árboles individuales pertenecientes a 14
diferentes familias de los árboles. Los hallazgos de este estudio en árboles del campus
identificados, que comprendían 1260 árboles individuales, demostraron tener una
madurez moderada en términos de almacenamiento de carbono en forma de biomasa
con un DAP promedio de 25,34 cm. Los valores de su biomasa total estimada y stock de
carbono fueron 75.26446 t/árbol y 37.63223 tC/árbol respectivamente. El valor máximo
de la biomasa total 13,01 t/árbol fue de Ficus recemos, y del stock de carbono 6,50
tC/árbol fue de Ficus recemosa. Se encontró que la especie Azadirachta indica era la
especie más dominante y se encontró que sus árboles muestreados podían secuestrar
537.526 toneladas de carbono en su biomasa en pie. Phyllanthus emblica tenía el
potencial de secuestro de carbono más bajo con 10,9 toneladas. Este documento ofrece
información valiosa con respecto al potencial de secuestro de carbono del campus
universitario situado en entornos urbanos de un ecosistema de bosque semiárido de
Delhi mediante la evaluación del potencial de almacenamiento de carbono de los árboles
por encima y por debajo del suelo. Los hallazgos son importantes para diferentes partes
interesadas, incluidos principalmente futuros investigadores, planificadores y tomadores
de decisiones involucrados en el proceso de urbanización.
Palabras clave: Biomasa, Campus, Reservorio de Carbono, Stock de Carbono,
Bosque semiárido, Secuestro.

INTRODUCTION
Climate change and resultant global warming have been affecting humans
negatively by having irreversible impact on the entire ecosystems of our planet (Kant &
Anjali, 2020a). Rapid increase in greenhouse gases (GHGs) is known to be the primary
cause of this change (Gupta & Bhatt, 2019). Carbon dioxide (CO2) constitutes an
important components of all the GHGs, and is also the most important gas which is
responsible for the global warming (IPCC, 2014). Its atmospheric level, which has
continuously increased from its pre-industrial period level of 279 ppm through 393.84
ppm in 2012 to 395.15 ppm in 2013 is expected to show the concentration of main GHGs
in 2100 in the range of 540 to 970 ppm resulting into the increase in the temperature by
1.8°C to 4.0°C (Narayana, Shashidhar, Nanda, & Savinaya, 2020; WMO, 2017). The
anthropogenic activities in the urban areas are found to be the top contributor of the
atmospheric level of CO2 (Avni & Chaudhry, 2016; Lahoti, Lahoti, Joshi, & Saito, 2020),
and thus are responsible for the global anthropogenic climate change (Abdollahi, Ning, &
Appeaning, 2000; IPCC, 2007) and global warming which are considered to be the major
environmental issues of this century (Kant, 2020; Kant & Agrawal, 2020).
Urban forests play crucial role with the support of the carbon cycle in sequestering
atmospheric CO2 and thereby mitigating global warming as well as climate change
(Anjali, Khuman, & Sokhi, 2020; Livesley, McPherson, & Calfapietra, 2016; Nowak &
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Crane, 2002). Tree cover in the urban settings across the globe is on decline giving rise
to the increase in the impenetrable cover as a result of the increase in the demand of the
area for development (Arya et al., 2017). Nonetheless, carbon sequestration offers itself
as a natural atmospheric carbon removal mechanism by plants and soil which deposit it
in the reservoir and thus can address these problems. It is defined as any of the few
processes which remove excess atmospheric CO2 for moderating global warming
(Subramaniyan, Jothi, Shoba, & Murugesan, 2017). Trees are the natural CO2 sink which
fix carbon during the process of the photosynthesis and store carbon as their biomass
(Lal, 2008). Trees in urban areas which are commonly known as urban forests are
responsible for sequestering and storing carbon as they grow, affecting thereby local
climate, carbon cycles, air temperature, climate change, energy use, and altering
emissions, in the end, from different urban sources (Ragula & Chandra, 2020).
Carbon sequestration in the atmosphere is significant not only for environmental
but also for socio-economic perspectives (Tripathi, 2016), and therefore mapping of
carbon stock at various geographic levels is required for the establishment of the policies
and the development of the strategies related to carbon sequestration in order to ensure
mitigation of climate change (Anjali et al., 2020; Kant & Anjali, 2020b; Salunkhe, Khare,
Kumari, & Khan, 2018). In addition to removal of atmospheric CO2, trees are
ecologically important because of its functions for maintaining carbon cycle and
decreasing pollution (Sahu & Sahu, 2015; Velasco, Roth, Norford, & Molina, 2016). The
canopies of the trees are also responsible for the cooling of microclimate directly through
shading the ground surface and indirectly through the process of transpiration (Subedi et
al., 2010). Trees are also responsible for absorbing major pollutants including CO2 which
are emitted by industries and automobiles restricting them from escaping to the upper
atmosphere resulting into trapping of the heat and global warming. Tree plantation is
therefore an important step for the mitigation of climate change (Nowak, 2010) which
facilitates greater carbon sequestration in growing forests as an affordable alternative of
climate change mitigation, contributing to the reduction in the global atmospheric carbon
(Anjali et al., 2020; Arya et al., 2017; Marak & Khare, 2017). Naturally, forest
ecosystems are known as a carbon reservoir which store huge amount of carbon and
regulate its cycle exchanging CO2 from the atmosphere, acting as an important sink of
carbon in the terrestrial ecosystem (IPCC, 2000).

The role of trees in the urban areas in decreasing GHGs including CO2 levels in the
atmosphere has been recognized as a significant benefit which they do through carbon
sequestration resulting into reduction of emissions and also conservation of energy while
using it for the purpose of heating and cooling (Devi, 2017). Urban ecosystems play a
dynamically significant role as regards reduction of air pollution and atmospheric carbon
sequestration. Absorption of CO2 removing it from the atmosphere during and through
the photosynthesis process and storing carbon as biomass by plants in the urban forests,
road plantations, and many other areas help them serve as CO2 sinks (Kiran & Kinnary,
2011).However, only a limited number of successful studies in India have focused
exclusively on estimation and sequestration of carbon and the potential of urban forests
(Bhalla & Bhattacharya, 2017).
Tree dominated areas in urban settings are known as ‘green pockets’ which
primarily include university campuses, streets, avenues and parks. They have received
less attention from the urban planners and architects who have undervalued the role
played by these trees ignoring the evidences supporting trees as important players in
urban areas (Anjali et al., 2020). It s notable that tree covers in university campuses are
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

significant contributors in carbon sequestration (Gavali & Shaikh, 2016). There have
been fewer studies conducted with the focus on campuses of educational institutions
such as universities (Potadar & Patil, 2017). The few such efforts in the past include
studies on the potential of trees in urban areas for carbon sequestration conducted at
Pune, India (Waran & Patwardhan, 2001) and at Aurangabad, India (Chavan & Rasal,
2010) which have showcased the context and underscored the need of the non-forested
tree dominant areas such as university campuses for carbon sequestration. It is notable
that university environment has suffered immensely due to the incessant increase of
CO2 emission resulting from the increase in the consumption of energy and fossils fuel
for the purpose of powering automobiles and running the facilities for effective learning,
teaching, residence and administration within the campuses (Yunusa & Linatoc, 2018).
Variety of species of the trees within the campuses possess huge potential in terms
of storage of substantial biomass and contributions to the environmental health (Avni &
Chaudhry, 2016; Kongsager, Napier, & Mertz, 2013). Majority of the universities and
higher educational institutions have, within their campuses, not only natural forests but
also cultivated or managed plantations constituting huge carbon stocks in India and
other countries across the globe (Anjali et al., 2020). Their carbon accounting offers
huge potentialities in order to reduce carbon emissions not only at the global but also at
the regional and national levels. New Delhi, the national capital of India, is considered to
be one of the most polluted cities around the world despite having a unique forest
ecosystem located on ridge areas which are actually the extensions of Aravalli hills in
Delhi. They have a length of 32 km and are known to be serving plethora of ecological,
environmental, and social functions (Meena, Bidalia, Hanief, Dinakaran, & Rao, 2019;
Mayank Tripathi & Joshi, 2015). This part of the country also boasts to have the green
campus of the Indira Gandhi National Open University, popularly known as IGNOU which
is a central university under Ministry of Education, Government of India, spanning in
around 150 acres at its headquarters at Maidan Garhi situated in the southern part of
New Delhi. While this campus has variety of avenue plants representing plethora of
species grown in the campus over the years, the multiple natural forest patches are also
being maintained in their own natural set-up in the campus (IGNOU, 2020).

Delhi is a metropolitan city which has immensely urbanized over the decades losing
its green spaces substantially. The paper attempts to make an assessment of the
biomass and carbon stock of the trees within IGNOU campus situated at the Indian
national capital, New Delhi. It aims to enhance understanding about the carbon
sequestration potential of the campus of a university in urban setting by assessing the
terrestrial carbon pools within a campus situated in the semi-arid forests of India which
is significant for building suitable action plans for the purpose of managing ecosystems
amidst the threat of anthropogenic climate change occurring due to rapid urbanization.
The paper also aims to enhance understanding of the current diversity, composition and
structure of the different species of the trees within the campus of IGNOU situated in the
city considering that urban green spaces are reservoirs of carbon stock and their biomass
and carbon stock must be assessed in order to evaluate their carbon sequestration
potential. This paper offers huge potentialities by assessing the biomass and carbon
stock of trees in IGNOU Campus in order to evaluate the ecological conservation values
and carbon sequestration potential of trees in the IGNOU University Campus at New
Delhi considering it a suitable case for addressing the challenges related to climate
change and global warming.
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Area: The Indira Gandhi National Open University, popularly known as
IGNOU, is a central university under Ministry of Education, Government of India. IGNOU,
with its pan-india presence through its Regional Centres across the country, has its
headquarters’ campus spanning in around 150 acres at Maidan Garhi situated in the
southern part of the Indian national capital i.e. New Delhi. The landscaping as well as the
development of greenery including lawns & gardens in this sprawling campus spread
over almost 120 acres are maintained by a designated Horticulture Cell (IGNOU, 2020;
Nayak, Kant, & Anjali, 2020). Not only the campus but the entire neighboring areas are
largely benefitted by the natural availability of the advantages of the green campus. The
campus has variety of avenue plants of plethora of species including unusual and rare
plant species which have grown in the campus over the years. In addition, multiple
natural forest patches are also being maintained in their own natural set-up in the
campus providing immense support to the campus in maintaining biodiversity (Anjali et
al., 2020).

Figure 1. Location map of IGNOU (Retrieved from Google Earth)

This campus of IGNOU, which is a premier Open & Distance Learning (ODL)
institution offering quality higher education, is situated in Delhi southern ridge of Aravalli
Hills, and comes under sub-urban setting. It has ample vegetation cover which
prominently includes gardens, parks, lawns, green roofs, internal planting etc., and
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

covers in excess of 40 per cent of its total area. Approximately 34 per cent is covered
with forest landscape. The study area located in the IGNOU campus lies at the Latitude
of 28o30'01.06'' N and a Longitude of 77° 12' 03.45'' E with an average elevation of 250
m above mean sea level (Figure 1). This campus has a humid sub tropical climate where
the temperature ranges from 5 to 40°C, and annual mean temperature is 25°C. It mainly
receives an annual rainfall ranging between 600 to 800 mm. Vegetation of this part of
Delhi is thorny scrub and is peculiar to arid and semi-arid region.
Data Collection_ Assessment of Biomass and Carbon stock of trees: In studies
conducted for carbon assessment, Biomass is considered to be an important component
(Anjali et al., 2020; Das & Mukherjee, 2015; Flora et al., 2018). Estimation of tree
biomass can be done with the help of methods such as direct method and indirect
method (Anjali et al., 2020; Salazar, Sanchez, Galiendo, & Santa-Regina, 2010), of
which destructive sampling which is a direct method is used by harvesting trees for
quantifying the biomass (Parresol, 1999; Salazar et al., 2010). Further, allometric
equations with measurable parameters are used for quantifying the biomass of a tree in
the indirect method which is known as the non-destructive method also (Gupta & Bhatt,
2019; Sundarapandian et al., 2014). Most of the studies in the past have used the
diameter at breast height (DBH) for the estimation of the above-ground biomass for its
strong correlations with the tree diameter (Anjali et al., 2020; Sandra Brown, 1996;
Sandra Brown & Lugo, 1982; Ketterings, Coe, Noordwijk, Ambagau’, & Palm, 2001).
Additionally, a simple model which needs only the diameter as input has also been
accepted as an effective method for the purpose of determining above-ground biomass
(Pragasan, 2014). It is notable that not only local but global quantification of carbon
sequestration done by trees is significant for tackling the menace of climate change
(Stephson et al., 2014).

This study was conducted with the help of a non-destructive method basing it on
the tree girth and height followed by DBH (Diameter at breast height). Tree diameter (D)
was calculated by using a formula GBH/π where π= 22/7, i.e. GBH x 7/22 which actually
is outcome of the division of π (22/7) by the actual marked girth of species (Bohre,
Chaubey, & Singhal, 2012). Biomass was estimated for the identified tree species by
application of bio-statistics based allometric equations. Height of the trees was found out
with the help of pole method using the heights of electric poles within the campus.
Allometric equations for biomass, in general, comprise tree Diameter at Breast Height
(DBH in cm), total tree Height (H in m), and Wood Density (WD in gm/cm3) (Tripathi,
2015). However, a standard average value of 0.6 gm/ cm3 was used whenever wood
density of specific plant species was not available (Patwardhan et al., 2003). Above
ground Biomass (AGB) was assessed by multiplying the bio-volume with the wood
density of tree species (Brown, Gillespie, & Lugo, 1989; Khan, 2013; MacDicken, 1997;
Sundarapandian et al., 2014). Tree bio-volume (TBV) value was established by
multiplying diameter and height of tree species to a factor 0.4 as has been used in the
previous studies (Das & Mukherjee, 2015). Total biomass is calculated by summing up
the above and below ground biomass (Pandya, Salvi, Chahar, & Vaghela, 2013; Sheikh &
Tiwari, 2013). Above Ground Biomass (AGB), Below Ground Biomass (BGB) and Total
Biomass (TB) of the different tree species were calculated using allometric equations
from non-destructive method of tree estimation. Carbon estimation is usually done for
any species of the plant by considering its half (i.e. 50%) as carbon (Brown et al., 1989).
An account of the parameters and formula used in the current study is presented below
in Table 1.
 Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Table 1. Parameters and formula used in the current study

Parameters under Study Formula applied

Bio-volume(TBV) (T) = 0.4 x (Diameter)2 x Height
AGB(ton) Wood Density x T(BV)
BGB (ton) AGB x 0.26
Total Biomass (TB) Above Ground Biomass + Below Ground
Carbon Storage Biomass
Biomass x 50% (i.e Biomass/2)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In the current study, a total of 20 species of trees at the study sites within the
campus of IGNOU, which comprised 1,260 individual trees, were identified. Table 2
presents the descriptions of the identified species including their scientific names,
common names, family names, wood density and abundance in terms of individual
counting.

Table 2: Description of the Selected Species of the Trees within IGNOU Campus

Scientific Name Common Name Family Name Number of Wood Density

Trees (g/cm3)
1 Azadirachta indica Neem Meliaceae 106 0.7
2 Casurina equistifolia Casurina (oak) Casuarinaceae 61 0.83
3 Cassia fistula Amaltas Fabaceae 53 0.64
4 Phyllanthus emblica Amla Euphorbiacea 48 0.88
5 Acacia nilotica Babool Fabaceae 184 0.9
6 Zizyphus jujube Ber Rhamnaceae 37 0.33
7 Ficus recemosa. Banayan Moraceae 15 0.39
8 Tecoma stans Tecoma Bignoniaceae 110 0.6
9 Holoptelea integrifolia Chillbil Comberataceae 34 0.64
10 Cresentia cujete Kamandal/Calabash Lecythidaceae 44 0.6
11 Callistemon viminalis Bottle brush Myrtaceae 63 0.6
12 Bauhinia purpurea Kachnar Fabaceae 33 0.67
13 Butea monosperma Dhak Fabaceae 32 0.48
14 Albezia lebbek Siris Mimosaceae 209 0.53
15 Tectona grandis Shisham Lamiaceae 77 0.55
16 Mimusop elangi Maulishri Sapotaceae 20 0.72
17 Delonix regia Gulmohar Fabaceae 38 0.6
18 Grevelia Robusta Silver Oak Proteacea 42 0.6
19 Dalbergia sissoo Shisham Fabaceae 34 0.64
20 Syzygium cumini Jamun/Java plum Myrtaceae 20 0.69
Total Trees 1,260

Table 3 presents an account of the values of the parameters used in the current
study for the assessment of biomass and carbon stock which included Average GBH &
DBH (in cm), Average DBH (in m), and Average H (in m). The average DBH of all the
tree species were found to be 25.34 cm which indicates that the trees are moderately
 Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

mature for the purpose of storing substantial amount of carbon in the form of biomass
that they have.

Table 3: Values of the Parameters used in the Study for assessment of Biomass
and Carbon Stock

Scientific name Average GBH (cm) Average DBH Average (m) Height (m)
(cm)
1 Azadirachta indica 110 35.01 0.3501 18.2
2 Casurina equistifolia 65 20.70 0.2070 23.6
3 Cassia fistula 55 17.50 0.175 11.4
4 Phyllanthus emblica 40 12.73 0.1273 6.4
5 Acacia nilotica 78 24.82 0.2482 11.2
6 Zizyphus jujube 86 27.37 0.2737 11.9
7 Ficus recemosa 190 60.47 0.6047 21..4
8 Tecoma stans 60 19.09 0.1909 12.3
9 Holoptelea integrifolia 78 24.82 0.2482 18.6
10 Cresentia cujete 56 17.82 0.1782 08.0
11 Callistemon viminalis 60 19.09 0.1909 09.1
12 Bauhinia purpurea 50 15.91 0.1591 10.4
13 Butea monosperma 101 31.83 0.3183 13.3
14 Albezia lebbek 86 27.05 0.2705 12.6
15 Tectona grandis 90 28.64 0.2864 28.1
16 Mimusop elangi 76 23.87 0.2387 14 .7
17 Delonix regia 61 19.09 0.1909 14.2
18 Grevelia Robusta 55 17.50 0.1750 28.1
19 Dalbergia sissoo 131 41.38 0.4138 22.2
20 Syzygium cumini 70 22.28 0.2228 17.3
25.34

The values of the estimated total biomass and carbon stock of identified species of
the trees within the campus of IGNOU are demonstrated in Table 4 as 75.26446 t/tree
and 37.63223 tC/tree respectively (Table 4).
The maximum value of the total biomass 13.01 t/tree was found to be of Ficus
recemosa. This was followed by 12.26 t/tree found to be of Dalbergia sissoo and 10.14
t/tree with the Azadirachta indica. The minimum 0.45998 t/tree was found to be of
Phyllanthus emblica which was followed by 0.85784 t/tree found to be of Cresentia
cujete. The maximum value of the carbon stock was found to be of Ficus recemosa
having (6.50 tC/tree) which was followed by Dalbergia sissoo (6.13 tC/tree), and
Azadirachta indica (5.07 tC/tree) respectively as the top three carbon content species of
the trees within the campus. Majority of the species of the trees, however, had carbon
content <1.5 tC/tree as per the values demonstrated in Table 4. Figure 2 demonstrates
the contributions of the identified individual trees in terms of carbon stock.
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Table 4: Estimated Values of Biomass and Carbon Stock of the Trees within IGNOU
Campus

Species AGB BGB TB Carbon

1 Azadirachta indica 6.24616 1.62400 10.14379 5.07189
2 Casurina equistifolia 3.35730 0.872899 4.23019 2.11509
3 Cassia fistula 0.89376 0.23237 1.12613 0.56306
4 Phyllanthus emblica 0.36507 0.09491 0.45998 0.22999
5 Acacia nilotica 2.48384 0.64579 3.12964 1.56482
6 Zizyphus jujube 1.17671 0.30594 1.48204 0.74102
7 Ficus recemosa 10.32922 2.68559 13.01482 6.50741
8 Tecoma stans 0.69926 0.18180 0.88107 0.44053
9 Holoptelea integrifolia 2.74996 0.71499 3.46496 1.73248
10 Cresentia cujete 0.68083 0.17701 0.85784 0.42892
11 Callistemon viminalis 0.79591 0.20693 1.00284 0.50142
12 Bauhinia purpurea 0/70818 0.18412 0.89230 0.44615
13 Butea monosperma 2.58717 0.67266 3.25984 1.62992
14 Albezia lebbek 1.95452 0.50817 2.46269 1.23134
15 Tectona grandis 5.07078 1.31840 6.38918 3.19459
16 Mimusop elangi 2.41220 0.62717 3.03938 1.51969
17 Delonix regia 1.24197 0.32291 1.56488 0.78244
18 Grevelia Robusta 2.0727 0.5389 2.61160 1.30580
19 Dalbergia sissoo 9.73136 2.53015 12.26152 6.13076
20 Syzygium cumini 2.37020 0.61625 2.98645 1.49322
Total 75.26446 37.63223

Figure 2: Contributions of the Selected Individual Trees in terms of Carbon Stock

Within the campus of IGNOU, Azadirachta indica species were found to be the most
dominant species and therefore the sample in the study had 110 trees which were found
to be able to sequester 537.526 tons of carbon in their standing biomass. They were
followed by the trees of the species Acacia nilotica and Albezia lebbek with 287.776 tons
 Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

and 257.27 tons respectively. The other major carbon sequestrating species were found
to be Tectona grandis (245.93 tons), Dalbergia lsissoo (208.420 tons), Casurina
equistifolia (129.015 tons), Ficus recemosa (97.60 tons), Holoptelea integrifolia (58.90
tons), Grevelia Robusta (54.81 tons), Tecoma stans (48.40 tons), Mimusop elangi (30.38
tons), Syzygium cumini (29.86 tons), and Cassia fistula (29.86 tons) in a decreasing
order. It is notable that the remaining species of the trees in the studied sample were
found to be having organic carbon content below 20 tons/species. The trees of the
species Phyllanthus emblica had the lowest carbon sequestration potential with 10.9 tons
whereas the lowest but second carbon sequestrating species were Bauhinia purpurea
having carbon content 14.04 tons, and the lowest but third carbon sequestrating species
were Cresentia cujete having 18.83 ton carbon (Table 55).

Table 5: Estimated Values of Carbon Stock of Selected Species of the Trees within
IGNOU Campus

Species Name Organic Carbon t/Individual Tree No. of Individual Tree Organic Carbon t/Species
1 Azadirachta indica 5.07189 106 537.526
2 Casurina equistifolia 2.11509 61 129.015
3 Cassia fistula 0.56306 53 29.839
4 Phyllanthus emblica 0.22999 48 10.992
5 Acacia nilotica 1.56482 184 287.776
6 Zizyphus jujube 0.74102 37 27.417
7 Ficus recemosa 6.50741 15 97.605
8 Tecoma stans 0.44053 110 48.400
9 Holoptelea integrifolia 1.73248 34 58.888
10 Cresentia cujete 0.42892 44 18.832
11 Callistemon viminalis 0.50142 63 31.563
12 Bauhinia purpurea 0.44615 33 14.718
13 Butea monosperma 1.62992 32 52.128
14 Albezia lebbek 1.23134 209 257.279
15 Tectona grandis 3.19459 77 245.938
16 Mimusop elangi 1.51969 20 30.380
17 Delonix regia 0.78244 38 29.732
18 Grevelia Robusta 1.30580 42 54.810
19 Dalbergia sissoo 6.13076 34 208.420
20 Syzygium cumini 1.49322 20 29.860
Total 37.63223 1,260 2201.118
*Organic Carbon is synonymous to Carbon

Figure 3 demonstrates the contributions of the identified individual species in terms

of carbon stock.
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Figure 3: Contributions of the Selected Species in terms of Carbon Stock

As conclusion, this study, as per its primary objective, made an assessment of the
biomass and carbon stock of the identified species of the trees within the campus of
IGNOU at New Delhi using non-destructive method. This method was found suitable for
the measurement of the different parameters of the trees useful in carbon sequestration
process with the help of allometric equations. Trees in the educational institution
campuses are highly vulnerable to the anthropogenic disturbances because of being at
the receiving end of all the developmental activities. The findings of the study suggest
that different species of the trees within the campuses possess huge potential in terms of
accumulation of substantial biomass and contributions to the environmental health.
There is a need to harness their huge potential in terms of non-tangible services offered
by these trees in the campuses by storing and sequestrating carbon despite the
limitedness of the quantity of planted trees as compared to natural forest. The findings of
the current study support the studies such as Poonia (2020) that for the purpose of
enhancing diversity in trees in terms of biomass and carbon allocation, there is a need to
plant above ground and below ground diverse varieties of native and evergreen trees in
different species.

The findings hint that the highest amount of biomass is contained in the above
ground parts of the trees which retain greater share of carbon and are followed by below
ground parts. The study hints at the necessity to maintain the baseline data related to
their species, genera and families along with the data of carbon to make their optimum
utilization for protecting these important species of trees in campuses especially in urban
areas which are under the threat of urbanization. These data would be useful in
facilitating future researchers to undertake appropriate studies focused on the trees in
the campuses of educational institutions and other urban areas. The findings also help in
concluding that trees with higher diameter posses higher carbon content indicating
thereby that they can be considered to be significant carbon reservoirs underscoring the
significance of the sustainable management of trees within the campuses to negate the
negative irreversible effect of climate change and global warming. This study offers
valuable insight with respect to the carbon sequestration potential of university campus
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

situated in urban settings by assessing the above- and below- ground carbon storage
potential of the trees.

This study might be immensely useful for different stakeholders associated with the
planning and decision-making of urbanization and future researchers in conducting more
such studies. Here, it is notable that the study had limitations in the form of keeping
itself confined to the assessment of the potentials of tress only amongst the terrestrial
carbon pools excluding soil and litter biomass. However, the findings suggest that the
trees species found in the campus of IGNOU at New Delhi make significant contributions
in climate change mitigation, helping also in conserving the biodiversity, maintaining the
carbon stock within the campus of IGNOU, and offering many significant ecosystem
services to the society. This study provides further underpinnings to the huge
contributions that trees along with their biodiversity within the campuses of educational.

REFERENCES
Abdollahi, K. K., Ning, Z. H., & Appeaning, A. (2000). Global climate change & the urban
forest. GCRCC/Franklin Press, Baton Rouge, LA.
Anjali, K., Khuman, Y., & Sokhi, J. (2020). A Review of the interrelations of terrestrial
carbon sequestration and urban forests. AIMS Environmental Science, 7(6), 464–
485. https://doi.org/10.3934/environsci.2020030

Arya, A., Negi, S., Kathota, J. C., Patel, A. N., Kalubarme, M. H., Garg, J. K., … Patel, A.
N. (2017). Carbon Sequestration Analysis of dominant tree species using Geo-
informatics Technology in Gujarat State (INDIA). International Journal of
Environment and Geoinformatics (IJEGEO), 4(2), 79–93.

Avni, A., & Chaudhry, P. (2016). Urban Vegetation and Air Pollution Mitigation: Some
Issues from India. Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies, 04(01), 1–
10. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2345748116500019
Bhalla, P., & Bhattacharya, P. (2017). Urban Biodiversity and Green Spaces in Delhi: A
Case Study of New Settlement and Lutyens’ Delhi. J. Hum. Ecol., 52, 83–96.
Bohre, P., Chaubey, O. P., & Singhal, P. K. (2012). Biomass Accumulation and Carbon
Sequestration in Dalbergia sissoo Roxb. International Journal of Bio-Science and
Bio-Technology, (3), 29–44.
Brown, S., Gillespie, A. J. R., & Lugo, A. E. (1989). Biomass estimation methods for
tropical forests with applications to forest inventory data. Forest Science, 35, 881–
902.

Brown, Sandra. (1996). Tropical forests and the global carbon cycle: estimating state
and change in biomass density BT - Forest Ecosystems, Forest Management and
the Global Carbon Cycle. In M. J. Apps & D. T. Price (Eds.) (pp. 135–144). Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Brown, S., & Lugo, A. E. (1982). The Storage and Production of Organic Matter in
Tropical Forests and Their Role in the Global Carbon Cycle. Biotropica, 14(3), 161–
187. https://doi.org/10.2307/2388024
Chavan, B. L., & Rasal, G. B. (2010). Sequestered standing carbon stock in selective tree
species grown in University campus at Aurangabad. International Journal of
Engineering Science and Technology, 12(2), 3003–3007.
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Das, M., & Mukherjee, A. (2015). Carbon sequestration potential with height and girth of
selected trees in the Golapbag Campus, Burdwan, West Bengal(India). Indian
J.Sci.Res., 10(1), 53–57.
Devi, R. (2017). Carbon storage by trees in urban parks: a case study of Jammu, Jammu
and Kashmir, India. Int J Adv Res Dev, 2(4), 250–253.
Flora, G., Athista, G. M., Derisha, L., Devi, D. S., Initha, M. P., D., & Shibani, W. (2018).
Estimation of Carbon Storage in the Tree Growth of St. Mary’s College
(Autonomous) Campus, Thoothukudi, Tamilnadu, India. International Journal of
Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 5(8), 260–266.
Gavali, R., & Shaikh, H. M. Y. (2016). Estimation of Carbon Storage in the Tree Growth
of Solapur University Campus, Maharashtra, India. International Journal of Science
and Research (IJSR), 5(4), 2364–2367.
Gupta, D. K., & Bhatt, R. K. (2019). Carbon sequestration potential of Hardwickia binata
Roxb. based agroforestry in hot semi-arid environment of India: an assessment of
tree density impact. Current Science, 116(1), 23–31.

IGNOU. (2020). IGNOU Profile 2020, Indira Gandhi National Open University. New Delhi,
India.

IPCC. (2000). A special report of the IPCC: Land use, Land-use change and Forestry. UK:
Cambridge University Press.

IPCC. (2007). Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

IPCC. (2014). Human Security. In Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Ed.),

Climate Change 2014 – Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Part A: Global and
Sectoral Aspects: Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report: Volume 1: Global and Sectoral Aspects (Vol. 1, pp. 755–792). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Kant, N. (2020). Climate Strategy Proactivity (CSP) and its Theoretical Underpinnings. In
W. L. Filho, A. M. Azul, L. Brandli, A. L. Salvia, & T. Wall (Eds.), Industry,
Innovation and Infrastructure, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development
Goals (Living Reference). Switzerland AG: Springer Nature.

Kant, N., & Agrawal, N. (2020). Developing a Measure of Climate Strategy Proactivity
Displayed to Attain Competitive Advantage. Competitiveness Review: An
International Business Journal.
Kant, N., & Anjali, K. (2020a). Climate Strategy Proactivity (CSP): A Stakeholders-
Centric Concept. In W. L. Filho, A. M. Azul, L. Brandli, A. L. Salvia, & T. Wall (Eds.),
Partnerships for the Goals, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals
(Living Reference). Switzerland AG: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-319-71067-9_121-1

Kant, N., & Anjali, K. (2020b). Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK): A Resource of
Sustainable Development for Tribal Communities. In W. L. Filho, A. M. Azul, L.
Brandli, A. L. Salvia, & T. Wall (Eds.), Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions,
Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Living Reference).
Switzerland AG: Springer Nature.
Ketterings, Q. M., Coe, R., Noordwijk, M. van, Ambagau’, Y., & Palm, C. A. (2001).
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Reducing uncertainty in the use of allometric biomass equations for predicting

above-ground tree biomass in mixed secondary forests. Forest Ecology and
Management, 146(1–3), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00460-
6

Khan, A. B. (2013). Assessment of carbon storage in Pondicherry mangroves,

Pondicherry, India. Acta Biol Malays, 2, 95–99.

Kiran, G. S., & Kinnary, S. (2011). Carbon Sequatration by urban trees on roadside of
Vadodara city. Int. J. of Engineering Science and Technology, 3(4), 3066–3070.

Kongsager, R., Napier, J., & Mertz, O. (2013). The carbon sequestration potential of tree
crop plantations. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 18(8),
1197–1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-012-9417-z
Lahoti, S., Lahoti, A., Joshi, R. K., & Saito, O. (2020). Vegetation Structure, Species
Composition, and Carbon Sink Potential of Urban Green Spaces in Nagpur City,
India. Land, 9(107), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9040107
Lal, R. (2008). Carbon sequestration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society
Biological Sciences, 363(1492), 815–830. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2185
Livesley, S. J., McPherson, E. G., & Calfapietra, C. (2016). The Urban Forest and
Ecosystem Services: Impacts on Urban Water, Heat, and Pollution Cycles at the
Tree, Street, and City Scale. Journal of Environmental Quality, 45(1), 119–124.
https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2015.11.0567
MacDicken, K. G. (1997). A Guide to Monitoring Carbon Storage in Forestry and Agro
forestry Projects, Winrock International Institute for Agriculture Development, USA.
Marak, T., & Khare, N. (2017). Carbon Sequestration Potential of Selected Tree Species
in the Campus of Shuats. International Journal for Scientific Research &
Development, 5(6), 63–66.

Meena, A., Bidalia, A., Hanief, M., Dinakaran, J., & Rao, K. S. (2019). Assessment of
above- and belowground carbon pools in a semi-arid forest ecosystem of Delhi,
India. Ecological Processes, 8(8), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-019-0163-
y
Narayana, J., Shashidhar, Nanda, A., & Savinaya, M. S. (2020). Carbon Sequestration
Potential of Trees in Kuvempu University Campus Forest Area, Western Ghats,
Karnataka. In N. Roy, S. Roychoudhury, S. Nautiyal, S. K. Agarwal, & S. Baksi
(Eds.), Socio-economic and Eco-biological Dimensions in Resource use and
Conservation: Strategies for Sustainability (1st ed., pp. 303–312). Switzerland AG:
Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32463-6
Nayak, S. R., Kant, N., & Anjali, K. (2020). Strategy of Using ICT in ODL to Disseminate
Higher Education in Tribal Communities: A Case of MP, India. Asian Association of
Open Universities Journal, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.1108.AAOUJ-05-2020-0029

Nowak, D. J. (2010). Urban Biodiversity and Climate Change. In N. Muller, P. Warner, &
J. Kelcey (Eds.), Urban Biodiversity and Design (pp. 101–117). Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
Nowak, D. J., & Crane, D. E. (2002). Carbon storage and sequestration by urban trees in
the USA. Environmental Pollution, 116, 381–389.
Pandya, I. Y., Salvi, H., Chahar, O., & Vaghela, N. (2013). Quantitative Analysis on
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Carbon Storage of 25 Valuable Tree Species of Gujarat, Incredible India. Indian

J.Sci.Res., 4(1), 137–141.

Parresol, B. (1999). Assessing tree and stand biomass: A review with examples and
critical comparisions. Forest Science, 45(4), 573–593.

Poonia, P. kumar. (2020). Tree Diversity and Carbon Stock Assessment of College,
(May). https://doi.org/10.36808/if/2020/v146i5/148155

Potadar, V. R., & Patil, S. S. (2017). Potential of carbon sequestration and storage by
trees in and around B . A . M . University campus of Aurangabad city in
Maharashtra , India. International Journal of Scientific Development and Research
(IJSDR), 2(1), 28–33.

Pragasan, L. (2014). Carbon Stock Assessment in the Vegetation of the Chitteri Reserve
Forest of the Eastern Ghats in India Based on Non-Destructive Method Using Tree
Inventory Data. J. Earth Sci Climat Change, 11–21.

Ragula, A., & Chandra, K. K. (2020). Tree species suitable for roadside afforestation and
carbon sequestration in Bilaspur, India. Carbon Management.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2020.1790243
Sahu, C., & Sahu, K. S. (2015). Air Pollution Tolerance Index (APTI), Anticipated
Performance Index (API), Carbon Sequestration and Dust Collection Potential of
Indian Tree Species: A Review. Emerging Research in Management &Technology,
4–11.
Salazar, S., Sanchez, L., Galiendo, P., & Santa-Regina, I. (2010). AG tree biomass
equation and nutrient pool for a para climax chestnut stand and for a climax oak
stand. Scientific Research and Essays, 1294–1301.

Salunkhe, O., Khare, P. K., Kumari, R., & Khan, M. L. (2018). A systematic review on the
aboveground biomass and carbon stocks of Indian forest ecosystems. Ecol Process,
7–17.
Sheikh, I., & Tiwari, S. C. (2013). Sequestration of Soil Organic Carbon Pool under
Different Land uses in Bilaspur District of Achanakmar, Chhattisgarh. Int J Sci Res,
4, 1920–1924.
Stephson, N. L., Das, A. J., Condit, R., Russo, S. E., Baker, P. J., & Beckmann, N. G.
(2014). Rate of tree carbon accumulation increases continuously with tree size.
Nature, 507(7490), 90–93. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12914

Subedi, B. P., Pandey, S. S., Pandey, A., Rana, E. B., Bhattarai, S., Banskota, T. R., …
Tamrakar, R. (2010). Guidelines formeasuring carbon stocks in community-
managed forests.
Subramaniyan, P., Jothi, J., Shoba, N., & Murugesan, S. (2017). Carbon sequestration in
plantation crops. Int J Environ Sci Eng Res, 2(1), 51–65.
Sundarapandian, S. M., Amritha, S., Gowsalya, L., Kayathri, P., Thamizharasi, M., Dar, J.
A., … Sanjay Gandhi, D. (2014). Biomass and carbon stock assessments of woody
vegetation in Pondicherry University campus, Puducherry. International Journal of
Environmental Biology, 4(2), 87–99.
Tripathi, M. (2015). Cassia fistula: Biomass functions and physiology of carbon
dynamics. International Journal of Applied Engineering and Technology, 5(4), 16–
22.
Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, (ISSN: 0719-3726), 12(X), 202X:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7770/safer-V12N1-art2627

Tripathi, M. (2016). Carbon Management with Urban Trees. Indian Journal of

Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 6(2), 40–46.

Tripathi, Mayank, & Joshi, H. (2015). Carbon flow in Delhi urban forest ecosystems.
Annals of Biological Research, 6(8), 13–17.

Velasco, E., Roth, M., Norford, L., & Molina, L. (2016). Does urban vegetation enhance
carbon sequestration? Landscape and Urban Planning, 148, 99–107.

Waran, A., & Patwardhan, A. (2001). Urban carbon burden of Pune City : A case study
from India. Masters thesis submitted to University of Pune (Unpublished).

WMO. (2017). Statement on the state of the global climate change.

Yunusa, A., & Linatoc, A. (2018). Inventory of Vegetation and Assessment of Carbon
Storage Capacity towards a Low Carbon Campus : a Case Study of Universiti Tun
Husein. Traektoriâ Nauki = Path of Science, 4(12), 3001–3006.
https://doi.org/10.22178/pos.41-3

Received: 12th July 2021; Accepted: 09th September 2022; First distribution: 27th March
2022.