Open-Earth-Monitor Global Workshop 2026

The growing availability of global aboveground biomass (AGB) maps from Earth Observation (EO) is changing how carbon stocks can be quantified, monitored and reported. Rapid advances in EO, cloud computing and GeoAI have expanded the range of available products, from coarse-resolution long time series to emerging global maps at up to 10 m resolution. At the same time, inconsistencies in spatial support, temporal coverage, modeling approach and uncertainty structure continue to limit comparability and reduce confidence in their use for carbon accounting, climate reporting, REDD+ and other policy-facing applications. What is increasingly needed is not simply more biomass maps, but a framework that can validate them consistently, explain where they differ and clarify what those differences mean for actual use.
This contribution presents an integrated framework developed within the Open-Earth-Monitor ecosystem with four connected components: (1) a harmonized global biomass reference dataset, AGBref; (2) a validation and estimation framework that explicitly accounts for spatial uncertainty and representativeness; (3) a systematic inter-comparison of global AGB maps across methods, resolutions and epochs; and (4) demonstrations of how product differences affect downstream uptake. A key novelty is the use of AGBref across all components. AGBref combines National Forest Inventories, permanent plots and airborne LiDAR-derived biomass maps in a multi-epoch, multi-resolution reference system with uncertainty information, providing a common backbone for independent validation and more transparent interpretation of biomass products. The framework moves beyond validation based only on global summary statistics. In addition to agreement with reference data, it examines how biomass products represent spatial heterogeneity and landscape structure. This is particularly important with the emergence of very high-resolution biomass maps, which may show similar overall accuracy but still differ substantially in the spatial patterns they reproduce.
Use cases are central to the framework. It responds to a clear demand for biomass information that is not only more accurate, but also more comparable, operational and easier to integrate into existing analytical systems. For example, WRI identifies the best available biomass dataset that can strengthen forest carbon stock and emissions assessment, support biomass change analysis, and remain compatible with Global Forest Watch workflows and baseline forest change products. For OECD, the need is similar but framed through environmental indicators, LULUCF-related analysis, and SEEA-based accounting, where one consistent and transparent dataset is preferred over multiple competing products. In both cases, independent validation, comparability with national data, open access, interoperability and regular updates are core conditions for uptake.
The framework is therefore designed not only to compare maps, but also to test their implications for reporting and accounting contexts. One priority application is carbon accounting across overlapping but distinct frameworks such as UNFCCC reporting and SEEA-based environmental accounting. These frameworks share a need for spatially explicit, transparent and comparable biomass information, yet differ in accounting logic, reporting purpose, and treatment of stocks and changes. The framework creates a basis for examining how the same EO-based biomass product performs across these contexts, where comparability holds, and where important differences emerge. This is especially relevant for countries with limited or infrequent National Forest Inventory data, and for recurrent accounting processes that require methods and datasets that can be updated regularly and consistently through time.
To support uptake, the framework is implemented through open, cloud-based tools such as Plot2Map within ESA-MAAP, enabling reproducible integration of plot-level reference data with large-scale EO products for validation, visualization and comparison. The platform also serves as a demonstration space for testing how biomass products can support institutional needs in global forest assessment, environmental indicators, policy analysis, SEEA and LULUCF applications, and country-facing monitoring workflows. This is particularly relevant for users such as WRI, OECD and national agencies that require transparent, scalable, open and regularly updateable biomass information.