WWF Guide to Building REDD+ Strategies

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Verification (V) The final component of the MMRV system is verification. Verification is an essential step in ensuring that (often self-reported) data is consistent with and meets the requirements laid out by international (or other thirdparty) standards. Under the IPCC GPG for LULUCF, verification is referred to as “the collection of activities and procedures that can be followed during the planning and development, or after completion of an inventory that can help to establish its reliability for the intended applications of that inventory”. There are several options for how changes in forest can be verified, and again this section will focus on national-level processes (with subnational-level verification as an interim measure) under a future REDD+ mechanism. Under the UNFCCC it was agreed that developing countries should verify their emissions reductions using a process called International Consultation and Analysis (ICA) (see above). The ICA process will consist of two steps: n A technical analysis of biennial update reports (BURs) by a team of technical experts in consultation with the UNFCCC party, resulting in a summary report. The information considered should include the national GHG inventory report along with NAMAs, including their impacts and the progress made in their implementation. n A facilitative sharing of views, which will have as input the BURs and summary report referred to above. The level of rigor for the verification system will depend greatly on the end use of the emissions reductions. If measured and reported emissions reductions are intended to be used for compliance purposes or as © JULIE PUDLOWSKI / WWF offsets, then strict standards will need to be applied to verification in line with national GHG inventory reporting under the UNFCCC or CDM. Under the UNFCCC, verification is done through quality control and quality assurance mechanisms, either by those directly involved in the calculation or by a third party (Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, 2013). On the other hand, within carbon markets, verification is done ex-post by an independent third party to confirm that the project has been conducted according to prescribed methodologies. Although guidance exists, many countries are still only in the early stages of development of their verification systems. In Doha there was also significant pushback against independent verification from forest-owning countries. Early examples of independent verification systems have also emerged (e.g. MOABI in DRC) that use a combination of crowdsourcing and third-party data collection to verify forest area change. WWF vieWPoint WWF has developed several positions on MMRV for REDD+. In the run-up to Doha in November 2012, WWF produced a position paper on MMRV that called for REDD+ MMRV systems that are robust and accurate and that are consistent, comparable and generated in a transparent manner. This is available here: bit.ly/143srBA. Prior to that, WWF developed recommendations for the UNFCCC SBSTA meeting in June 2012 that called for efficient, inclusive and accurate MMRV systems. In these recommendations, WWF also stated that forest degradation and biodiversity should initially be tracked using proxy indicators. This is available here: bit.ly/15GMC8y. FuRtHeR ReSouRCeS n GOFC-GOLD REDD+ Sourcebook, available at: www.gofcgold. wur.nl/redd n GOFC-GOLD Fire Project, available at: gofc-fire.umd.edu n IPCC Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-use change and Forestry, available at: www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/ gpglulucf/gpglulucf.html n IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, available at: www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl n MRV Community of Practice—REDD+ Community, available at: www.reddcommunity.org/ mrv-community WWF FOREST AND CLIMATE INITIATIVE monitoRinG, meaSuRement, RePoRtinG and veRiFiCation // 59
BiBlioGRaPHy AIKAWA, S. et al. 2013. “REDD-plus Cookbook. How to Measure and Monitor Forest Carbon.” FFPRI, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute. Research and Development Center. Tsukuba, Japan. DANIELSEN, F. et al. 2011. “At The Heart Of REDD+: A Role For Local People In Monitoring Forests?” Conservation Letters, 4 (2), 158-167. FRITZ, S. et al. 2009. Geo-Wiki.org: “The Use of Crowd-Sourcing To Improve Global Land Cover.” Remote Sensing, 1 (3), 345-354. HARRIS, N. L. et al. 2012. “Baseline Map Of Carbon Emissions From Deforestation In Tropical Regions.” Science, 336, 1573–1576. PRATIHAST, A. K. et al. 2013. “Linking Community-Based And National REDD+ Monitoring: A Review Of The Potential, Carbon Management.” Carbon Management, 4, 91-104. SAATCHI, S. S. et al. 2011. “Benchmark Map of Forest Carbon Stocks in Tropical Regions Across Three Continents.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 9899–9904. Sy, V. D. et al. 2012. “Synergies of Multiple Remote Sensing Data Sources for REDD+ Monitoring.” Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4, 696-706. end noteS 1. Decision 2/CP.13. 2. ibid. Noting that the decision only requires reporting on deforestation. 3. Including, if appropriate, subnational systems as part of national monitoring systems and recognizing again the IPCC GPG for LULUCF. 4. Decision 4/CP.15. 5. Decision 1/CP.16. 6. FCCC/SBSTA/2012/L.9/Rev.1. 7. “Complete” means the provision of data and information that allows the technical analysis of the results. 8. Described in Annex III to Decision 2/CP.17. 9. Described in Annex IV of Decision 2/CP.17. 10. This is not always the case. For instance, in peat swamps BGB is the dominant source of carbon fluxes. 11. This type of data can be gathered from forest management concessions; however, this approach limits the scope to commercial species only. 12. Identified in the stratification process. 13. Synergies among plot data and ancillary data are currently being explored. The feasibility of using such synergies has been established (Asner et al., 2009, 2010, 2011, Skole et al., 2009). WWF FOREST AND CLIMATE INITIATIVE monitoRinG, meaSuRement, RePoRtinG and veRiFiCation // 60
Page 1 and 2:
PRevieW edition INT WWF Guide to Bu
Page 3 and 4:
FOREWORD In the last five years, th
Page 5 and 6:
aCRonymS 3E: Effectiveness, efficie
Page 7 and 8:
this guide is designed to provide R
Page 9 and 10:
WWF Guide to BuildinG Redd+ StRateG
Page 11 and 12:
All in all, since 2007, REDD+ has e
Page 13 and 14: BiBlioGRaPHy ANGELSEN, A., BROWN, S
Page 15 and 16: Key Messages n One of the first ste
Page 17 and 18: Other International Conventions, Fo
Page 19 and 20: WWF vieWPoint On goals WWF endorses
Page 21 and 22: © EDUARDO RUIZ / WWF-CANON WWF Gui
Page 23 and 24: intRoduCtion institutional arrangem
Page 25 and 26: taBle 1: FunCtionS tHat a CountRy
Page 27 and 28: CaSe Study © DIEGO PEREZ / WWF StR
Page 29 and 30: FoCuS Guyana and BRazil: tWo diFFeR
Page 31 and 32: © JENNIFER FERGUSON-MITCHELL/WWF W
Page 33 and 34: © © WWF-CANON / MIKE GOLDWATER in
Page 35 and 36: Implementation and enforcement Impl
Page 37 and 38: owners may be charged royalties on
Page 39 and 40: The right of access to information
Page 41 and 42: © JENNIFER FERGUSON-MITCHELL / WWF
Page 43 and 44: intRoduCtion if well-designed, REDD
Page 45 and 46: video: RelevanCe oF ConSultation an
Page 47 and 48: national and SuBnational oPtionS A
Page 49 and 50: CaSe Study © NIGEL DICKINSON / WWF
Page 51 and 52: n Principles: An effective grievanc
Page 53 and 54: end noteS 1. Section III C of Decis
Page 55 and 56: Key Messages n Forest monitoring, m
Page 57 and 58: COP 17: Durban, 2011 In 2011, at CO
Page 59 and 60: Table 1 lists the predominant remot
Page 61 and 62: CaSe Study BRazil’S FoReSt monito
Page 63: estimates from the plots to the fin
Page 67 and 68: Key Messages n Robust and transpare
Page 69 and 70: inteRnational PoliCy Context RLs ar
Page 71 and 72: (see Focus, right), but ultimately
Page 73 and 74: Adjustments Recognizing that histor
Page 75 and 76: FuRtHeR ReSouRCeS Key internal WWF
Page 77 and 78: Key Messages n Addressing the drive
Page 79 and 80: Emissions from DD vary significantl
Page 81 and 82: Intervention strategies according t
Page 83 and 84: taBle 8: oveRvieW oF CRediBle tHiRd
Page 85 and 86: essential for companies managing su
Page 87 and 88: BiBlioGRaPHy AGNEW, D., GRIEVE, C.,
Page 89 and 90: Key Messages n International and na
Page 91 and 92: COP 16: Cancun, 2010 The question o
Page 93 and 94: toward transformational policy init
Page 95 and 96: WWF vieWPoint As of mid-2013, WWF h
Page 97 and 98: Key Messages n Benefit sharing syst
Page 99 and 100: outlines the international policy l
Page 101 and 102: FoCuS taRGetinG PaymentS in Redd+ P
Page 103 and 104: taBle 1: oddaR meanCHey Redd+ PRoje
Page 105 and 106: WWF vieWPoint WWF is working with g
Page 107 and 108: WWF PoliCy PoSitionS & BRieFS Offic
Page 109 and 110: © JENNIFER FERGUSON-MITCHELL / WWF
Page 111 and 112: Ecosystem The interactive system fo
Page 113: RL ular ouR viSion WWF’s global F
show all

WWF Guide to Building REDD+ Strategies

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?