Lessons from the REDD+ readiness process and opportunities to build on them for climate action in the agricultural sector

Transcription

1 WORKSHOP Enhancing land-use sector readiness for addressing climate change and lessons learned from REDD+ Lessons from the REDD+ readiness process and opportunities to build on them for climate action in the agricultural sector Ricardo Ulate, Advisor National Forestry Financing Fund Ministry of Environment and Energy Government of Costa Rica 11-12th October, 2016 Wageningen, The Netherlands

2 REDD+ main features UNFCCC mechanism decided in 2010 during COP16 in Cancun as policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions in developing countries including from: Deforestation Forest degradation, Conservation of Forests, Sustainable management of forests and Enhancement of forest carbon stocks With the collective aim to slow, halt and reverse forest cover and carbon loss (1/CP.16) A National REDD+ strategy or Action Plan A Forest Reference Emissions Level (FREL) or Forests Reference Level (FRL) A system for Monitoring, Reporting and Verification A System of Information on how Safeguards are addressed and respected

3 REDD+ readiness main features Phased approach Readiness, national strategies (no definition, most countries still here, phases) Policies and demonstration activities (Financing gaps remain) Result-based actions or full implementation also known as resultbased payments (No country has yet reach this stage, but Congo DR and Costa Rica are close to in the Carbon Fund) Readiness: Started as soon as 2008: -Adding additional complexities according to frameworks applied- FCPF Carbon Fund UN-REDD (FAO/UNDP/UNEP) Bilaterals (Japan, Germany, USA, EU, Norway, etc.)

4 Summary of REDD+ readiness key elements (R-Package)

5 Design and Implementation challenges Methodological framework just completed in 2015 (uncertainties during design phase and revised versions of methodological frameworks) Stakeholders expectations surpassed delivery capacities in most countries (no readiness process fully completed after 8 years, lack of confidence resulted) Finance sources, modalities and conditions complex and unclear for each stage Requirements to fulfill methodological frameworks not well understood since the beginning (measuring carbon more complex that just forest cover): lack of systematic data gathering scope and frequency of National Forest Inventories, emission factors for different forests types, inconsistencies among GHG inventories and REDD+ requirements/activities, Transfer and management of REDD+ credits still unclear, in particular in the context of NDCs and the Paris Agreement Land-tenure related issues and technical capacities to demonstrate source of emission reductions impose additional challenges for the design of the Mechanism for Benefit Distribution, safeguards, non-carbon benefits

6 Lessons learnt Technical instruments to be developed prior to promote specific dialogues with stakeholders (Reference Level, National Forest Inventory, assessment of drivers of deforestation, availability of information and linkages with National Communications and Biennial Update Reports requirements) Need to create national capacities in technical issues for purposes of follow up (MRV frameworks, measuring forest degradation, conservation of forests, drivers of deforestation) Clarify participation processes and roles of stakeholders and the leading role of the Government: in particular other land-use subsectors Need to look-back and strengthen cross-sectoral policy planning and coordination and integrated public services delivery at all scales Clarify requirements and roles of supporting entities (administrative, political, financial, legal frameworks, ER and rights) More detailed planning and budgeting needed Clarify role of different donors (national framework required prior to deploy action to ensure alignment)

7 Additional Challenges for REDD+ implementation Land tenure issues (Private, Indigenous, PA s and other public lands Attribution and Transfer of titles for ER (land-rights approach) and other activities Criteria for defining the levels of compensation for REDD+ activities (different by category: reforestation, restoration, agroforestry) Complexity of document s preparation (TAPs and UNFCCC review) Engage other land-use actors from the beginning (agriculture and cattle sectors, address drivers of deforestation, clarify scope and roles in NAMAs and other ER efforts / NDCs) Ensure coordination with relevant technical entities at the national and global levels (UNFCCC/IPCC related)

8 Additional Challenges for REDD+ implementation Need to develop a political reading of safeguards prior to deploy an open process to develop safeguards, criteria and indicators and existing capacities Political clarity on the legal nature of carbon rights (ER) and further MRV, including potential transfer of titles to third parties Awareness on speed of approval and review processes and frameworks Linkages among policies and drivers of deforestation and degradation Addressing non-carbon benefits: valuation, distribution and reporting Trade-offs with the agricultural sector Measuring NAMAs emission reductions in LULUCF and other sectors (energy, industrial processes, waste)

9 Agriculture in the UNFCCC Opportunities exists!!! NAMA framework provides room to all countries to work on mitigation in any sector NDC scope is country-driven, all sectors can be considered Historically, agriculture has been part of the adaptation agenda in developing countries and also part of developed countries reporting Is there a need for a more specific framework to advance mitigation efforts in the agriculture sector?

10 Questions and comments? Thank you