The future of REDD+ - Interpreting FREL/FRL for Post-2020 Framework -FREL/FRL on UNFCCC–Overview and Analysis of Submitted FREL/FRLJanuary 28th, 2016
Environment and Energy Dept.
AnalystYoko ASADA （y.asada@murc.jp）

0/●Background –Discussion of REDD-plus in UNFCCC–YearCOP

Key events and Decisions related to REDD-plus in UNFCCC

2005

COP11

Suggestion from Costa Rica and PNG― Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries

2007

COP13

Bali Action Plan

2010

COP16

Cancun Agreement

2013

COP19

Warsaw Framework for REDD-plus2105

COP21

Paris Agreement

 Five activities of REDD-plus

 Key elements for REDD-plus

 Reducing emissions from deforestation

 National Strategy or Action Plan Reducing emissions from forestdegradation

 National Forest Monitoring System Conservation of forest carbon stocks
 Sustainable management of forests
 Enhancement of forest carbon stocks(1/CP.16)(1/CP.16, 15/CP.19)(4/CP.15, 1/CP.16, 11/CP.19)

 Forest Reference Emission Levels and /orForest Reference Levels（FREL/FRLs）(4/CP.15, 1/CP.16, 12.CP.17, 13/CP.19)

 Safeguards Information System(1/CP.16, 12/CP.17, 12/CP.19)

1/●

What is FREL/FRLs ?

 No explanation of difference between
FREL and FRL
 Reason why countries establish
FREL/FRLs : To access results-based payments
 To assess progress on the outcomes of thepolicies and measures for mitigation in
the forestry sector

Emission reductions/removals

GHG emissions/ removals [t-CO2/yr]

 “… benchmarks for assessing eachcountry’s performance in implementing
REDD+ activities” (12/CP.17)

FREL/FRLs(Projection of future GHG
emissions/ removals)

Historical GHG
emissions/removals (actual)

Actual emissions/removals

FuturePastStart of REDD-plus

 To express the country’s contribution
internationally2/●

Decision related to FREL/FRLs
 Modalities for FREL/FRLs (12/CP.17)
 Unit: t-CO2/yr
 To take into account historical data To maintain consistency with national GHG inventories
 To provide information and rationale of FREL/FRLs development, including informationon national circumstances
 To take step-wise approach in FREL/FRLs development
 Sub-national FREL/FRLs as an interim measure Guidelines for submissions on information on reference levels (12/CP.17, Annex)
 Guidelines and procedures for the technical assessment of submissions fromParties on proposed FREL/FRLs (13/CP.19, Annex)3/● Minimum requirements,
a lot of flexibility
 Providing only key words
 Free interpretation of these words

 Emphasizing incentives for eachcountry Promoting participation of manycountries(for avoiding displacement ofemissions) Not necessary to be consistentinternationally, but necessary inthe country

GHG emissions/ removals [t-CO2/yr]

Characteristics of FREL/FRLs rules
Unit

Historical dataNational
circumstances

FuturePastStart of REDD-plus

4/●Submitted FREL/FRLs【Process of REDD-plus in UNFCCC】
FREL/FRLs Submission byCountries to UNFCCC
Technical Assessment ofFREL/FRLs by experts⇒ FREL/FRLs are fixed
Submission of the result ofREDD-plus implementationin Biennial Update Report
Verification?
Result-based Payment ?

【Countries submitting FREL/FRLs】
Country

Date of submission○

Brazil2014/06/06○

Columbia

2014/12/08○

Ecuador2014/12/08○

Guyana2014/12/08○

Malaysia

2014/12/08○

Mexico2014/12/08

Indonesia

2015/12/09

Peru

2015/12/29

Costa Rica

2016/01/06

Paraguay

2016/01/08

Ethiopia

2016/01/15

Viet Nam

2016/01/15

Congo

2016/01/21○： FREL/FRLs have been assessed
As of 25th January, 20165/●

Overviews of assessed FREL/FRLs
Country

Scale

BrazilS

Columbia

SEcuadorN

Area[M ha]

Scope ofActivity

Carbon pools

419.7

DefAGB, BGB,
Litter

45.9

Def

24.9

Period ofFREL/FRLs

FREL/FRLs[M t-CO2/yr]

FREL/FRLs
Construction Approach

2006-2010

1,106.0

2011-2016

908.0

Average of historicalemissions

AGB, BGB－51.6

Average of historicalemissionsDef

AGB, BGB,
Dead wood,
Litter2000-2008

43.4

Average of historicalemissions46.3

Average of deforestationrate of Guyana and allover the world

GuyanaN

21.5

Def, Deg

AGB, BGB,
Dead wood

Malaysia

N

33.0

SMF

AGB, BGB,Litter

2006-2010－183.6

2011-2015－197.8MexicoN

197.3

DefAGB, BGB

2000-2010

44.4－

Average of historicalemissions/ removals
Average of historicalemissions[Scale] N: National, S: Sub-national,[Scope of Activity] Def: Avoiding Deforestation, Deg: Avoiding Forest Degradation, SMF: Sustainable Management of Forest[Carbon pools] AGB: Above-ground Biomass, BGB: Below-ground Biomass

6/●Overviews of submitted FREL/FRLs
 Points of developing FREL/FRLs
 Forest Definition
 Data (Year, number of point) Scope of FREL/FRLs (Selected Activities, Carbon pools, GHG sources)
 FREL/FRLs Construction Approach― Average of historical emissions― Simple historical trend such as single regression analysis― More complicated analysis such using models, considering national
circumstances (population growth, economic growth) etc.
 Value of FREL/FRLs may be changed depend on applied methodology,
especially in those points above.
 FREL/FRLs are very important for quantifying the effort by each country; foraccounting as the National Determined Contributions, acquiring result-based payment.
7/●

Overviews of assessed FREL/FRLs
Country

Scale

BrazilS

Columbia

SEcuadorN

Area[M ha]

Scope ofActivity

Carbon pools

419.7

DefAGB, BGB,
Litter

45.9

Def

24.9

Period ofFREL/FRLs

FREL/FRLs[M t-CO2/yr]

FREL/FRLs
Construction Approach

2006-2010

1,106.0

2011-2016

908.0

Average of historicalemissions

AGB, BGB－51.6

Average of historicalemissions

DefAGB, BGB,
Dead wood,
Litter2000-2008

43.4

Average of historicalemissions46.3

Average of deforestation
rate of Guyana and allover the world

GuyanaN

21.5

Def, Deg

AGB, BGB,
Dead wood

Malaysia

N

33.0

SMF

AGB, BGB,
Litter

2006-2010－183.6

2011-2015－197.8MexicoN

197.3

DefAGB, BGB

2000-2010

44.4

Scope－

Average of historicalemissions/ removals
Average of historicalemissions

Construction Approach[Scale] N: National, S: Sub-national,[Scope of Activity] Def: Avoiding Deforestation, Deg: Avoiding Forest Degradation, SMF: Sustainable Management of Forest[Carbon pools] AGB: Above-ground Biomass, BGB: Below-ground Biomass

8/●Analysis (Technical Issues)
 Scope Important activities, carbon pools, and GHG sources may be omitted because oftechnical difficulty.
Case 1: Brazil
Emission from forest degradation, which is 59% of emission from deforestation, isomitted at present.

Case 2: Indonesia
CO2 emission from peat decomposition is included, but CH4 and N2O emissions frombiomass burning (e.g. forest fire) are not included, at present.

 How emissions from REDD+ activity, such as agriculture as the alternative
livelihood are estimated and accounted? How emissions from REDD+ activity
and non-REDD+ activity are identified and separated?
 If sub-national FREL/RELs have different scope, how they are integrated fornational level?
9/●Analysis (Technical Issues)
 FREL/FRLs Construction Approach Many countries apply simple approach, such as average of historicalemissions/ removals
GHG emissions/ removals [t-CO2/yr]

FigureComplicated approach
GHG emissions/ removals [t-CO2/yr]

Simple approach

FuturePast

FuturePast
Start of REDD-plus

Start of REDD-plus

Construction

Easy

Difficult

Emission
reductions/removals

Generally Small

Generally Large10/●Analysis (Political Issues in near future) Rule making for result-based payment (will be discussed in future COP)
 Decision of the amount to be paid Measures to avoid double counting Allocation of the acquired payment inside the country
UNFCCC / Organization for payment
Submission of emission reductions/removals by REDD-plus

Result-based payment

Country

Allocation of payment

Region ARegion B

High cost, low performance

Low cost, High performance11/●Thank you for your attention

12/●

[Scale] N: National, S: Sub-national, [Scope] Def: Avoiding Deforestation, Deg: Avoiding Forest Degradation, SMF: Sustainable Management of Forest,
Aff: Afforestation, Enh: Enhancement of Forest Carbon Stocks, Ref: Reforestation, * Peat: Peat decomposition, [Other] ○: assessed by technical experts

Appendix: Overviews of submitted FREL/FRLs
Area[M ha]CountryScale

Scope of Activity○Brazil

S

419.7

Def

○

Columbia

S

45.9

CongoN

Costa Rica

Period ofFREL/FRLs

FREL/FRLs[M t-CO2/yr]

FREL/FRLs
Construction Approach

2006-2010

1,106.0

2011-2016

908.0

Def－51.6

Average of historical emissions

34.2

Def, Deg

2000-2012

39.1

Using calculation models based on national
development planS

5.1

Def, Enh

1996-200914.3

2010-2025

4.0

Ecuador

N

24.9

Def

2000-2008

43.4

Average of historical emissions

Ethiopia

N

112.7

19.8

Average of historical emissions－10.2

Average of historical removals

GuyanaN

21.5

Def, Deg－Indonesia

S

113.2

Def, Peat*

2013-2020

568.9～593.3○Malaysia

N

33.0

SMF

2006-2010－183.6

2011-2015－197.8○Mexico

N

197.3

Def

2000-2010

44.4

ParaguayN

40.7

DefPeruS

78.3

Def

2015-2020

Viet NamN

Def, Deg, Ref－○○DefAff

2000-2013

46.3Under construction

77.6～93.7

Average of historical emissions

Average of historical emissions

Average of deforestation rate of Guyana and allover the world
Forest: Average of historical emissions
Peat: Historical trend (increasing)Average of historical emissions/ removals
Average of historical emissions－Historical trend (increasing)

FREL:

88.2

Average of historical emissions

FRL:

-70.9

Average of historical removals

13/●References


UN-REDD (2015) Technical Considerations for Forest Reference Emission Level and/or Forest Reference Level
construction for REDD+ under the UNFCCC

UNFCCC, REDD+ Web platform.
http://redd.unfccc.int/fact-sheets/forest-reference-emission-levels.html

Decisions of the COP
http://unfccc.int/documentation/decisions/items/3597.php

14/●