1OVERVIEWIPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

Chapter 1: Overview

AUTHORS AND REVIEW EDITORS
Co-ordinating Lead authors
Jim Penman (UK)Michael Gytarsky (Russia), Taka Hiraishi (Japan), Thelma Krug (Brazil), and Dina Kruger (USA)

Review Editors
Ian Carruthers (Australia) and Carlos Lopez (Cuba)

1.2

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

Chapter 1: Overview

Contents
1.1

INTRODUCTION

1.4

1.2

GOOD PRACTICE GUIDANCE FOR LAND USE, LAND-USE CHANGE
AND FORESTRY (LULUCF)

1.4

DEFINITION OF INVENTORIES CONSISTENT WITH GOOD PRACTICEGUIDANCE

1.6

1.4

RELATIONSHIP TO THE IPCC GUIDELINES

1.8

1.5

OUTLINE OF PRESENT DOCUMENT

1.8

1.6

USING THE GUIDANCE - PRACTICAL ADVICE FOR INVENTORY AGENCIESAND OTHERS

1.10

POLICY RELEVANCE

1.11

1.3

1.7

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

1.3

Chapter 1: Overview

1.1

INTRODUCTION

In 1998, the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) invited theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to produce good practice guidance to the Revised 1996
IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC Guidelines)1. Since the Parties had alreadyagreed to use2 the IPCC Guidelines for estimating greenhouse gas emissions and removals, the role of goodpractice guidance was not to replace the IPCC Guidelines, but rather to provide advice consistent with them.
The IPCC finished its work in time for the first volume of the Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty
Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (GPG2000) 3 to be accepted at the IPCC Plenary meeting
held in Montreal in May 2000. The Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC as well as its Subsidiary
Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) subsequently endorsed 4 GPG2000. The COP has
referred extensively to GPG2000 in subsequent decisions, including those collectively referred to as the
Marrakesh Accords5, which were achieved at its seventh session. The Marrakesh Accords also invited the IPCC
to develop good practice guidance for land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), which is not coveredin GPG2000. The mandate for this work, the definition of good practice in this context, its relationship to the
IPCC Guidelines, and the practical consequences for inventory agencies are described in more detail below in
Sections 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.6 respectively. Sections 1.5 and 1.7 contain an outline of the present document and a
discussion of its policy relevance.

1.2

GOOD PRACTICE GUIDANCE FOR LAND USE,
LAND-USE CHANGE AND FORESTRY(LULUCF)The GPG2000 did not cover the land-use change and forestry (LUCF) activities described in Chapter 5 of the
IPCC Guidelines6 because during the time that the GPG2000 was being prepared, the IPCC was also preparing
the Special Report on Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry (SR LULUCF). Parallel work on Good
Practice Guidance for LULUCF would have carried a risk of inconsistency with the Special Report. Furthermore,significant negotiations on LULUCF were underway in the UNFCCC process, and the IPCC recognised that it
would be better to develop Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF in the light of the outcome of thesenegotiations.
The LULUCF negotiations relating to the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol were completed (except for
those relating to rules and modalities for afforestation and reforestation activities under the clean development
mechanism) during the second part of the COP6, and at COP7, which took place respectively in Bonn (July 2001)

1

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (1997). Houghton J.T., Meira Filho L.G., Lim B., Tréanton K.,
Mamaty I., Bonduki Y., Griggs D.J. and Callander B.A. (Eds). Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse
Inventories. IPCC/OECD/IEA, Paris, France.

2

Notably the Report of the Fourth Session of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice(FCCC/SBSTA/1996/20), paragraph 30; decisions 2/CP.3 and 3/CP.5 (UNFCCC reporting guidelines for preparation ofnational communications by Parties included in Annex I to the Convention, part I: UNFCCC reporting guidelines onannual inventories), 18/CP.8 revising the guidelines adopted under 3/CP.5, and 17/CP.8 adopting improved guidelines forthe preparation of national communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention.

3

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2000). Penman J., Kruger D., Galbally I., Hiraishi T., Nyenzi B.,
Emmanuel S., Buendia L., Hoppaus R., Martinsen T., Meijer J., Miwa K., and Tanabe K. (Eds). Good Practice Guidanceand Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. IPCC/OECD/IEA/IGES, Hayama, Japan.

4

Report of the Twelfth session of the SBSTA (FCCC/SBSTA/2000/5), paragraph 40 and decisions 3/CP.5 and 19/CP.8.

5

Decisions 1/CP.7 to 24/CP.7, decision 21/CP.7 refers specifically to the use of Good Practice Guidance in the context of
the Kyoto Protocol.

6

The IPCC Guidelines refer to Land-Use Change and Forestry (LUCF), but Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry(LULUCF) has become the usual term in UNFCCC negotiations and was adopted for the title of IPCC’s 2000 Special
Report on the subject. LUCF is used in this report when referring specifically to the IPCC Guidelines.

1.4

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

Chapter 1: Overview

and Marrakesh (November 2001). Paragraph 3 in the Decision 11/CP.77 agreed at COP7 contains the requests to
the IPCC (see Box 1.2.1).

BOX 1.2.1
INVITATION TO THE IPCC IN THE MARRAKESH ACCORDS, DECISION 11/CP.7

The Conference of Parties…..
3. Invites the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):(a) To elaborate methods to estimate, measure, monitor, and report changes in carbon stocks andanthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks resulting from land use,land-use change and forestry activities under Article 3, paragraphs 3 and 4, and Articles 6 and 12of the Kyoto Protocol, on the basis of the Revised 1996 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, taking into account the present
decision (11/CP.7), and draft decision -/CMP.1 (Land use, land-use change and forestry) attachedhereto, to be submitted for consideration and possible adoption to the Conference of the Parties at
its ninth session;(b) To prepare a report on good practice guidance and uncertainty management relating to themeasurement, estimation, assessment of uncertainties, monitoring and reporting of net carbon
stock changes and anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks inland use, land-use change and forestry sector, taking into consideration the present decision(11/CP.7) and draft decision -/CMP.1 (Land use, land-use change and forestry) attached hereto, tobe submitted for consideration and possible adoption to the Conference of the Parties at its ninth
session;(c) To develop definitions for direct human-induced ‘degradation’ of forests and ‘devegetation’ ofother vegetation types and methodological options to inventory and report on emissions resulting
from these activities, to be submitted for consideration and possible adoption to the Conference of
the Parties at its ninth session; and(d) To develop practicable methodologies to factor out direct human-induced changes in carbon
stocks and greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks from changes in carbon
stocks and greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks due to indirect humaninduced and natural effects (such as those from carbon dioxide fertilization and nitrogen
deposition), and effects due to past practices in forests (pre-reference year), to be submitted to theConference of the Parties at its tenth session.
...

The invitations in paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b) of 11/CP.7 are closely linked, and therefore the IPCC has responded
to them by producing a single report on Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF, on the basis of the IPCC
Guidelines. This single report completes the set of good practice guidance for all sectors of the IPCC Guidelines.
The first volume of the good practice guidance (GPG2000) covers other sectors of the IPCC Guidelines –namely Energy, Industrial Processes, Agriculture and Waste.
The IPCC is addressing the requests under the paragraphs 3(c) and 3(d) of 11/CP.7 separately, and this Good
Practice Guidance for LULUCF does not rely on them for its application.

7

The designation 11/CP.7 means the 11th decision adopted by the COP to the UNFCCC at its 7th session. The
designation -/CMP.1 refers to draft decisions which will be considered by the COP when it meets for the first time serving
as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol.

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

1.5

Chapter 1: Overview

1.3

DEFINITION OF INVENTORIES CONSISTENT
WITH GOOD PRACTICE GUIDANCEGPG2000 defines inventories consistent with good practice as those which contain neither over- nor underestimates so far as can be judged, and in which uncertainties are reduced as far as is practicable8.
When applied to LULUCF, this definition from GPG2000 should ensure that estimates of carbon stock changes,
emissions by sources and removals by sinks, even if uncertain, are bona fide estimates, in the sense of notcontaining any biases that could have been identified and eliminated, and that uncertainties have been reduced as
far as practicable given national circumstances. Estimates of this type are presumably the best attainable, given
current scientific knowledge and available resources. Good practice aims to satisfy the definition by providing
guidance on:•

Choice of estimation method within the context of the IPCC Guidelines;•

Quality assurance and quality control procedures to provide cross-checks during inventory compilation;•

Data and information to be documented, archived and reported to facilitate review and assessment of
inventory estimates; and•Quantification of uncertainties at the source or sink category level and for the inventory as a whole, so that
resources available can be directed toward reducing uncertainties over time, and the improvement can betracked.

Good practice guidance further supports the development of inventories that are transparent, documented,
consistent over time, complete, comparable, assessed for uncertainties, subject to quality control and assurance,
efficient in the use of resources available to inventory agencies, and in which uncertainties are reduced as better
information becomes available.
GPG2000 introduced a method to identify the key sources that should be prioritised by using more detailed(higher tier) estimation methods where resources are available, because of their significance in affecting absolutelevel or trend in emissions, their uncertainty, or qualitative factors such as unexpectedly high or low estimates.
Chapter 5.4 of this report extends the key source analysis to LULUCF categories. The approach augments the
key source categories identified without consideration of LULUCF by those identified as key by analysis of thewhole inventory including LULUCF categories. Activities under Articles 3.3 and 3.4 of the Kyoto Protocol are
key if the associated Chapter 3 category is key, or if the effect of activities spread over several Chapter 3
categories is larger than Chapter 3 categories that are key, or on qualitative grounds. The outcome of the key
category analysis is then used in decision trees to guide the choice of estimation method for use in preparing theinventory. Figure 1.1 shows an example decision tree (the abbreviations LF, LG, LC, LW, LS and LO in Figure
1.1 are explained in the “Abbreviations and Acronyms” at the end of this report).

8

See GPG2000 Section 1.3.

1.6

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

Chapter 1: Overview

Figure 1.1

Decision tree for identification of appropriate tier-level for land converted toanother land-use category (example given for land converted to forest land,
LF)

Repeat for each land use category:
- LF
- LG
- LC
- LW
- LS
- LO

Are there
any land conversions toforest land?
(Note 1)

No

Report “Not Occurring”

Yes

Repeat for each gas:
- CO2 (carbon)
- CH4
- N2O

Use tier level mostappropriate foravailable data

No

Is LF
a key category?
(Note 2)
Yes

Repeat for each sub-category*:- Biomass- Dead organic matter- SoilAsk for each
sub-category under
LF (Note 3): Is this subcategory significant?
(Note 4)

No

Are
country-specificdata available?

Yes
No

No

Yes

Are
country-specific data
available?

Develop or obtainrepresentative data
and EFs

Yes

Yes

Are
advancedmethods and detailed
data for LF available
in yourcountry?

No

Use advanced methods
and detailed countryspecific data (Note 5)

Use country-specificdata (Note 5)

Use default data
(Note 5)(Tier 3)(Tier 2)(Tier 1)

Note 1: The use of 20 years, as a threshold, is consistent with the defaults contained in the IPCC Guidelines. Countries may use different
periods where appropriate to national circumstances.
Note 2: The concept of key categories is explained in Chapter 5, Subsection 5.4 (Methodological Choice – Identification of Key
Categories).
Note 3: See Table 3.1.2 for the characterisation of sub-categories.
Note 4: A sub-category is significant if it accounts for 25-30% of emissions/removals for the overall category.
Note 5: See Box 3.1.1 for definition of Tier levels.
* If a country reports harvested wood products (HWP) as a separate pool, it should be treated as a sub-category.

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

1.7

Chapter 1: Overview

1.4

RELATIONSHIP TO THE IPCC GUIDELINES

As explained in the introduction, good practice guidance needs to be consistent with the IPCC Guidelines since
the Parties have agreed to use the latter for estimation of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. Good PracticeGuidance for LULUCF defines consistency with the IPCC Guidelines, using the following three criteria9:(i)

Specific source or sink categories addressed by the Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF can betraced back to categories in the IPCC Guidelines.

(ii)

Good practice guidance for LULUCF uses the same functional forms for the equations that areused in the IPCC Guidelines, or their equivalent.

(iii)

Good practice guidance for LULUCF allows corrections of any errors or deficiencies that havebeen identified in the IPCC Guidelines.

Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF has some interlinkages with GPG2000 in estimation of agriculturalemissions, particularly nitrous oxide from soils, and must maintain consistency with the advice already agreed
upon.
Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF has some additional, though limited and specific, flexibility following theconclusions of the 15th meeting of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), heldin association with COP7 in Marrakesh. Having noted with appreciation the progress of IPCC’s work on
LULUCF, the SBSTA:…encouraged the IPCC to ensure that any elaboration of, or change to, the reporting of
categories in Chapter 510 of the 1996 Revised IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories allows for a comparison of information reported using Good Practice Guidancewith previous inventory reporting under the Convention.11
SBSTA suggested this flexibility for the scientific reason that the IPCC Guidelines treat all soils as one reporting
category, which tends to separate soil organic matter from associated living biomass stocks in the inventory
calculations, leading to possible inconsistencies in the estimates due partly to different handling of categories.
This advice from SBSTA allows some rearrangement in the Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF, as long as
the ability to trace back the inventory estimates to the reporting categories in Chapter 5 of the IPCC Guidelines
is retained. The development of Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF has made use of this flexibility, while
paying careful attention to the need to ensure consistency with Chapter 5 of the IPCC Guidelines.
Criteria (i) to (iii) allow for inclusion of additional source or sink categories on managed land where these arecovered under the “Other” category of Chapter 5 of the IPCC Guidelines. Default emission or removal factors
and model parameters have been updated where these can be linked to particular national circumstances anddocumented. Advice on more complex methods than those described in the IPCC Guidelines is also provided,
since the latter anticipate use of such methods12.
Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF must also serve the needs of the Kyoto Protocol, which introduces
LULUCF activities that are a subset of the activities covered in Chapter 5 of the IPCC Guidelines. These
activities have more precise requirements on definitions, geographical reporting, carbon pools and greenhousegases to be accounted and Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF provides ways to meet these requirements.

1.5

OUTLINE OF PRESENT DOCUMENT

The chapters of the Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF are organised as follows:
Chapter 1 Overview
This Chapter sets out the mandate for Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF, defines and describes the history
of IPCC good practice guidance and its relationship to the IPCC Guidelines, summarises the practical advice
provided to inventory agencies, and discusses policy relevance.
9

GPG2000, page 1.6.

10

The Chapter 5 categories referred to are Changes in Forest and Woody Biomass Stocks (5A), Forest and Grassland
Conversion (5B), Abandonment of Managed Lands (5C), CO2 Emissions and Removals from Soil (5D) and Other (5E).

11

Report of SBSTA 15, FCCC/SBSTA/2001/8, paragraph 29(b).

12IPCC Guidelines (Reference Manual), page 5.4.

1.8

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

Chapter 1: Overview

Chapter 2 Basis for consistent representation of land areas
The IPCC Guidelines contain little, if any, discussion on how to estimate land areas and changes in land area
associated with LUCF activities. In practice, countries use a variety of sources including agricultural census data,
forest inventories, and remote sensing data, but definitions that different authorities use in assembling the data
are not always consistent. Chapter 2 therefore provides advice on different approaches for representing land area
depending on the data available. The term “approach” used in Chapter 2 is distinct from the term “tier” used in
Chapters 3 to 5. The approaches are not presented as a hierarchy, although the requirements of Article 3.3 and3.4 under the Kyoto Protocol imply the need for additional supplementary spatial data if Approaches 1 or 2 areused for estimating and reporting on these activities. Using the approaches, singly or in combination, will help
ensure the reliability of the area estimates, avoid overlaps and gaps.
The discussion is in terms of six broad categories of land use namely forest land, cropland, grassland, wetlands,
settlements, and other land that provide the basis for more detailed discussion in the chapters that follow.
Unmanaged as well as managed areas are considered to help ensure consistency of area estimates, althoughemissions and removals are only estimated in respect of managed areas, as required by the IPCC Guidelines.
Chapter 3 LUCF sector good practice guidance
Chapter 3 is organised following the six broad land-use categories identified in Chapter 2. Land may remain in
any of these categories (e.g., grassland) or its use may change to another category (e.g., from forest to cropland).
Chapter 3 provides advice on the estimation of emissions and removals of CO2 and non-CO2 greenhouse gases
for both situations, taking account of the long term average carbon stocks associated with particular land uses,
and the time taken for carbon stocks to adjust to the new equilibrium following a change in land use. Chapter 3
maintains consistency with the advice in GPG2000 on estimation of nitrous oxide emissions from land. Decision
trees guide the choice of method according to national circumstances. Simple tables are provided to assist
countries with the linkage to the IPCC Guidelines and good practices on the default methods in the IPCC
Guidelines are clearly identified. There are short summary sections on forest and grassland conversion. The
chapter also provides appendices covering wetlands and settlements, for which the IPCC Guidelines provide
only limited advice and harvested wood products (HWP), which remain under consideration by the UNFCCC.
The status of the appendices is further discussed in Section 1.7.
Chapter 4 Supplementary methods and good practice guidance arising from the Kyoto Protocol
The human-induced activities agreed under Article 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol (afforestation, reforestation anddeforestation since 1990), and the activities which Parties may elect to use under Article 3.4 (forest management,
cropland management, grazing land management, revegetation) have specific supplementary requirements on
temporal and spatial boundaries, identification of areas, avoidance of double counting, inclusion of carbon pools,
and dealing with possible definitional differences between LULUCF activities under the Kyoto Protocol andcategories under the UNFCCC reporting. These requirements imply the need for supplementary information
beyond the information reported in inventories under the Convention. Chapter 4 explains how to use the methods
described in the other chapters, and where necessary provides additional methods, to meet these supplementary
requirements. Chapter 4 also provides advice on identification of project boundaries and sampling strategies for
project activities under Articles 6 and 12 of the Kyoto Protocol. The good practice advice for LULUCF related
project activities covers only estimation of carbon stock changes and emissions and removals of greenhousegases within the project boundary; there is no consideration of non-permanence, additionality 13 , leakage,baseline definition or socio-economic and environmental impacts, because these items are under consideration
by SBSTA14.
Chapter 5 Cross-cutting issues
Inventory development is a resource-intensive enterprise, which means that inventory agencies may need toprioritise efforts to improve the estimates by focusing on the more important categories, both in terms of thecontribution made to the overall level of emissions and removals, and the contribution to the trend. Chapter 5
provides advice on this, applying the key category concept in GPG2000 to cover sinks. The Chapter also has
sections on quality assurance and quality control, reconstruction of missing data, time series consistency,
collecting and analysing data by sampling, quantification and combination of uncertainties, and verification bymeans of comparison with inventories in other countries, independently compiled datasets, modelling
approaches and direct measurements on land and/or atmosphere.

13

Whether the emission reductions or removals are additional to those which would have occurred in the absence of the
project.

14

Decision 17/CP.7 in FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.2.

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

1.9

Chapter 1: Overview

Glossary
Provides definitions of technical terms commonly used in the Guidance.

1.6

USING THE GUIDANCE - PRACTICAL ADVICEFOR INVENTORY AGENCIES AND OTHERS

Practical advice for using this good practice guidance report is given below. The advice summarises how to use
the guidance in preparing inventories for submission to the UNFCCC, the additional steps relevant to Parties
reporting under Articles 3.3 and 3.4 of the Kyoto Protocol, and the use of the guidance for projects under
Articles 6 and 12 of the Kyoto Protocol.
UNFCCC Inventory preparation
Inventory agencies, when preparing the national greenhouse gas inventory for the LULUCF Sector for annual
reporting under the UNFCCC, should follow steps 1 to 6:
1.

Use the approaches in Chapter 2 (Basis for Consistent Representation of Land Areas), singly or in
combination, to estimate land areas for each land-use category relevant to the country. For each land-use
category, inventory agencies should complement the advice in Chapter 2 with the more detailed guidance in
Chapters 3 and 4 on the preparation of specific emission and removal estimates and, if relevant, thereporting on the activities under the Kyoto Protocol.

2.

Follow the good practice guidance in Chapter 3 (LUCF Sector Good Practice Guidance) to estimate theemissions and removals of greenhouse gases for each land use, land-use change and pool relevant to thecountry. The decision trees in this chapter guide choices of method in terms of tiers. The tier structure usedin the IPCC Guidelines (Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3) is hierarchical, with higher tiers implying increased
accuracy of the method and/or emissions factor and other parameters used in the estimation of the emissions
and removals. Key categories should be identified following the guidance in Chapter 5 and the results taken
into account in the application of the decision trees.

3.

If necessary, in some cases, collect additional data (if required to implement a particular tier) to improve
emission factors, other parameters and activity data.

4.

Estimate uncertainties at the 95% confidence level, using sectoral advice and the detailed guidance in
Chapter 5.

5.

Report the emissions and removals in the reporting tables provided in Chapter 3 Annex 3A.2 taking into
account any modifications by SBSTA15 and any additional information as specified under each category.

6.

Implement QA/QC procedures as described in the generic guidance in Chapter 5 and specific advice undereach category, including documentation and archiving of the information used to produce the nationalemission and removal estimates.

Kyoto Protocol requirements
Inventory agencies, when preparing the supplementary information for annual reporting of carbon stock changes
and emissions and removals of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the activities under Article 3.3 andArticle 3.4 of the Kyoto Protocol, should additionally:
7.

Assess the extent to which the data assembled for the existing national inventory (following steps 1 to 6
above) can meet the supplementary data requirements set out in the supplementary guidance provided in
Chapter 4 of this report, taking into account national choices on definitions and activities elected under
Article 3.4, and the requirements in geographical location.

8.

Following this assessment collect or collate any additional information necessary to meet the supplementary
data requirements, using the advice in Chapter 4 and the references it contains to other Chapters.

9.

Follow the advice in Chapter 4 on reporting and documentation when providing the supplementary
information in the national inventory report.

National circumstances will determine the sequence in which the reporting information is compiled. For example,
it is possible to start with the UNFCCC inventory (with the additional spatial information required for Kyoto
Protocol reporting) and expand it to the reporting under the Kyoto Protocol, or it is possible to use a system that
15

SBSTA 18 requested the UNFCCC secretariat to develop common reporting format for its consideration, in consultation
with IPCC - see paragraph 2 in FCCC/SBSTA/2003/10.

1.10

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

Chapter 1: Overview

generates the information for both UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol reporting. The precise sequence of steps 1 to 6
and 7 to 9 does not matter as long as the substance is covered.
Projects
Project participants, independent entities and operational entities should use the advice in Chapter 4, Section 4.3,
as needed, in the overall context of relevant decisions of the COP, when designing, validating and verifying
methods to measure and monitor changes in carbon stocks and non-CO2 greenhouse gases associated withprojects activities.

1.7

POLICY RELEVANCE

This Overview and Chapters 2, 3 and 5 are relevant to all countries as they prepare estimates of emissions andremovals from the LULUCF Sector, whether or not they ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The first two sections of
Chapter 4 provide supplementary information to that in Chapters 2, 3 and 5, which is relevant only to Annex I
countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Section 4.3 (LULUCF Projects) is relevant to all countries thatwill undertake projects under the Articles 6 or 12 of the Kyoto Protocol.
While many categories within the LULUCF sector are well established and relatively straightforward to estimate,
LULUCF is a complex area, and it was clear from the outset that some issues remain under consideration forsome emission/removal categories. In particular:•

SBSTA has set out a policy process on harvested wood products (HWP) accounting and reporting that may
lead to decisions by the COP and/or COP/MOP16. However, although the default assumption is that HWP
pools are not increasing, the IPCC Guidelines allow inclusion of HWP in national inventories if a country
can document that existing stocks of long-term forest products are increasing. Good practice guidance has
therefore been elaborated for the HWP pool. The material provided is in an appendix rather than part of themain text, since SBSTA is still considering this issue. The appendix makes no judgement about possible
future decisions on reporting or accounting.

•Settlements and wetlands are land-use categories for which limited methodological guidance was provided
in the IPCC Guidelines, but a great deal of scientific work has been done since these Guidelines werecompleted in 1996. This applies also to non-CO2 emissions from drainage and rewetting of forests soils. For
these categories and sources, the IPCC determined that good practice guidance reflecting the newer
scientific information should be developed, but that it should be presented in an appendix to indicate its
preliminary nature. The main text on these sections provided sufficient advice to estimate the contributionthat conversions to these categories make to national inventories.

Countries do not have to prepare estimates for categories contained in appendices, although they can do so ifthey desire. The IPCC intends this approach to reflect the prevailing scientific and policy contexts, in a mannerthat provides useful information to countries as they prepare their inventories while recognising that it is the
COP’s role to establish general guidelines for inventory reporting and accounting in the UNFCCC context.
•

The IPCC Guidelines do not explicitly include losses from natural disturbances in managed forests althoughomitting the effect of these disturbances would overestimate carbon uptakes as calculated by themethodology in the Guidelines. Good Practice Guidance therefore provides guidance on how to account forthem.

For Kyoto Protocol reporting, Chapter 4 is intended to provide policy-neutral scientific operationalisation of the
COP7 agreement in terms of annual reporting17. In some cases this has required judgement. In particular:•

In the treatment of the geographical identification issue the phrase The geographical location of theboundaries of the areas that encompass18 is interpreted as consistent with either a sampling approach withina geographical boundary, or complete enumeration of units of area subject to the carbon stock changes andemissions or removals of greenhouse gases due to the activities to be reported.

16

Conclusions related to emissions from forest harvesting and wood products (Report of the fifteenth session of SBSTA, heldat Marrakesh from 29 October to 6 November 2001, paragraph 29(m), page 14). The COP/MOP is the Conference ofParties to the UNFCCC serving as the Meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol.

17

The terms estimation, reporting and accounting have distinct meanings. Estimation is the process of calculating emissions,and reporting the process of providing the estimates to the UNFCCC. Accounting refers to the rules for comparing
emissions and removals as reported with commitments. GPG2000 and this report deal with estimation and reporting issues,
but not accounting for which detailed rules have been established under the Marrakesh Accords.

18

FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.3, page 22, paragraph 6(a).

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF

1.11

Chapter 1: Overview•

The use of the key category concept and the choice of methodology in relationship to Articles 3.3 and 3.4
activities has been developed in a logical fashion as described in Section 1.3 above, but would not pre-empt
any decision as to whether all activities under Articles 3.3 or 3.4 should be treated as key.

•

Although it is good practice for Article 3.4 activities to match the dominant land use, in some cases (e.g.,agroforestry systems) land could fall under either forest management (which is limited by capping) or
cropland/grazing land management (which is subject to net-net accounting). In such cases Good PracticeGuidance for LULUCF suggests that countries should establish national criteria to be applied consistently
over time.

•

Net-net accounting is taken to require comparison between emissions and removals from the elected
activities in the base year and the commitment period, which could lead to comparison of areas that differ insize. Alternative approaches, where areas are changing, would be to normalise to constant area, or maintain
constant area over time, possibly the base year area – though this third approach would bring in effects ofactivities not covered by the Marrakesh Accords, and could increase uncertainties by making the estimation
more complex.

Elaboration of the Marrakesh Accords decision on these (or indeed any other matter) would be for the COP;
however, the IPCC believes that the interpretations should be acceptable because of the review process andbecause throughout the development of this report, the IPCC has maintained contact with the Convention
process via formal reporting of progress at SBSTA, side events, and attendance at workshops. The developmentof Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF is a step in the IPCC’s on-going programme of inventory development
and will also support future revisions of the IPCC Guidelines themselves.

1.12

IPCC Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF