Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

Appendix 3： Revised Terms of Reference of the EFDB Editorial
Board

IPCC Emission Factor Database
The Editorial Board

Note:
These terms of reference are to be classified as “supporting material” prepared for consideration by theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This supporting material has not been subject to formal IPCC
review and approval process. It has been approved by the IPCC Task Force Bureau on National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories at its 11th session in Geneva, Switzerland, on 19 September 2003.
The TFB, at its 11th session, decided that the responsibility of the EFDB Editorial Board should be to“evaluate” whether proposed new emission factors or other parameters are acceptable or not according to
the criteria set out in these terms of reference. The TFB decided to avoid using the term "assess" because it
might be misleadingly associated with the IPCC Assessment Reports that are produced through a series ofofficial review processes involving governments and many experts. Pursuant to this decision, theresponsibility or exercise of the EFDB Editorial Board should be described as “evaluate” or “evaluation”
rather than “assess” or “assessment” in any relevant documents, including these terms of reference and the
EFDB User Manual.

–1–Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

Boundary conditions
The database on GHG emission factors (EFDB) is developed under the work plan endorsed by the
Task Force Bureau of the IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme (TFB). The final
responsibility of the system is with the IPCC. The Management Plan for the maintenance of the
EFDB is meant to fully recognise this responsibility, through defining a pragmatic and cost-effective
management structure to ensure the following:a. A sustained availability of the information in EFDB throughi. The Internet;
ii. Distribution of the information contained in EFDB on CD-ROMs for users withlimited Internet access.
b. A sustained inflow of new emission factors and other parameters that supports estimationof emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily at a national level.
c. Appropriate presentation, publication and dissemination of information on the EFDB andits contents1.
The goal of the EFDB is to grow towards a recognised library, where users can find emission factors
and other parameters with background documentation that can be used for estimating greenhousegas emissions in national submissions of inventories to the UNFCCC2. The EFDB will complement
the information on emission factors and other parameters given in the Revised 1996 IPCC
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories and the IPCC report on Good PracticeGuidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. The choice ofemission factor or other parameters should be guided by the principles and approaches in the
Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories and the IPCC report on
Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
The responsibility of using the information in the EFDB appropriately will always remain with thenational expert using it.
The EFDB shall be open to any relevant proposal on emission factors or other related parameters.
Acceptance of such proposals will be subject to evaluation by the EFDB Editorial Board using thecriteria given in paragraphs 2-7 on pages 4-5 of this document.

Management plan - Role of the EFDB Steering Group
Figure 1 presents an overview of the proposed management structure for the EFDB.
The Technical Support Unit (TSU) will be responsible for the technical maintenance (systemmanagement) of the EFDB.
The EFDB Steering Group members present at the 1st Editorial Board meeting recognised thatmodification/improvement of the EFDB will be required, and therefore recommended that theSteering Group established by the TFB at its 6th session3 should continue to be responsible for the1

The working language of the EFDB is English. However, the TFB will consider translation of the web application anddatabase content in other official UN languages when the required funding is ensured.
2
The EFDB covers 6 direct GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6) and 4 precursors (NMVOCs, CO, NOx, SO2).
3
The EFDB Steering Group is composed of 9 members: Tinus Pulles (Project Co-Chair from the Netherlands), Katarina
Mareckova (Project Co-Chair from Slovakia), Thelma Krug (TFB Co-Chair), Taka Hiraishi (TFB Co-Chair), Joe
Mangino (US), Branca Americano (Brazil), Riitta Pipatti (TSU), Kiyoto Tanabe (TSU) and a representative from the
UNFCCC secretariat.

–2–

Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

management of EFDB during the first two years of its use and population. The Steering Group will
carry out its work through e-mails and meetings on the margins of the Editorial Board meetings.

Figure 1. Management structure for the EFDBTFBSupervise

Supervise

Supervise

Steering Group
AdviceTSU

Editorial Board

SupportBoard Co-chairs (2)EnergyEditorial Sector Co-ordinators (2)Sector Experts (3-5)
Accept/rejectdata proposals

Industrial Processes
Solvent and Other Product Use

Technical
maintenance

Editorial Sector Co-ordinators (2)Sector Experts (3-5)

Datamanagement

Agriculture
Editorial Sector Co-ordinators (2)Sector Experts (3-5)

LUCF

EFDB
Database +Web-server

Editorial Sector Co-ordinators (2)Sector Experts (3-5)

Waste
Editorial Sector Co-ordinators (2)Sector Experts (3-5)–3–Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

Terms of Reference of the Editorial Board
Objectives
1. The objective of the EFDB Editorial Board is to ensure all emission factors and other parameters
contained in the emission factors database (EFDB) under the IPCC National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories Programme (IPCC-NGGIP) fulfil the criteria described below and endorsed by the
Task Force Bureau (TFB) of the IPCC-NGGIP. Another objective is to advise the TSU on
effective strategies to populate the database and to promote the usage of the collected information
on emission factors or other parameters.
Criteria
2. The EFDB should assist countries in producing inventories that are neither over- norunderestimates so far as can be judged and in which uncertainties are reduced as far as practicable.
To achieve this, a proposed emission factor or other parameter should! be in line with the fundamental principles and approaches of the Revised 1996 IPCC
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories and the IPCC report on Good PracticeGuidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories;! be accompanied by documentation describing the conditions of its derivation andinformation regarding the level of uncertainty, preferably quantified but at a minimum somequalitative indicators, to be attached to it;! be unbiased and as accurate as possible;! contribute to the EFDB by adding a value for a source not already covered or by providing a
different value or an identical but independent value for an existing emission factor orparameter type. The technical information in the “properties fields” should provide theinformation needed to differentiate between the alternative values for emission factors or
parameters for a particular source.
To meet these standards, the proposed emission factor or other parameter should be robust,
applicable and documented. Each of these is briefly discussed below.
Is the emission factor or other parameter robust?
3.
A robust emission factor or other parameter is one that, within the accepted uncertainty, isunlikely to change if there was repetition of the original measurement programme or modelling
activity. Specific issues concerning robustness are:•••

Are the measurement techniques including raw data validated and/or verified?
Are the modelling techniques including supporting data validated and/or verified?
Is the conversion (if any) from model assumptions or measurement conditions to annual orother forms of emission factors or other parameters sufficiently explained and justified?

•

Is an uncertainty assessment on the emission factor or other parameter presented?

Is the emission factor or other parameter applicable?
4.
An applicable emission factor or other parameter is one that matches either a specific IPCC
Source/Sink Category or subcategory, or another well defined source category that can be used ina national inventory compilation. An emission factor is applicable if the source and its mix oftechnology, operating and environmental conditions and abatement and control technologies
under which the emission factor was measured or modelled are clear and allow the user to see
how it can be applied.

–4–Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

Is the emission factor or other parameter documented?
5.
For emission factors or other parameters to be transparent, access information to the originaltechnical reference must be provided to evaluate the robustness and applicability as describedabove. This can preferably be done by providing sufficient information through a scientific ortechnical publication in an internationally available journal or a report or book with an ISBN
number. For those emission factors or other parameters where this is not available, the data
provider can provide the information required to enable a judgement on its robustness andapplicability as described above through technical documentation, or by sufficient information in
the proposal document fields of the database to satisfy the acceptance requirements.
6.
The information provided in the database should be detailed and comprehensive enough sothat users may be able to evaluate the applicability to a national GHG inventory. Pivotal elements
are an accurate source definition and proper information on the type and extent of validation andon known applications to date. These documentation requirements are even more important when
the background document is not written in English.
7.
The data provider should be encouraged to provide an electronic or hard-copy of thetechnical reference to the TSU at the time of data submission or alternatively, make available thisinformation in a publicly accessible form such as widely available scientific journals orproceedings.

Membership
8. The Editorial Board will consist of the following members:a. Two Board Co-chairsb. Two experts as Editorial Sector Co-ordinators for each of the sectors:
i. Energy
ii. Industrial Processes, and Solvent and Other Product Useiii. Agriculture
iv. Land-Use Change and Forestry
v. Wastec. Three to five additional experts as Sector Experts for each of the sectors above.
d. A representative of the TSU to represent data and system management.
9. The members of the Editorial Board other than the representative of the TSU will be selected by
the TFB from the experts officially nominated by governments/IPCC National Focal Points forthis purpose. In this selection, geographical balance as well as balance of expertise should beensured.
10. The selected experts will serve the Editorial Board for two years. There will be an option foranother 2 years to ensure continuity of the work of the Editorial Board.
11. The TSU will maintain the actual membership list of the Editorial Board. The e-mail lists will
be maintained on the EFDB server to facilitate communication among the Editorial Board
members.
12. The Editorial Board members may consult other experts if the needed expertise is not coveredby the Editorial Board members. The name and contact information for the expert consulted
should be included in decision on the proposal. A list of consulted experts should be published in
the EFDB to give full credit for their contribution.
Responsibility
13. In order to achieve the objectives mentioned in paragraph 1 above, the EFDB Editorial Board
should assume the responsibility to evaluate whether proposed new emission factors or other–5–Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

parameters are acceptable or not according to the criteria in paragraphs 2 through 7. In principle,
the EFDB Editorial Board will accept without further evaluation the data already published by the
IPCC. The data presented in emission factor handbooks or international scientific emission
databases may be also accepted without further evaluation on the condition that the Editorial
Board collectively judges that those handbooks or databases are internationally recognised as
authoritative information sources.
14. The Board Co-chairs will have overall responsibility for the evaluation of proposed newemission factors or other parameters for the EFDB. They will decide whenever the Editorial
Sector Co-ordinators do not reach consensus or when the data provider refutes the decision.
15. The Editorial Sector Co-ordinators will
! appoint a member of the sector group to prepare a draft decision to accept or reject the data
proposal and post it for comments on the web site
! merge the draft decision by the appointed expert with the comments by the other membersof the sector group into the final decision to accept or reject the proposed emission factor orother parameter
Procedure for evaluation
16. The procedure for evaluation of proposed new emission factors or other parameters will be
performed using both the functionality of the EFDB web site and e-mail.
17. This procedure for evaluation should follow the flow chart below, resulting in a decision on
including the new information in the EFDB preferably within 8 weeks after commencement of
the evaluation:
Task
A data provider proposes new data.
TSU carries out initial checks, and notifies
Editorial Sector Co-ordinators and Sector
Experts
Editorial Sector Co-ordinators appoint anexpert to lead the evaluation
The appointed expert evaluate the proposed
data, prepares a draft decision and posts iton the web site
Editorial Sector Co-ordinators and Sector
Experts comment on the draft decision.
Editorial Sector Co-ordinators take a final
decision4
Board Co-Chairs endorse the final decision
made by the Editorial Sector Co-ordinators
Publish the new information in the EFDB

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

W6

W7

W8

Web publication 2-4 times a year

a. When a proposal on new data is submitted to the EFDB (by using Single Input menu forexample), the TSU will perform an initial check:i. Prompt the data provider to supply obligatory information if this is missing andpoint out that further consideration of the data is dependent on receiving themissing information.
ii. When all mandatory information is available, notify the Editorial Sector Coordinators and Sector Experts for the relevant sector of the new proposal by e-

4

If consensus cannot be reached, the Editorial Sector Co-ordinators will involve the Board Co-chairs.

–6–Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

b.

c.

d.

e.

f.

g.

mail5, and ask them to make a decision preferably within 8 weeks from thenotification.
iii. Notify the data provider who submitted the new data that the proposal has been
sent to the EFDB Editorial Board for evaluation and that a decision is to be
expected in about 8 weeks from the notification.
The Editorial Sector Co-ordinators will appoint one of the members of the sector group
to take the lead in the evaluation of the data proposal and inform the TSU on this choice.
The TSU will provide the appointed expert with the e-mail address of the data provider.
This will be carried out preferably within 1 week after the notification by the TSU.
The appointed expert will prepare a draft decision to accept or reject the data proposal.
The acceptance can be on the condition of specific revisions or additions. The appointed
expert will keep the other Sector Experts, Editorial Sector Co-ordinators and the TSU
informed.
The appointed expert may contact the data provider by e-mail in order to ask for more
information on the proposed data. The appointed expert may also contact the data
provider to recommend specific revisions/additions to be made. If the data provider
agrees to the recommendation, the original proposal should be revised by the data
provider himself/herself6. All these correspondences should be copied to the TSU.
The appointed expert will post the draft decision with rationale on the Editorial Board
webpage. This will be carried out preferably within 4 weeks after the appointment of theexpert in charge.
Subsequently, the Editorial Sector Co-ordinators responsible for the sector shallcomment on the draft decision. Other Sector Experts may post their comments on thewebsite. The final decision will in principle be based on consensus. If there is noconsensus, the Editorial Sector Co-ordinators will decide in consultation with the Board
Co-Chairs7. This decision will be forwarded to the data provider by the TSU. This will
be carried out preferably within 2 weeks after the appointed expert posts the draft
decision on the Editorial Board webpage.
In the case that the data provider refutes the decision, the TSU will forward it by e-mailto the Board Co-Chairs, Editorial Sector Co-ordinators and Sector Experts for the sector
for their further consideration8. Again, the final decision will in principle be based onconsensus. If there is no consensus, the Editorial Sector Co-ordinators will decide in
consultation with the Board Co-Chairs. This decision will be forwarded to the data
provider by the TSU.
Preferably, one week later the Board Co-chairs will endorse the final decision made by
the Editorial Sector Co-ordinators for the sector. If the decision is positive the Editorial
Sector Co-ordinators will request the TSU to make the new data available to all on the
EFDB web site.
The TSU will send a message by e-mail to the data provider, indicating the decision of
the Editorial Board.

5

The TSU should make this notification in such a manner that reduces unnecessary e-mails and maximises efficiency of
the work of the Editorial Board.
6
Neither the Editorial Board nor the TSU should change the substantive information contained in the original proposal
without the consent of the data provider.
7
The Editorial Sector Co-ordinators will contact the data provider if it is deemed necessary. In this case some delay willprobably be unavoidable. The Editorial Sector Coordinator should inform it to the TSU.
8
In this case some delay will probably be unavoidable.

–7–Appendix 3 of the Report of the 1st Meeting

EFDB Editorial Board

h. The TSU will upload the new and accepted information onto the web site and will placea notification on the changes on the home page of the web site two to four times a year.
i. The TSU will also publish this new information by CD-ROMs annually or semi-annually.
18. A periodic process for uploading data on the EFDB will be established in future. However,
due to the need to populate the EFDB effectively, a continuous process will be temporarily
followed during the initial data submission period. The switch from a continuous to a periodic
process will be proposed by the Editorial Board and the TSU and determined by the TFB. The
process switch may also depend on quantity of submitted data.
Annual meeting
19. To ensure consistency of the decision criteria over time and between Editorial Sector Coordinators and Sector Experts, an annual meeting of the Editorial Board will be organised in thesecond quarter of each year9.
20. All members of the Editorial Board and the Steering Group, a representative from the
UNFCCC secretariat, and a limited number of experts nominated by governments will participate
in this meeting. Governments are encouraged to nominate their national inventory experts torepresent the primary users of EFDB10.
21. The agenda of the meeting will contain, amongst others, the following elements:
a. An overview of the achievements of the past year;
b. An overview of the usage through analysis of website statistics and data requests on the
EFDB web site;c. A presentation of the work plan by the EFDB Steering Group;.
d. An overview of the type of data providers (national inventory compilers, scientificcommunity, relevant business firms, etc);
e. Identification of weak points in the database and proposals for improvement of emission
factors and other parameters in specific sectors, sub-sectors and source categories;
f. Other issues relating to EFDB functionality, procedures and process for evaluation of
proposed new data, data collection, data dissemination, administrative issues, etc.

9

Exceptionally, the first meeting of the EFDB Editorial Board was held on 28-30 January 2003.
Exceptionally, national inventory experts to represent the primary users were not invited to the first meeting of the
EFDB Editorial Board, since it was premature to seek feedback from users.

10–8–