FREL/FRL on UNFCCC: Overview and Analysis of Submitted
FREL/FRLs
Yoko Asada (Mitsubishi UFJ Research and Consulting)Session 1

FREL/FRL on UNFCCC: Overview and Analysis of Submitted FREL/FRLs
Yoko Asada (Mitsubishi UFJ Research and Consulting)

These are some of the flows of the discussions about the UNFCCC over the years.

I will beelaborating on COP16, the Cancun Agreement where the framework or the design of the REDD+
was agreed upon.

REDD+ has five activities, and some of the key elements were decided, such as

the action plan, national plan, forest monitoring plan for REDD+, establishing forest reference
levels/forest reference emission levels, safeguard information provisioning system, and also reporting.

101Session 1
What are FREL/FRLs?

I would like to talk about our main topic of FREL. What are reference levels?
draw from documents from COP17.

I would like to

The reference level is a benchmark for assessing each country’s

performance in implementing REDD+ activities.

The differences between FREL and FRL are not in

the UNFCCC documents.
I would like to explain to you the overview of the concept.

Data about past deforestation andemissions from forests are calculated to figure out the past trend of emissions.
shows the reference if REDD+ is not adopted.

The red dotted line

If the REDD+ is carried out, then emissions are

reduced or absorbed and the difference is shown in brown, which is the emission removal.

This isused to as the indicator for success, and the reference level is used to produce a result.
A reference level is created to be able to see the difference indicated in brown.
doing REDD+, they will get results-based payments.

If countries start

We need to visualize how much of a result wasachieved. Also in each country, the forestry policies can be also measured of its level of successes
quantitatively, so the countries can visualize how much effort the countries have made to internationalsociety.

As for the related rules for creating FREL and FRLs, I would like to elaborate on modalities for
FREL/FRL 1 that was determined in COP17.
1

This is the only rule for creating the reference level.

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a02.pdf#page=17102

FREL/FRL on UNFCCC: Overview and Analysis of Submitted
FREL/FRLs
Yoko Asada (Mitsubishi UFJ Research and Consulting)

The unit is tons CO2 per year.

It also takes into account past historical data.

consistency with national greenhouse gas inventories.
level from accumulated information.

Session 1
It maintains

They must show how they created reference

They also need to make improvements.

Finally, the reference

level should cover the entire nation, but if it is not possible then it can start at sub-national level first.
There are also two guidelines according to UNFCCC.
submissions of information on reference level 2.

The first are the guidelines for

How is the reference level created and what sort of

information needs to be provided to UNFCCC are provided in the guidelines.

The second are

guidelines and procedures for the technical assessment of submissions from Parties on proposed
FREL/FRL 3 .

UNFCCC-certified reviewers will conduct a technical investigation based on theguidelines.

I will share some of the characteristics of the rules.

Modalities for FREL/FRL have minimum

requirements and have high degrees of flexibility. For instance, the unit is tons of CO2 per year andthey need to incorporate historical data.

There are a number of selected keywords, but theinterpretation of reference levels and method used in determining them is mostly left open.
Examples include averaging historical data or to create a linear regression from past data.

They might

say we will have more population and much economic activity, so the forest may be reduced and/or
have a higher reference level.
The freedom of flexibility means that, as long as you ensure the transparency, you can freely createand design the system.

No strict restrictions are provided, so this allows many countries toparticipate and prevents the displacement of emissions to other countries.

Displacement means, if

one country does REDD+ very well, but the neighboring country may not, then the citizens of one
country may go to a neighboring country and log their trees. We would like to avoid this.
Another characteristic is that, although international consistency is not essential, consistency
within each country is. Due to the level of freedom afforded each country, it is impossible to haveinternational consistency.

However, for the modalities for FREL/FRL, there is a requirement to beconsistent within the country according to their national inventory of greenhouse gas emissions.
23

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a02.pdf#page=19
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/cop19/eng/10a01.pdf#page=36

103Session 1

FREL/FRLs of Each Country

According to the flow on the left-hand side I have sorted out some of the processes of reference
levels of REDD+.

The countries will submit reference levels to UNFCCC, it will be assessed bytechnical experts, and the reference level is determined after the assessment.

Countries will thenimplement activities, and once results are obtained and reported in the biennial update report (BUR),
results will be submitted again to UNFCCC.

Rules up until the submission of the BUR have been

decided, but the rules to verificate results and make payments will be discussed at subsequent COPs or
UNFCCC.
The right-hand side list shows the dates and countries who submitted FREL/FRLs.
accurate as of January 25, 2016 and today is January 28th.
results in the past three days for a total of 15 countries.

This is

Chile and Zambia have submitted their

The circles on the left indicate the countries

who have underwent technical assessments, a total of six.

These are the reference levels of those six countries.
activities, and reference levels.

It shows the scale (national/sub-national),

The area is different for each, so the reference levels are all different.

Taking Malaysia as an example, the negative numbers indicates that they are absorbing CO2 to the tuneof 183.6 and 197.8 tons of CO2 per year.

Malaysia will be absorbing CO2 even if left as is, but they

have expressed a desire to increase the amount absorbed.

104

FREL/FRL on UNFCCC: Overview and Analysis of Submitted
FREL/FRLs
Yoko Asada (Mitsubishi UFJ Research and Consulting)In order to create these reference levels, what are the important points?
based on four points.

Session 1

The value will change

The first is that the definition of ‘forest’ varies among countries.

Second isthat, although there is rule that requires the use of historical data, the value will vary depending on theyear and number of points of time.

The third is the scope of the reference level.

REDD+ has fiveactivities, so depending on which activities were selected or if all the activities we covered, the values
will change.

Will it incorporate carbon pools, biomass, or fallen litter?

approach of the reference levels.
Will a model be used?

Fourth is the construction

Will an average or regression analysis of the historical data be used?

Reference levels vary according to the approach taken.

The reference level will be used as indices, so I would like to again emphasize that they are very
important.

They are important because they will be used for national determined contributions andwill be used as a basis for results-based performance payments.

Looking at ‘scope’ on the previous table, Brazil targets deforestation, while Guyana targets bothdeforestation and degradation.

Malaysia differs by aiming for sustainable forestry management.

Things such as biomass, litter, and the scope of the pool differ between countries.
side shows the construction approach.

The far right-handMost countries who have been assessed have been taking thepast average, while Guyana is taking its own unique approach.

105Session 1
Analysis (Technical Issues)

Now I will go into analysis.

This is becoming more technical.

About scope, important activities,

and also important carbon pools and gas may be omitted because it is technically difficult, so thecountries do not need to be blamed.

There will be a stepwise approach to improve the situation.

For instance, in the case of Brazil, research has already shown that emissions from degradation are
59% of the emissions from deforestation.

However, it is technically very difficult to collect related

data continuously, so they are only looking at deforestation, but I think they will start looking at
degradation in the future.
For Indonesia, the CO2 emissions from biomass are included in addition to deforestation since it
is an important source of emissions.

Reference levels take into account CO2 emissions frompeatlands, but other gases such as methane and N2O in biomass burning are omitted and are notcounted. Despite the large amount of methane and N2O released from the many forest fires lastyear, it is difficult to measure these emissions at this point.
Another point is that maybe there are highly productive farms bordering the forests to protectthem.

Do you need to count the emissions from fertilizers used in farming?

REDD+, the traditional farming fertilizers were agriculture chemicals.
emissions from farming as part of REDD+?

Also if you do

How do you separate out

These details need to be discussed.

We have a temporary rule allowing for sub-national reference levels, but how are you going tointegrate region A’s reference levels with region B’s?
simply add them?

If the pools or scopes different, are you going toEnsuring consistency is another technical issue.

106

FREL/FRL on UNFCCC: Overview and Analysis of Submitted
FREL/FRLs
Yoko Asada (Mitsubishi UFJ Research and Consulting)

Another technical issue is the construction approach.
historical data to determine reference levels.

Session 1

Most countries are taking the average ofThis is a relatively simple methodology. However, toforecast into the future and to create the large reference level is possible, but very difficult.

It isdifficult not necessarily because of technical challenges, but because of the need explain to theevaluators the validity of the approach.

Using simple methods has a tendency to lead to predictionsof smaller emissions reductions, while using difficult methods tends to lead to larger predictedemissions reductions, so this is an area that requires further discussion.

Finally, in addition to the technical issues, there are political issues that we must consider in thenear future.

Since there are some people from the governments today, I would like to raise this as apending issue.
Countries that implement REDD+ will receive payments based on the results submitted to
UNFCCC and the institutions in charge of making results-based payments.
about results, what does ‘result’ mean?

However, when we talkWill payments be made at a rate of $5 per ton of CO2 ofcarbon emission reductions, or will they be based on the expenses incurred?

There is no certain ruleand no one can predict how payments will be made.
There are outstanding issues on how payments will be distributed within a country.

For instancein region A it may be very costly to achieve reductions, but the reductions are limited.

On the other

hand, region B could minimize the cost, but could reduce emissions by quite a bit.

Which region

should receive more payments?

That is a difficult question.

These are the issues that I would like to raise, and I look forward to seeing the next threepresentations to understand how each country is proceeding.

107