FAO Support to Forest Reference Emission Levels for REDD+:
Experiences and Lessons Learned
Julian Fox (The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO))

Session 1

FAO Support to Forest Reference Emission Levels for REDD+: Experiences and Lessons
LearnedJulian Fox (The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO))

Good morning distinguished guests, ladies, and gentlemen.

First, I would like to acknowledge theinvitation and kind support from the REDD Research and Development Center, and the Forestry andForest Products Research Institute of Japan.
this important workshop.

Thank you for inviting and supporting FAO contribution to

Today, I will try and present FAO’s experience on supporting developing

country partners on developing the reference emission levels and submitting them to the UNFCCC for
REDD+.

I do not need to dwell on this slide because I think many of us in this room are REDD practitioners,
and we collectively can acknowledge that REDD+ is a success story, both under the convention with the
Warsaw Framework agreeing on the modalities amongst all UN member countries, and then this being
enshrined in article five of the Paris Agreement.
significant mitigation potential.

The reason why it is in the Paris Agreement is that it has

This I am happy to report and now present an FAO publication which

Session 1
documents that this is becoming a reality.
the UNFCCC.

For example, we have five sets of REDD+ results submitted to

In total, they represent over six billion tons of CO2 emission reductions.

To put this inperspective, this equates to 10% of annual global emissions as estimated under the IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report1, so a significant mitigation potential that is now becoming a reality under the UNFCCC.
There is much action both from FAO, from Japan, and from JICA to support this huge political andfinancial exercise of enabling developing country partners to participate in REDD+.
countries that are actively engaged in this process.

There are about 70

When REDD+ began, there was this technical andinstitutional barrier to REDD+, which centered on countries being able to measure, report, and verify
REDD+ actions.

This is really fundamental to making REDD+ a success.

measure and report their actions in the forest sector to the convention.

Countries need to be able toI am happy to report that there issignificant progress on country level measurement reporting and verification.
I think a key next step to FAO, JICA, and all the cooperating partners supporting REDD+ is to reallymaintain this wonderful momentum that we see in countries, keep overcoming these technical andinstitutional barriers, and scale up REDD+ action because it is going to be a key climate action to achieve
the Paris Agreement.

The FAO created two publications that I recommend that you download and read them.

The first is a2017 publication called Forests and Climate Change Working Paper 152 where we did a stock-take of all the
REDD+ reference emission levels and REDD+ results reports submitted to the UNFCCC.
there were 26 forest reference emission Levels.

In fact, as of now, there are 38.

As of 2017,

Therefore, FAO is in theprocess of updating this publication to have a new annual stock take of this huge progress on measurement,
reporting, and verification.

The second publication is a policy brief called From Reference Levels to Results

Reporting: REDD+ Under the UNFCCC3, which includes five sets of REDD+ results submitted to the
UNFCCC.

This publication gives a summary of experiences in the technical assessment process under theconvention, and this is all transparent and available in the REDD+ hub of the UNFCCC.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/
http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7163e.pdf
3 http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7352e.pdf
1
2

The 38

FAO Support to Forest Reference Emission Levels for REDD+:
Experiences and Lessons Learned
Julian Fox (The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO))

Session 1

reference emission level submissions as of today, and the technical assessment reports of the land use,land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) experts of the convention are all published, is transparent, andfreely available.

One of the key outcomes from this publication was to bring together the lessons learned

and some key next steps.
REDD+ MRVI think we all remember the huge excitement about REDD+ in the Bali Action Plan4 of 2007.
Basically, it took to 2013 for the real breakthrough in the Warsaw Framework, the actual REDD+ modalities
that countries could follow in order to implement REDD+.

Although it is described in more detail in the

publication, this figure describes the process of MRV: countries collecting their activity data; their emission
factors; creating a reference emission level submission; submitting it to the convention; it undergoing
technical assessment; using exactly the same consistent methodology measuring the activity and emission
factors for the REDD+ accounting period; and submitting REDD+ results in a biennial update Report
Technical Annex.

These then undergo technical analysis of the REDD+ results in the annex following theinternational consultation and analysis (ICA) process of the convention.

4

http://unfccc.int/key_steps/bali_road_map/items/6072.php

Session 1
I am very excited by this graphic because FAO and wonderful cooperation we have with bilateral
partners such as JICA and many others, we have seen huge progress since the Warsaw Framework of 2013.
On the top of the graphic, we see the countries that are submitting reference emission levels.
not underestimate the significance of this.

We should

Many of these developing country partners, it is the first timethey have submitted solid quantitative information on their forest sector to an international body for atransparent review process.

I am very happy to acknowledge the collaboration with JICA that has

supported and enabled many of these countries to submit this information to the convention, notably the
Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

I am very happy that Kei-san will present that wonderfulexample of a huge concentrated collaborative effort to enable a country to participate in REDD+ like the
DRC, a complicated country.
34 countries.

On the top axis, we have the reference emission levels now totaling 38 fromOn the bottom, we have the five sets of REDD+ results.

We expect with the results-based

payments pilot program under the GCF that there will be more submissions of REDD+ results in the near
future.
Scale of Forest Reference Emission Levels (FREL)

I encourage you to refer to the publication because there is a lot more detail in this global 2017 stock
take of reference emission levels, but a few notable observations are that most of the submissions are at thenational level.

I think this is a very positive sign because it shows that countries are taking this opportunity

to work on MRV at the national level, which aligns closely to their national policies, their national forest
management, and their national processes.
been associated with biome factors.

The sub-national submissions to the convention have mainlyThis means the Latin American countries with large pieces of the

Amazon biome within their territory have submitted a particular reference emission level for that particularbiome.

FAO Support to Forest Reference Emission Levels for REDD+:
Experiences and Lessons Learned
Julian Fox (The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO))

Session 1

With regard to scope, this is regarding which REDD+ activities the country includes in its submission,
the carbon pools and the gases.
deforestation.

We can see that as of 2017, 25 out of the 26 countries included

This to some extent is an indication that countries are comfortable with the technologicalmeasurement of deforestation.

Therefore, fewer countries have included forest degradation because thisis still quite a technical challenge for countries to overcome going forward.

I would also like toacknowledge the significant efforts of Vietnam and the presentation of Dr. Hung to follow.
managed to include all five REDD+ activities in their reference emission level.
technological achievement.

They

It is a significant

A few countries have included the other REDD+ activities such asconservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement, but we are seeing with a new round of
submissions that countries are increasingly trying to include all five activities in their REDD+ submissions
to the convention, and FAO will collate and report on this.

In terms of carbon pools, most countries

included the significant carbon pools such as above-ground and below-ground biomass.

Then the lesser

forest carbon pools such as dead wood, litter, and soil organic carbon, countries are including those when
they have that information in their national forest inventories.

I think countries will include more andmore carbon pools as they complete national forest inventories and collect country-specific information.
For gases, most countries have focused on carbon dioxide.

Countries have included the other gases likenitrous oxide when activities like fire are significant, but the real focus has been on the carbon dioxide.

Session 1
In terms of the construction approaches, I am quite happy to report that most countries are using avery simple historical average.

This is a very elegant simple approach because you end up with one

number that is your reference emission level, and that is an average across an accounting period.

That is aconsistent approach to the GCF REDD+ pilot program results-based payments scorecard, and also theForest Carbon Partnership Facility5 FCPF Carbon Fund Methodological Framework6.

Therefore, this is

great that the countries are using this simple and agreed approach to creating a reference emission level.
On the bottom, there is the example of Paraguay, and it just shows how it is a very simple approach.
Brazil was the first country to do this and many countries have followed this approach in their reference
emission level.
Fewer countries have used a linear projection.

This example on the bottom is for Papua New Guinea,

who have quite strong annual data coming from Collect Earth7 and the JICA base map that allowed themto create a linear projection.
national circumstance.

Other countries have adjusted their reference emission level based on their

These countries either have a significant program like in Vietnam with a 661

planting program, or their post-conflict countries that are emerging from the conflict situation, and expect
more development and more encroachment in their forest area, and have therefore adjusted their low
historical deforestation rates to reflect this.
Stock Take of REDD+ Results

A quick stock take of REDD+ results: we see Brazil, Columbia and Ecuador submitted reference
emission levels for deforestation, and then reported REDD+ results on these reductions in deforestation.
The green area is the reduction in emissions.

Malaysia’s reference emission level is focused on sustainable

management of forests, so they are actually enhancing the carbon stocks in their forest estate, and the green
is a removal of CO2 from the atmosphere.

As I mentioned before, the result is dominated by Brazil, butthese four results represent over 10% of annual global emissions, so a really significant demonstration of
the potential of REDD+ becoming a reality.
https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/
https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/carbon-fund-methodological-framework
7 http://www.openforis.org/tools/collect-earth.html
5
6

FAO Support to Forest Reference Emission Levels for REDD+:
Experiences and Lessons Learned
Julian Fox (The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO))

Session 1

Key Observations and Challenges

We will again undertake the stock-take.
room.

We are undertaking it right now.

Our technical team is in

The key observation from our publication of 2017 is that the technical and institutional barriers to

REDD+ MRV are being overcome.

There is a huge progress in the quality of the forest sector data that iscoming to the convention for a transparent review process.

I think for the first time we can say that there

is really unprecedented transparency of countries’ forest-sector data and information.

Historically, theforest sector has not been good at submitting accurate information to processes like forest resources
assessments (FRA), but now with 38 submissions, they are very detailed submissions on forest sector datasubmitted to the UNFCCC that are undergoing a transparent technical assessment process.

It is reallyquite unprecedented.
This technical assessment process under the convention where LULUCF greenhouse gas experts review
in a very facilitative way with the country, this submission is key to improving their submissions in theirforest sector data.

We have seen many examples of this.

One example was the submission of Malaysia.

Their first submission included only sustainable management of forests.

The technical assessment process

in a nonintrusive way encouraged them to include deforestation, and they have.

I am very happy to report

that, as of now, they have submitted a revised reference emission level that takes on that feedback from thetechnical assessment process, and they have included deforestation in a new reference emission levelsubmission.
I would say that this data goes well beyond REDD+.

It is contributing to inform forest sector

policies and contributes to many sustainable development goals, and of course their nationally determined
contribution reporting under the Paris Agreement.

Session 1

Some of the key challenges: this huge momentum needs to continue.
accuracy, and the comparability needs to improve over time.

The quality of the data, theFAO, in close cooperation with bilateralorganization like JICA, I am very confident that we can keep supporting developing partner countries tokeep improving their data and their submissions so that we end up with very comparable REDD+ MRV
reports to the convention that are also accurate.
This, of course, needs further investment.

Particularly, we do not want developing country partners to

not have the opportunity to participate in REDD+.

It is a real opportunity for many of our member

countries to improve their forest sector data and participate in this under the convention. Therefore, I
would say now we have quite clear clarity on how results-based payments will look with the GCF decision(the pilot program for results-based payments).

Now, many of the countries with support from many

cooperating partners and supporting them on improving their data and their submissions to meet the donor
expectations for payment.
This is particularly important as we move to the enhanced transparency framework of the Paris
Agreement, and particularly under Article 6 where mitigation obligations are tradable.

I would say in the

post-2020 forest mitigation environment, we would need these submissions to be comparable, accurate, andtradable so that countries are able to move emission reductions between themselves to meet their nationallydetermined contributions (NDC) obligations.

FAO Support to Forest Reference Emission Levels for REDD+:
Experiences and Lessons Learned
Julian Fox (The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO))

Session 1

FAO Support

FAO and many cooperating partners like JICA I am sure are very proud to have supported countries on
this process of submitting good information to the convention many times for the first time.
take a very country-driven approach.

As FAO, we

We support them on the technical work, but always it is the country

that writes the reference emission level, responds to the technical assessment, and undergoes the fullprocess with FAO support.

Often, the FAO support comes in the form of national forest inventory tocreate emission factors, remote sensing or satellite land monitoring systems to create activity data, and then,of course, reviewing and refining submissions so that countries are confident and comfortable to submit
them to the convention.

FAO does this with a number of resources and tools that are very nicely displayed on this tree.

This isanother publication that I encourage you to download, but it just shows the breadth of resources and toolsthat FAO has to try and match that national circumstance, which is different in every single country that weland in.

We do not prescribe a single tool to all countries because we want to build on a sustainable MRV

system, and build on the systems that are already in the countries.
Thank you very much.

I would like to acknowledge a new project that FAO has started in cooperation

Session 1
with the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries8 (MAFF) of Japan, which is really scaling up
efforts for carbon enhancement as a real climate action for the Paris Agreement.
acknowledge that new support from the MAFF Japan.

8

http://www.maff.go.jp/e/Thank you very much.

I am very happy to