Title and Format of the Methodology Report
IPCC Scoping MeetingMethodology Report on Short-lived Climate Forcers (SLCFs): 2027 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines
Brisbane, Australia, 26-28 February 2024
IPCC TFI TSU

Title and format Options
Looking at history of Methodology Reports in IPCC, 3 options are available
 Option A: Stand-alone independent Methodology Report [independent Report from those
produced so far by TFI]

 Option B: Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines* [to be used in conjunction with the 2006
IPCC Guidelines only ] Option C: Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines [stand-alone Report not-independent fromthose produced so far by TFI, cross-references largely needed/used]* Hereafter it does include also Wetlands Supplement and 2019 Refinement

Option A: stand-alone Methodology Report
Such option opens the possibility of the Scoping Meeting questioning the following elementsof the 2006 IPCC Guidelines:
 Should definitions of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines be revised?
 Should the categorization of sources be made independently from the 2006 IPCC Guidelines?
 Should the good practice approach, tiered approach, land-representation approaches beretained?
 Should anthropogenic emission be defined again?
 Should authors be rewriting all chapters on cross-cutting issues (Volume 1 in the 2006 IPCCGuidelines)?

This option is likely requiring the largest amount of work to authors and is prone to the riskof producing guidance inconsistent with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines

Option B: Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines
Such option implies that the Report: is to be used in conjunction with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines only
 can refine some elements of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines –e.g. the categorization- to make those fully
consistent with the addition of SLCF emissions, or simply add those for SLCF emission inventory only
 Elements of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for which the Refinement does not provide any re-elaborationor further elaboration are just cross-referenced

This option:
 does not produce a stand-alone Methodology Report, while ensuring its fully consistency with the2006 IPCC Guidelines
 is consistent with decision 18/CMA.1** “20. Each Party shall use the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, and shall use any subsequent version or refinement of the IPCC guidelines
agreed upon by the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA)…”

Option C: Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines
Such option implies that: Definitions and methodological approaches of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines are retained and applies toSLCF emission inventories
 Categorization of sources is that of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, although changes can be
implemented to capture the characteristics of SLCF sources e.g. NOX and NH3 emissions from managed soils
while current category seems to limit to N2O

 Elements of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for which the Supplement does not provide any re-elaborationor further elaboration are just cross-referenced

This option ensures that the Report is necessarily consistent with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines,
and a stand-alone Methodology Report is producedSummary of Title and Format options
 Option A: Stand-alone independent Methodology Report:
 Title: 2027 IPCC Guidelines for National Short-lived Climate Forcers inventories
 Format: to be defined Option B: Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines: Title: 2027 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories:
Short-lived Climate Forcers
 Format: as of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines

 Option C: Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines: Title: 2027 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories:
Short-lived Climate Forcers
 Format: as of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines

Thank you
https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/index.html
https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/meeting/meeting.html