CDM Final Workshop Proceedings - CD ROM - ITTO

1

PD 337/05 Rev.3 (F)

“INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM – OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES FOR THE FOREST INDUSTRY SECTOR

IN SUB-SAHARAN TROPICAL AFRICA”

WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS

2ND – 5TH OCTOBER 2006

FUNDING AGENCIES

2

Table of Content

PageFOREWORD OPENING SESSION SESSION 1: BACKGROUND, PROCEDURES AND INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENTS Background paper:

Forestry Options for Developing Countries within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Mitigation and Adaptation as means for Sustainable Development, with special consideration of the conditions in Africa Carmenza Robledo, Intercooperation

Climate Change and Forests: Impact of international forestry processes on CDM forestry and on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation Jürgen Blaser; Intercooperation

The Relationship Between CDMs and National Forest Programmes Francois Wencelius; FAO.

The Role of CDM Forestry Projects in Poverty Alleviation David F Karnosky; Michigan Technological University.

Procedures, modalities and legal aspects Carmenza Robledo; Intercooperation. and Approved Methodologies and EB clarifications for CDM Forestry Projects, with special consideration of the simplified methodology for small-scale project activities. Wojciech Galinski; UNFCCC Secretariat.

SESSION 2: EXPERIENCES, LESSONS AND CHALLENGES FROM CDM PROJECTS

The UNDP’s CDM Forestry-related Activities in Africa Julie Fischer; UNDP

Defining “forest” for the Clean Development Dieter Schoene; FAO

Past Afforestation and Reforestation Activities in Africa: Insights and Lessons for the CDM – Peter Lowe; FAO, South Africa

Case from Asia-PacificFacilitating Reforestation for Guangxi Watershed Management in Pearl River Basin Xiaoquan Zhang; Chinese Academy of Forestry Bernhard Schlamadinger; Joanneum Research ....Neil Bird; Joanneum Research

Case from Latin America: Alternative financing model for sustainable management in the San Nicolas forest Carmenza Robledo; Intercooperation Javier Blanco; Ecoversa

An analysis of the opportunities of Afforestation/Reforestation CDM projects in Ghana: Case study in the Upper West Region

3

Elisa Grieco; University of Tuscia, Italy An analysis of the opportunities for CDM Afforestation/Reforestation Projects in Ghana. A case study from the Upper West Region Elisa Grieco, Lucia Perugini, Riccardo Valentini;University of Tuscia, Italy

CDM Bio-energy Projects in Africa – Alois P Mhlanga; African Development Bank

SESSION 3: MARKETS FOR CARBON CREDITS FROM CDM PROJECTS

Supply and Demand of Emissions Credits from CDM Forestry Projects Robert Tipmann; Ecosecurities

Resources for CDM Forestry Projects Development in Africa: ITTO’s Capacity Building Programme Dr. Ma Hwan Ok; ITTO

MDG: Carbon Facility. Increasing Access of Developing Countries to Carbon Finance Maryam Niamir-Fuller; UNDP/GEF

Interest in CERs from CDM Forestry Projects in the EU Region Aulikki Kaupilla; Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Finland

Carbon Credit Markets in the Asia-Pacific Tatsushi Hemmi; Pacific Consultant Co., Japan

Carbon Market in South America Javier Blanco; Ecoversa

SESSION 4: REDUCING EMISSIONS FROM DEFORESTATION

Deforestation under the UNFCCC: Future opportunities Claudio Forner; CIFOR

Reduction of GHG Emissions through Avoiding Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD): Committing forests as Carbon Reservoir Jürgen Blaser; Intercooperation Carmenza Robledo; Intercooperation

Reducing emissions from deforestation: Methodological issues Dieter Schoene; FAO

COMIFAC Submission on avoiding emissions from deforestation Sébastien Malele ; Directeur de la Gestion Forestière, RDC

Financial and investment issues related to avoided deforestation Robert Tipmann; Ecosecurities

RECOMMENDATIONS ANNEXES

Agenda

List of participants

Glossary Abbreviations

4

Opening Session

5

Welcome Speech by the Honourable A. Adjei-Yeboah (MP), Deputy Minister for Lands, Forestry and Mines Ghana

Your Excellencies and Members of the Diplomatic Corps,

Distinguished Representatives of Sponsoring Governments and Agencies

Distinguished Speakers and Delegates,

Ladies and Gentlemen.

On behalf of the people and Government of Ghana I welcome you warmly to our country. As a nation, we are indeed honoured that our country has been chosen as the venue for this important meeting. I am informed that there are 50 Delegates from 30 countries attending the workshop.

I trust that the available facilities and support from the Forestry Commission will provide the congenial atmosphere necessary for your deliberations on the opportunities that the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism can offer to African Countries, for new investment in sustainable management of our natural resources to assist the global effort in addressing the impacts of human-induced climate change.

Your presence here is an affirmation of the confidence the international community has in Africa’s ability and the continent’s potential to make a significant contribution to this important global challenge of our time.

Mr. Chairman, the Government of Ghana ratified the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1995 and also acceded to the Kyoto Protocol (KP) in the year 2002. By taking this bold step, Ghana joined the Global Community in addressing this environmental catastrophe. Although as a developing country we do not have binding obligations under the Protocol, the people and Government of Ghana are committed, as part of the global community, to play our part in reducing the impacts of climate change by hosting projects under the Clean Development Mechanism.

Based on the available scientific information and the unusual weather patterns being experienced globally, there is little doubt that our planet’s climate is undergoing some change.

Many African Countries, including Ghana, are unable to cope with current climate variability. Climate change increases the vulnerability of poor people by adversely affecting their health and livelihoods and undermining growth opportunities, which are crucial for poverty reduction.

For example, in recent years in Ghana, there has been a noticeable increase in the frequency of drought conditions. These dry conditions affect the water level of the Akosombo dam, which is the main source of electrical energy for the country and its industries.

Mr. Chairman, it is noted that there is still a section of the climate science community yet to be convinced that the climate of our planet is changing, and in my view, it will be reckless not to take steps now in line with the cautionary principle.

6

In 1999, the Plantation Development Programme which aims to plant up 20,000 ha. of trees per annum was launched by the Government of Ghana to cover 10 percent of our land area within the next five years to help bridge anticipated future supply deficit in the timber industry and to safeguard the environment.

Some individuals, Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and business concerns have also over the years invested in reforestation and other projects in line with the Government’s agenda to achieve sustainable development. However, none of these projects and programmes benefited from the CDM opportunities available under the Kyoto Protocol for Developing Countries.

Mr. Chairman, Ghana has officially nominated the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as the Designated National Authority (DNA) as required under the Kyoto Protocol for the purpose of implementing the relevant provisions of the Kyoto Protocol including taking advantage of additional investment opportunities in climate change-related activities.

To assist the EPA in carrying out its DNA functions under the Protocol, the government has established a DNA Governing Council. The membership of the governing council includes the following agencies:

the Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Environment;

the Ministry of Energy;

the Ministry for Finance and Economic Planning;

the Ministry of Lands, Forestry and Mines; and

the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Presidential Special Initiatives.

Ghana’s Climate Change programme has many facets, which include the following:

Mitigation Assessment

Technology Transfer

Research and Systematic Observation of Climate Change Phenomena

Education, Training and Public awareness

Vehicular Emission programme and

Vulnerability Assessment

For Ghana, Climate Change related activities present the opportunity to address poverty as well as contribute to the mitigation of global warming.

Mr. Chairman, Ghana is also involved in several collaborative activities on carbon sequestration such as the Spatially Explicit Modelling of Soil Organic Carbon (SEMSOC). Ghana signed the SEMSOC contract Agreement in April 2005 to commence the project.

The objectives of SEMSOC are to identify adaptation and mitigation opportunities derived from changes in land use and natural resources (including carbon stocks), the response of appropriate land management options and the opportunities that shall lead to enhanced soil fertility, agricultural sustainability and increased food security, as well as to evaluate the need for adaptation responses to climate change.

7

Additionally, Ghana is a participant in a project entitled "Information for African Climate Technology Transfer" (IACTT) which is supported by the United States EPA. The project is an effort to provide African stakeholders with easy access to tools for up-to-date climate change information resources.

Ladies and Gentlemen, according to “the State and Trends of the Carbon Market Report (May 2006)” published by the World Bank, Africa appears to be the only continent which has not yet taken full advantage of the investment opportunities under the CDM.

For example, between January 2005 and March 2006, Asia accounted for 73% of contracted volume of project-based transactions signed, the largest for the period. China alone accounted for 66% of the global volume.

Contracted volumes in Latin America for the same period accounted for 17% of project-based transactions.

Although the report indicated that a number of projects appeared on the UNFCCC PDD pipeline, transactions for Africa signed between January 2005 and March 2006 represented only about 2% of the global project-based volumes. These projects were mainly in South Africa, Egypt and the Maghreb.

According to the report, this was because the vast majority of the approved methodologies deal with energy, industry and synthetic gases.

As you are all aware, most African countries have low energy and industrial footprints. As agriculture and forestry are the major contributors to the economies of many African countries, naturally, it is in the area of Land Use and Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) that African countries would have a comparative advantage in attracting additional investment under the CDM.

Within this context, this workshop on Africa CDM is very timely. I am also gratified that the focus of this workshop is on land use and land use change and forestry. This is not to say that consideration should not also be given to energy and industry in Africa.

As industrial development in Africa gathers pace, it is important to ensure that African industries do not become net emitters of greenhouse gases.

Clean energy technologies such as solar, wind and bio-energy should be made an integral part of Africa’s energy sources now rather than later through technology transfer.

This is important to obviate reliance on energy sources which potentially could contribute to increased levels of greenhouse gases.

As already indicated, to date, some progress has already been made in developing and implementing climate change mitigation projects in Ghana.

I am informed that Ghana’s first CDM project – the rubber outgrowing and carbon sequestration project in the Western Region - is very advanced.

What is required to support on-going and sustainable activities in climate change-related activities in Ghana includes:

8

increased capacity building in the design, development, implementation and monitoring of CDM projects;

increased investment in CDM-related activities consistent with the objectives of our national sustainable development strategy; and

legal, institutional, policy and governance frameworks to support enhanced transparency and credibility in CDM-related activities.

Over the next four days, you have a very comprehensive programme, and I am gratified that some of Ghana’s priority areas are covered in your programme.

For this workshop to be useful for Africa, it must go beyond just discussing issues. African governments look to this workshop to come up with action-oriented and practical recommendations that will assist countries to look critically and seriously at how they can take advantage of the opportunities under the CDM.

In this context, I appeal to organisations such as the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the FAO and private sector organisations represented at this workshop to ensure that Africa’s current under-representation in the global CDM market is addressed for mutual benefit. We are not asking for a handout. Rather, we are appealing for a framework and an action plan that will enable effective partnerships between governments, communities and investors for mutual benefit.

In conclusion, I wish you all fruitful deliberations over the next four days. I also encourage you to take advantage of the social life provided by our national capital to enjoy our warm and welcoming hospitality.

There are many lovely tourist attractions all over our country and I encourage you, after the workshop, to take sometime off to explore these.

On this note, I am pleased to declare the workshop officially open.

Thank you.

9

Opening Remarks by Dr. Hwan Ok Ma, Project Manager, International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) His Excellency, the Honourable Adjei Yeboah, MP – Deputy Minister for Lands, Forestry and Mines, Ghana, Mr. J E Otoo, CEO, Ghana Forestry Commission, Distinguished guests and participants, Ladies and Gentlemen, It is, indeed, my great honour and pleasure to address you all on the occasion of the opening of the International Workshop on CDM organized by the Ghana Forestry Commission (GFC) under ITTO project PD 337/05 with the aim of improving the understanding of CDM forestry projects and identifying opportunities and challenges for African timber producing countries. First of all, allow me to convey to you all the warmest greetings from Dr. Manoel Sobral Filho, the Executive Director of ITTO, and his best wishes for the success of this important Workshop. I would also like to express ITTO’s sincere gratitude to the Ghana Forestry Commission for its warm hospitality and excellent arrangements for the convening of the workshop in this beautiful city of Accra. My gratitude also goes to the workshop collaborators: FAO, UNFCCC, UNDP, CIFOR, the African Development Bank, Swiss Intercooperation and Joanneum Institute for their outstanding contributions to the organization of the Workshop. In particular, I wish to thank Ms. Carmenza Robledo, ITTO consultant from Swiss Intercooperation and Dr. Kwame Asumandu, ITTO Consultant for your dedication and contributions to the Workshop. Last but not least, I wish to put on record ITTO’s profound appreciation to the donors to this Workshop, namely the Governments of Finland, Switzerland and USA as well as Common Fund for Commodities (CFC) and FAO for raising the funds required to make this important workshop possible. His Excellency, ladies and gentlemen, The International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) is an inter-governmental organization comprising 59 member states which seek to promote the international trade in tropical timber as well as the conservation and the sustainable management and use of tropical forests. With the recent adoption of the International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA), 2006, at the Fourth Session of the United Nations Conference for the Negotiation of a Successor Agreement to the ITTA, 1994, held in Geneva last January, ITTO is now poised to continue its on-going work, with renewed commitment of its members. It is our hope that under the ITTA, 2006, which is scheduled to come into effect in 2008, ITTO will continue and strengthen its role in supporting the sustainable management of tropical forests. ITTO has been promoting CDM forestry through its on-going project work. Lessons learned from this work show that there are a number of key problems hindering the development of Afforestation and Reforestation (AR) CDM projects. These problems include lack of institutional and legal framework for AR CDM projects and limited or even absence of capacity on the part of project developers in developing countries in formulating AR CDM Project Design Documents. Under the UNFCCC, it was decided at the Seventh Conference of the Parties (COP-7) that Afforestation and Reforestation Activities could represent one percent of the assigned emissions

10

amount of any country for each of the five years of the fist commitment period (2008-2012), to a total of 137 million tons CO2-equivalent (t CO2-e) per year. According to the recently prepared ITTO Guidebook for the Formulation of AR Projects under the CDM, this is interpreted as follows: 137 million t CO2-e is equivalent to 4,500 AR CDM projects with an average area of 3,000 hectares and a mean annual sequestration of 10 t CO2-e per hectare per year. Nevertheless, it would be difficult to reach the cap of one percent for AR project activities considering the current situation that only three methodologies have been approved by the CDM Executive Board (EB) by mid September this year. Ladies and gentlemen, I am sure that this Workshop will identify concrete steps for possible regional approaches to accelerate the development of AR-CDM project activities in Africa. In this regard, I wish to recall the Green Belt Movement, which has been launched by Ms. Wangari Matthai, 2004 Nobel Peace Prize Winner, to encourage the planting of trees in deforested and degraded forest lands. It is, therefore, my hope that AR-CDM project activities in the region will be strengthened with the African Green Belt Movement in order to visualize the multiple-value of AR-CDM project activities in terms of carbon sequestration, rehabilitation and community development. I believe that the Ghana Workshop will deal with many important issues surrounding CDM forestry projects by many prominent speakers. The workshop will also facilitate the exchange of views on the issue of reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries, which emerged strongly in the deliberations at the COP 11 of UNFCCC held in 2005 in Montreal, Canada, and at the UNFCCC Workshop held last August, in Rome, Italy. It is hoped that the Workshop will end with concrete recommendations to ensure further progress in (i) promoting AR-CDM project activities in the region, (ii) increasing accessibility of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) to be generated from AR-CDM to international trading systems, including the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) and demand from governments in developed countries and (iii) enhancing regional views on the issue of reducing emissions from deforestation. It is further hoped that following the Workshop, its main recommendations will be presented at relevant forums in the near future including the Forty-first session of the International Tropical Timber Council which will take place in early November in Yokohama, Japan and the COP 12 of UNFCCC in mid November in Nairobi, Kenya. Dear distinguished participants, I wish to conclude my remarks by re-iterating the importance of this Workshop in promoting regional cooperation in the development of CDM forestry projects. ITTO will continue to promote CDM forestry projects towards achieving Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) in the tropics. Finally, I hope that newly-established partnerships and networking from this Ghana Workshop will continue to be maintained and strengthened to serve as a solid foundation for CDM forestry projects in the region. Thank you.

11

Opening Remarks by Dr. Philippe Sas, Country Representative, State Secretariat of Economic Affairs (SECO) Switzerland His Excellency, the Honorable Adjei Yeboah, MP – Deputy Minister for Lands, Forestry and Mines, Ghana, Mr. J E Otoo, CEO, Ghana Forestry Commission, Distinguished guests and participants, Ladies and Gentlemen, It is a great pleasure to have the opportunity to talk to you today on behalf of the State Secretariat of Economic Affairs (SECO) of Switzerland. I would like to initiate my speech by expressing our sincere gratitude to the Government of Ghana for hosting this meeting which is of great importance for the sub-Saharan countries. Now, let me explain to you the involvement of my institution in issues related to forestry and mitigation to climate change in the context of development cooperation. SECO is a competence centre of the Swiss administration committed to promote sustainable economic development in developing and transition countries as well as to facilitate sustainable integration of partner countries into the global economy. Consequently, SECO supports activities in Africa in the forest sector as e.g. the Africa Forest Law Enforcement and Governance – AFLEG -, the promotion of sustainable trade of tropical timber and of markets for non-timber forest products as well as capacity building efforts in different areas related to sustainable forest management. In Ghana SECO supports the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS) through the Multi-Donor Budget Support (MDBS ) as well as complementary projects like the development of the private sector specially small and medium enterprises, activities in promoting transparency and efficiency of the public financing sector, development of infrastructure and the use of the international trade. Switzerland, as an active member of the International Tropical Timber Organization, promotes many activities in Africa, where for many countries and their populations, tropical forests are an important and potentially sustainable source of revenue, thus contributing to poverty reduction. In this context ensuring the different environmental functions of the forests is becoming increasingly relevant. With regard to mitigation of climate change SECO seeks at strengthening the international framework/rules, building up capacities in partner countries for implementing the Kyoto Protocol, supporting climate friendly infrastructure and industrial projects as well as mobilising private funds and know-how for the implementation of CDM- and JI-Projects. SECO is aware that Africa has a good potential for CDM projects on afforestation and reforestation (A/R) as well as in biomass-energy CDM projects. However, African countries, special in the sub-Saharan region, need support in building their capacities for using the opportunities offered by the CDM A/R. Such a support would include technology transfer as well as knowledge exchange and the promotion of pilot experiences. It is in this context of a continuous cooperation in improving African capacities in which we appreciate this workshop. We consider that it is very opportune and will be of a great use for all participants.

12

In this sense let me express my gratitude to the organizers for their excellent job preparing the workshop and to all participants for dedicating their time this week to this important task. I am sure you will have a very successful meeting.

13

Opening Remarks of the Representative of the Common Fund for Commodities (CFC) Mr. Andrey Kuleshov, First Project Manager, CFC Honourable Deputy Minister, Mr. Chairman, Distinguished delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen, On behalf of the Managing Director of the CFC it is my great pleasure to greet you at this meeting. In the interest of time I will keep my intervention short. Allow me to say a few words about the reasons which brought my organisation, the Common Fund for Commodities, to support the event. The CFC is an organisation of 104 member Countries and 5 organisations of regional economic cooperation which aims to assist the Developing Countries to make the best out of their commodity production in terms of economic development and growth. The Common Fund mainly focuses on projects of general importance to a particular commodity sector within a region or a group of countries. This way, a small intervention by the Fund may have a significant and lasting effect as a catalyst improving the lives of commodity producers. A typical CFC project costs under 3 million dollars and takes 3 to 5 years. All projects are implemented in partnership with International Commodity Bodies, of which ITTO is one. Over the years the CFC has developed a variety of practical support measures for the commodity producers, which broadly fall in the categories of: - productivity and quality improvement; - vertical and horizontal diversification; - new product development and market access. The CFC also runs a special programme which aims to assist the commodity dependent developing countries to adapt to and benefit from globalisation and liberalisation of the commodity markets. Measures supported by the Fund under this programme have to-date included commodity-based financial instruments, price risk management and commodity exchanges. We expect that the CDM process would open for our member countries a whole new class of development projects, where actions in support of the forest commodity sectors could reach financial sustainability by exploiting the market for carbon credits alongside with the traditional forest products market. In the longer term, we are looking to attract greater investment in the development of the forest sector, improving its competitiveness, and its contribution to the economic growth. In short, the CFC expects that this meeting would lead to the emergence of a new generation of development projects, allowing the Fund to better serve its member countries. In this connection, I wanted to thank the government of Ghana, the ITTO, the Ghana Forestry

14

Commission, and the other donors for making this meeting possible. The contribution of the specialists who worked hard to prepare this meeting is also recognised with gratitude. Distinguished delegates, Ladies and gentlemen, I wish you a successful meeting.

15

Opening Remarks by Mr. Oloche Anebi Edache, Regional Representative for Africa/Assistant Director – Food & Agriculture Organisation (FAO)

Mr. Chairman, Your Excellencies Ministers of State Your Excellency, Representatives of Civil society, Colleagues Development Partners, Distinguished Members of the Media, Distinguished Invited Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, I am delighted to be present at this important meeting, and honoured to have this opportunity to present this Address on behalf of the FAO. The subject for this week’s workshop, Climate Change, is emerging as possibly the greatest environmental challenge of this century. The issue: Africa, like other continents, is endowed with a wide range of climates. But a large portion of its population is living at the margin of fragile agro-ecosystems. This situation is exacerbated by erratic weather conditions and extreme poverty that lead to the unsustainable utilization of forest resources, which in turn leads to land degradation, desertification and loss of arable soil, famine and misery, with incalculable long term consequences on the environmental conditions of the continent. In the short run already, we are experiencing some of these effects through increased average temperatures, flooding, recurring droughts and crop failures in many parts of Africa. There is no doubt that mitigating the negative effects of climate change will result in improving the living conditions of an important part of our population. Moreover, by making full use of the Clean Development Mechanism created under the Kyoto Protocol, African countries should benefit from the emerging market related to carbon sequestration. FAO: That is why FAO is ranking climate change as a high priority in its programme of action throughout the world. It seeks to contribute to mitigate climate change namely by advocating and strengthening sustainable forest management. The Forestry Department is investing more resources to cover this new aspect of forestry. At present, programme activities cover the following main areas: Integrating climate change concerns into core forestry activities, like adding biomass and carbon data to national forest inventories; advocating forests in the developing climate change mitigation regime in support of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); and assisting member countries in climate change related tasks such as organizing joint workshops with partners like the UNFCCC, ITTO, UNEP, IUCN…to improve the capacity of countries to negotiate agreements made under the Kyoto Protocol and most importantly to reap the benefits stemming from the Clean Development Mechanism.

16

Mr. Chairman, If we turn to Africa, the Twenty-Fourth FAO Regional Conference for Africa in Bamako noted, at the beginning of this year, that the issue of the impacts of fire on carbon emissions and climate changes needed to be further studied and documented, and recommended that FAO and relevant partners pursue work on the issue in order to improve understanding and knowledge of both the civil society and political leaders. A few months later, in March 2006, the Fifteenth Session of the African Forestry and Wildlife Commission in Maputo, paid attention also to the wider dimensions of Climate Change issues, such as poverty alleviation, forest law compliance, good governance, in relation to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The Commission recognized planted forests as vital in ecosystems’ provision of carbon sinks. It further took note of the potential impacts of climate change on African people and forests and recognized the important roles of Africa’s forests in the global carbon cycle. The Commission is cognizant of the potential importance for Africa of the new issue of compensating developing countries for reduced emissions from deforestation. We realize that our forests do play an important carbon storage function. The challenge in front of us is to develop further our ability to attract funds in competition with other regions of the World. In other words, how can we get more investments based on coherent forest and tree management policies and sustained long-term actions. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, In these 4 days of intense discussions, debates and field activities, you will have the opportunity not only to take stock of the progress and work done so far in the World in general and in Africa in particular, but also and mainly to review what is good and desirable for Africans and Africa’s forests and environment. We expect to receive clear indications on what we can achieve together to contribute to face up this immense challenge. Solutions and initiatives, given the mandate of FAO on poverty reduction and food security, should impact positively on the livelihoods and well being of the millions of small holders which are the most affected by the erratic negative changes of our climate. Mr. Chairman, Allow me finally to mention that FAO will continue to use National Government Development Priorities to mainstream its programmes into the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), and CAADP of NEPAD, for the betterment of our natural resources and our populations. I wish you fruitful deliberations. Thank you for your attention.

Session 1: Background, Procedures and Institutional Agreements

17



18

Background Paper: Forestry Options for Developing Countries within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Mitigation and Adaptation as means for Sustainable Development, with especial consideration of the conditions in Africa Dr. Carmenza Robledo, Intercooperation [email protected] Abstract Climate change is a human-induced phenomenon that affects tropical forests and forestry. After the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, inappropriate land use and land-use change are the second source of greenhouse gas emissions and a major concern for sustainable development. The impacts of climate change on tropical forest ecosystems include variations in the availability of wood, reduction of water availability, increased pressure on agricultural land, biodiversity loss and socioeconomic stresses. The strategies defined by the UNFCCC to address climate change, namely mitigation and adaptation, recognize the important role of tropical forestry. Mitigation offers interesting opportunities for tropical forestry through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), a mechanism designed at helping industrialized countries to achieve their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol and promoting sustainable development in developing countries. In the case of adaptation, forestry activities can be used to reduce the vulnerability to climate change and variability of both natural and social systems. Furthermore, non-sustainable forestry activities reduce resilience and increase the risks for livelihoods. This background paper presents the framework for using both strategies. Regarding adaptation, the background paper presents some of the most important advances in methods and tools for understanding vulnerabilities and preparing adaptation measures in the forestry sector. It includes also some guidance for designing a CDM project in the forest sector and explains the modalities and procedures to be considered in order to get such a project validated by the Executive Board of the CDM. Further, some potential forestry activities are presented that could be implemented by using the CDM.

1 Introduction

The climate of the earth has never been stable, least of all since the appearance of the human species. Glacial periods have been 4 – 5 °C cooler than now, interglacials perhaps between 1 and 3°C warmer. These changes in climate were natural in origin. Today, scientists believe that a new kind of climate change is under way. Its impacts on people and ecosystems might be more drastic than natural climate changes over long periods of time. Levels of carbon


19

dioxide and other 'greenhouse gases1' in the atmosphere have risen steeply since the industrial revolution. Concentrations have increased mainly because of the use of fossil fuels, large-scale deforestation and other human activities, spurred on by economic and population growth. Like a blanket around the planet, greenhouse gases stop energy escaping from the Earth's surface and atmosphere. If levels rise too high, excessive warming can distort natural patterns of climate.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed in its Third Assessment Report (2001) that there was “new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities”. Although uncertainties in the process of projecting future trends create wide margins for error in the estimates, the IPCC predicted a rise of 1.4 to 5.8 oC in global mean surface temperatures over the next 100 years. The impact of warming, even at the lower end of this range, is likely to be dramatic (see table below). The impacts on humans will be certain and – in places – drastic. People in some areas may benefit from climate change. But the great majority will struggle to cope with its effects. Developing countries will suffer more than others, as they are generally situated in the area of most extreme climate hazards (tropics and subtropics). Their lack of resources makes them particularly vulnerable to adversity and emergencies on any major scale. Yet people in developing countries have created only a small proportion of greenhouse gas emissions.

Source: UNFCCC (2003) Caring for climate

2 Climate Change and Forests

Climate change is considered one of the major threats to sustainable development as a result of its impacts on health, infrastructure, settlements, agriculture and food security, and forest ecosystems. According to the IPCC, unprecedented changes in the climate system have taken place during the 20th century. These changes can be observed through three variables: increments in

1 Out of the six greenhouse gases, the most important for forestry are: carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); and laughing gas (N2O).


20

average temperatures; changes in rainfall patterns; and an increase in the intensity and frequency of extreme events. It is now widely accepted that these changes in the climate system are closely related to increased human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), especially during the last 150 years. The burning of fossil fuels is the most important source of GHG. The second source of GHG emissions are activities related to land use, primarily tropical deforestation and forest fires. GHG resulting from deforestation are mostly carbon dioxide with lesser amounts of methane and carbon monoxide. Besides its impacts on the climate system, deforestation is one of the most critical environmental problems facing developing countries today in terms of its long-term negative impact on biodiversity, loss of economic opportunities and increased social disparity. Forests can contribute to solving climate change related problems. The role of forests in carbon sequestration as a result of photosynthesis has been demonstrated. Because trees have a much longer lifespan than agricultural crops, they act as long-term reservoirs, which lock up the carbon for decades, even centuries, in the form of cellulose and lignin. Therefore, enhancing carbon sinks and reducing deforestation can contribute substantially to mitigating climate change and its impacts on ecological and social systems. Impacts on forests The impacts of climate change are likely to affect all forest landscapes. Indeed, the predicted change in climate variables will place severe pressure on forests' ability to adapt to these and to survive. With rising temperatures, changes in water availability and expected double levels of carbon dioxide, it is expected that forests will change at two levels: physiology and metabolism; and ecosystem functioning (see table 1). These changes will impact the availability and quality of both forest goods and services. Table 1: Summary of climate change impacts on forest ecosystems Climate factor

Cell level Organism level Species level Ecosystem level

CO

2 in

crea

se

Photosynthetic rate increase

Growth rate increase Decreased seed mortality Biomass production increase

Stomatal conductance reduction

Water use efficiency increase

Increased recruitment Alterations in species competitiveness

Seed production increase

Period for individuals to reach maturity

Changes in species composition

Changes in individual density?

Tem

per

atu

re in

crea

se

Photosynthesis increase or decrease

Primary production positive or negative changes

Regeneration rate changes Alterations in species competitiveness

Photosynthetic period can increase

Seed production changes Possible increase in tree mortality Changes in species composition

Transpiration increase Negative consequences for species sensitive to temperature changes

Soil mineralization increase

Rai

nfa

ll

regi

me

chan

ges

Growth rate decrease Seed mortality rate increase

Alterations in species competitiveness

Increase of mature individuals’ mortality rate

Species composition changes

Source: Meer, Kramek and Wjik (2001). The socioeconomic impacts of these changes in tropical forests have not yet been quantified. However, the following potential impacts on trade of forest goods and services can be listed:


21

- decrease in timber production as a result of increased extreme events such as forest

fires, hurricanes, flooding and droughts; - decrease in timber production due to changes in ecosystems and increased pests; - changes in the quality of timber; - changes in the regional distribution of timber species; - impacts on the ability of some species designed for productive plantations to maintain

their growth rate and wood quality over the next 30 - 50 years; - indirect impacts on the timber chain due to changes in quantity and quality of timber

offer; - impacts on the availability and quality of forest ecosystem services; - impacts on forests-dependant livelihoods; and - changes in land use due to an increasing demand for agricultural land.

3 International Climate Policy Evidence of human interference with the climate first emerged in 1979 at the First World Climate Conference. Increased scientific evidence, coupled with growing public concern over global environmental issues began to push climate change onto the political agenda in the mid-1980s. Recognizing the needs of policymakers for authoritative and up-to-date scientific information, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 19882.

In 1990, the IPCC issued its First Assessment Report, confirming that climate change is a threat and calling for a global policy to tackle the problem. This call was echoed by the Ministerial Declaration of the Second World Climate Conference, held in Geneva at the end of 1990. Based on this Declaration, the UN general Assembly formally launched the negotiations on a framework convention on climate change. After 15 months of intergovernmental negotiation, governments adopted the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in May 1992. The Convention was opened to signature in June 1992 during the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro and came into force in March 1994. Today, 186 countries have signed and ratified the Convention.

The Convention’s goal is to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of GHG at a level that would prevent human-induced actions from leading to “dangerous interference” with the global climate system. The UNFCCC acknowledges that countries have “common but differentiated responsibilities” and different capabilities to address climate change. Under such premises, developed countries have engaged themselves to take a leading role in achieving the Convention’s goal. To assist developing countries in mitigation and adaptation activities, developed countries agreed to provide new and additional funds. Mitigation and adaptation activities must be consistent with and supportive of sustainable development objectives. Scientific uncertainties that might still remain cannot be used as an argument to postpone action (“precautionary principle”).

Members meet once a year in the Conference of the Parties (COP) to monitor implementation of the UNFCCC and to continue negotiations on how best to tackle climate change.

2 Until now the IPCC has produced three assessment reports, a special report on Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry and several specific guidelines in respect to climate change and natural resources.


22

The UNFCCC agreed on two main strategies to address climate change: mitigation and adaptation. These strategies are complementary and non-exclusive.

Mitigation refers to an anthropogenic intervention to reduce the emission of GHG at the source or to enhance sinks (IPCC, 2001). At the third COP, held in Kyoto in 1997, the Parties to the Convention adopted a protocol aimed at paving the way for emission reduction in Annex I countries until 20123. This instrument is known as the Kyoto Protocol (see figure 1). Adaptation to climate change refers to adjustments in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderate, harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including anticipatory and reactive adaptation, private or public adaptation and autonomous or planned adaptation. Fig 1: Strategies, Instruments and Approaches to tackle Climate Change

4 Adaptation Progress in addressing adaptation has been slower than for mitigation. As part of their First National Communication, Parties have defined their vulnerability to climate change, and many countries have established that the forest sector is vulnerable. At COP-9, the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) was required to initiate work on scientific, technical and socioeconomic aspects of, and vulnerability and adaptation to, climate change. In response, the UNFCCC Secretariat planned a workshop held during the SBSTA meeting of June 2004. During this first meeting, three themes were explored, namely vulnerability and risks, sustainable development, and solutions

3 Annex I countries are Parties that have emission reduction commitments (mainly industrialized countries). A list of Annex I countries is provided in the annex to this publication.


23

and opportunities. Forestry is among the sectors that were included in the workshop the June 2004 WKSP. As the first workshop delivered important insides the Secretariat now regularly organizes a workshop on vulnerability and adaptation as part of the usual agenda of the SBSTA. Other issues considered in these workshops over time have been social issues in adapting, the role of technology transfer and costs of adapting to climate change (for more information see the corresponding web pages as http://unfccc.int/meetings/sb22/in_session_workshops/items/3443.php ) In parallel to the UNFCCC process, some multilateral organizations, research institutions and NGOs have been working on forests and adaptation to climate change (see Robledo and Forner 2004, IISD/IUCN/SEI-B/Intercooperation 2003, Robledo and Tipmann 2004). On one hand, tropical forests are likely to be subject to negative impacts from climate change. On the other hand, projects on sustainable forest management can reduce the vulnerability of natural and social systems. Guidance, methodologies and tools for sustainable forestry and adaptation to climate change are being developed. In this regard, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in a joint effort with Intercooperation and co-financed by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) have recently published the “Adaptation of forest ecosystems and the forest sector to climate change” (Robledo and Forner, 2004). This document summarizes information that facilitates the definition and formulation of policies and projects aimed at decreasing vulnerability to climate change, with special emphasis on forest ecosystems and the social groups that depend on them. It emphasizes that adaptation to climate change must be part of a country’s development process, and that every adaptation action should be framed within the national development policies. Initially the document introduces the topic of climate change in the context of international policy-making, its relationship to sustainable development, and the most important environmental conventions of the United Nations organizations. It then provides a theoretical basis for responding to the problem of climate change, starting with a summary of the scientific knowledge accumulated so far. It also presents a description and analysis of positive and negative impacts deriving from a changing climate, with emphasis on forest ecosystems. The chapter includes a summary of methodologies for vulnerability analysis. The next chapter focuses on the challenges for institutional development at the national level, including the importance of adaptation policy as the framework for actions aimed at decreasing vulnerability. Further, the document presents stages in the process of adapting to climate change and their concrete application in the forest sector. It then focuses on projects for each stage of the adaptation process. It presents examples of potential projects that cover the national, sub-national and very local levels. A methodology for formulating such projects is also described. Finally it deals with financing. It considers the limitations of UNFCCC and widens the spectrum to include all those entities and financial mechanisms that are interested in sustainable forest management. The linkage between mitigation and adaptation in forestry should also be considered. In addition to their role in mitigation, CDM projects in forestry can contribute to reduce vulnerability. However, in many areas, some species planted today could be highly vulnerable to climate change in some decades. CDM activities in forestry should therefore consider climate change scenarios.


24

5 The Clean Development Mechanism and Forestry

During the third COP, held in Kyoto in 1997, the Parties of the Convention adopted a protocol that aimed to pave the way for emission reduction in Annex I countries. This document is known as The Kyoto Protocol.

The Kyoto Protocol defines two main ways to achieve emission reductions: internal measures taken in the Annex I countries and the flexible mechanisms. The latter allow Annex I countries to “buy” part of their reductions commitments in other countries. There are three such Flexible Mechanisms: Joint Implementation, Clean Development Mechanism and International Emission Trading4.

The Clean Development Mechanism has a twofold objective: on one side emission reduction from CDM projects shall help Annex I countries in fulfilling their reduction commitments. On the other these projects have to promote sustainable development in the host countries. Criteria and indicators to demonstrate sustainable development promotion shall be set by each host country and should be inline with its general development strategy. The eligibility, modalities and procedures for forestry activities under the CDM are ruled by the following decisions:

- “Marrakesh Accords”, COP-7, 2001 (FCCC/CP/2001/13) (UNFCCC 2001): o Dec. 11/CP7: “Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry” o Dec. 17/CP7: “Modalities and procedures for a clean development mechanism

as defined in Art. 12 of the Kyoto Protocol”

- COP-9, 2003 (FCCC/CP/2003/6) (UNFCCC 2004): o Dec. 19/CP9: “Modalities and procedures for afforestation and reforestation

project activities under the clean development mechanism in the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol”

- COP-10, 2004 (FCCC/CP/2004/10) (UNFCCC 2005):

o 13/CP.10 “Incorporation of the modalities and procedures for afforestation and reforestation project activities under the clean development mechanism into the guidelines under Articles 7 and 8 of the Kyoto Protocol”

o 14/CP.10 “Simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale afforestation and reforestation project activities under the clean development mechanism in the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and measures to facilitate their implementation”

o 15/CP.10 “Good practice guidance for land use, land-use change and forestry activities under Article 3, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Kyoto Protocol”.

- COP-11, 2005 (FCCC/CP/2005/10) (UNFCCC 2005):

4 Joint Implementation (Art. 6): “Any Party included in Annex I may transfer to, or acquire from, any other such Party emission reduction units resulting from projects aimed at reducing anthropogenic emissions by sources or enhancing anthropogenic removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in any sector of the economy…” Clean Development Mechanism (Art. 12): The purpose of the clean development mechanism shall be to assist Parties not included in Annex I in achieving sustainable development and in contributing to the ultimate objective of the Convention, and to assist Parties included in Annex I in achieving compliance with their quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments under Article 3. International Emission Trading (Art. 17): The Parties included in Annex B (~Annex I of the UNFCCC) may participate in emissions trading for the purposes of fulfilling their commitments under Article 3. Any such trading shall be supplemental to domestic actions for the purpose of meeting quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments under that Article.


25

o Decision -/CMP.1 “Simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale afforestation and reforestation project activities under the clean development mechanism in the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and measures to facilitate their implementation”

All these decisions were accepted by the first Meeting of the Parties (MOP), which took place in Montreal, Canada in December 2005. What are the implications of these decisions and guidance for participating in CDM projects? The most important elements of these decisions are:

- definition of the CDM market size for forestry activities; - definition of eligible forestry activities; - definition of the modalities and procedures for CDM projects in forestry; and - definition of small-scale projects and their first simplified methodology.

Market size In the Marrakesh Accords, the participation of forestry activities in climate change mitigation was restricted for internal measures in Annex I countries as well as for the CDM. Regarding the CDM, the market demand during the first commitment period (2008-2012) is restricted to one per cent of the emissions of each Annex I country in 1990, multiplied by five5.

Eligibility Several project activities are eligible under the CDM, both in the energy sector and LULUCF sector. Until 2012, eligible LULUCF activities under the CDM are restricted to afforestation and reforestation (see box 1). Activities in bioenergy are also eligible until 2012. Box 1: Key definitions under the UNFCCC

Forest is a minimum area of land of 0.05-1.0 hectares with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10-30 per cent with trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 2-5 meters at maturity in situ. A forest may consist either of closed forest formations where trees of various storeys and undergrowth cover a high proportion of the ground or open forest. Young natural stands and all plantations which have yet to reach a crown density of 10-30 per cent or tree height of 2-5 meters are included under forest, as are areas normally forming part of the forest area which are temporarily unstocked as a result of human intervention such as harvesting or natural causes but which are expected to revert to forest; Afforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of land that has not been forested for a period of at least 50 years to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources; Reforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of non-forested land to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources, on land that was forested but that has been converted to non-forested land. For the first commitment period, reforestation activities will be limited to reforestation occurring on those lands that did not contain forest on 31 December 1989.

Source: FCCC/CP/2001/13 (UNFCCC 2001)

5 For the first commitment period, the total of additions to a Party’s assigned amount resulting from eligible LULUCF project activities under Article 12 shall not exceed one per cent of base year emissions of that Party, times five (FCCC/CP/2001/13, Marrakesh Accords, Dec. 11/CP7) (UNFCCC 2001).


26

According to UNFCCC definitions, the following forestry activities could be interesting for reforestation and afforestation under the CDM: a) Plantations on non-forest land by 1990, including:

- monocultures - planting more species than planned without the carbon incentive; - extended rotation periods; and - bioenergy plantations.

b) Forest land restoration and rehabilitation c) Agroforesty activities d) Silvopastoral activities Modalities and procedures The modalities and procedures for the CDM define the project cycle and the requirements for each of the steps of the cycle. The CDM project cycle includes seven major steps: design; validation; registration; monitoring; verification; certification; and issuing of the CERs (see box 2). The cycle involves the participation of a relatively wide range of actors, including project developers, the National Authority, the Operational Entity, the CDM Executive Board and the Working Group on Afforestation and Reforestation Box 2 Steps of a CDM project activity

Validation is the process of independent evaluation of a proposed afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM by a designated operational entity (DOE) compared to the requirements of afforestation and reforestation project activities under the CDM. Registration is the formal acceptance by the Executive Board of a validated project as an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM. Registration is the prerequisite for the verification, certification and issuance of temporary CERs (tCERs) or long-term CERs (lCERs) relating to that project activity. Monitoring is the activity to control the implementation of the project activity against the documentation provided in the project design document (PDD) and produced during the design step. Verification is the periodic independent review and ex post determination by the DOE of the achieved net anthropogenic greenhouse gas removals by sinks, since the start of the project, by an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM. Certification is the written assurance by a DOE that an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM achieved the net anthropogenic greenhouse gas removals by sinks since the start of the project, as verified. Issuance refers to the actual emission of CERs. Source: FCCC/CP/2003/Add. 2, Dec 19/CP9

The CDM project cycle is very challenging. Experience has shown that due to complexity, CDM projects can have higher transaction costs than other activities related to forest products or services. Before a project can be validated, the methodologies used for baseline and monitoring have to be approved by the Executive Board. The approval process involves the


27

project proponents, one operational entity, the Working Group on Afforestation and Reforestation (ARWG) and the Executive Board (see figure 3) Figure 3: Process for approving a set of AR-CDM methodologies

Proponents: prepare/improve a new methodologies set:Baseline methodology, monitoring methodology and PDD

Operational Entity: Check the methodology for completeness

ARWG: Evaluates the proposed new methodologies

Executive Board

The validation process can start ONLY after a set of methodologies (baseline and monitoring) has been approved

Approve the new methodologies

UNFCCC Secretariat: proves for completeness

Re

com

men

da

tions

In order to be validated, project participants have to present a Project Design Document (PDD), which needs to provide enough information on additionality, permanence, leakage, definition of the carbon potential, and environmental and socioeconomic impacts (see box 3 and FCCC/CP/2003/Add. 2) Box 3: Some key elements to be included in the Project Design Document

Additionality means that an A/R CDM project has to be additional to any activity that would have taken place in the absence of the project. Additionality is the result of the carbon sinks created by the project (project scenario) minus those sinks that would exist in the absence of the project (baseline). Additionality refers only to the additional amount of CO2e sequestered due to the project activity. Permanence relates to the period of time that carbon can stay in the biosphere. Due to different risks, including fires and pests, carbon can be released into the atmosphere, thereby reducing the climate change mitigation effect of a project. To solve this problem, A/R CDM projects have to choose between temporary CERs (tCER) or long-term CERs (lCER). Leakage is the increase in GHG emissions by sources, which occurs outside the boundary of an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM, and which is measurable and attributable to the afforestation or reforestation project activity.


28

The carbon potential or net anthropogenic greenhouse gas removals by sinks is the actual net GHG removals by sinks minus the baseline net GHG removals by sinks minus leakage; Environmental and socioeconomic impacts. An A/R CDM project has to provide enough information on potential negative environmental and socioeconomic impacts. If any negative impact is considered significant by the project participants or the host Party, an impact assessment has to be conducted, and impacts have to be monitored during the project’s implementation.

Source: FCCC/CP/2003/6 (UNFCCC 2004)

Besides, the PDD shall include information on the legal title to the land, rights of access to the carbon, a detailed monitoring plan and information on sources of public funding for the project activity. The monitoring plan shall include: - collection and archiving of data on the GHG fluxes; - identification of potential leakages; - monitoring activities for potential socioeconomic and environmental impacts considered

as significantly negative; - changes that affect the legal title to the land or rights of access to the carbon pools; and - procedures for periodic calculations of GHG fluxes. Small-scale projects Small-scale project activities are defined as “those that are expected to result in net anthropogenic GHG removals by sinks of less than 8 Kilo tonnes of CO2 per year and are developed or implemented by low-income communities and individuals, as determined by the host Party. If a small-scale afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM results in net anthropogenic GHG removals by sinks greater than 8 Kilo tonnes of CO2 per year, the excess removals will not be eligible for the issuance of tCERs or lCERs” (FCCC/CP/2003/Add. 2, Dec. 19/CP9 and Dec.14/CP.10) (UNFCCC 2004). Small-scale projects were defined to promote participation of small-scale farmers and local communities in the CDM. These projects aim to improve the socioeconomic and environmental conditions of poor communities, which are currently implementing unsustainable land use practices on degraded land due to lack of knowledge or opportunities. For this reason small scale projects won’t pay the 2% foreseen for the Adaptation Fund. Simplified methodologies for small-scale reforestation and afforestation activities under the CDM were prepared by the ARWG and the Executive Board and agreed during the first MOP in December 2005. Table 2: Glimpse on CDM and forestry activities

Key issues Explanation

Eligible activities in LULUCF until 2012 Afforestation and reforestation (as defined in the UNFCCC)

Units Certified Emission Reduction (CER)

Size of the potential market (1% Annex I Country emissions in 1990)

Project cycle

1. Design 2. Validation 3. Registration 4. Implementation and monitoring 5. Verification 6. Certification 7. Issuance of the CERs


29

Key issues Explanation

Relevant decisions

Dec. 11/CP7 Dec. 17/CP7 Dec. 19/CP9 Dec. 14/CP10 Dec. 15/CP.10 Dec.-/CMP.1

Small-scale projects

Activities expected to result in carbon removals by sinks of less than 8 Kilo tonnes of CO2 per year and developed or implemented by low-income communities and individuals

At the moment we write this paper some methodologies for the definition of the baseline and for monitoring for full size projects have already been approved. Project proponents can download the approved methodologies from the web page reporting the meetings of the CDM Executive Board (http://cdm.unfccc.int/EB/Meetings), specifically under issues related to procedures for afforestation and reforestation project activities. Finally, it should be mentioned that during the last COP in Montreal, discussions on “avoiding deforestation” in non-Annex I countries started again. Parties and observers have been invited to develop proposals on the issue, which will be discussed during the next two years. Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry An important document regarding mitigation activities in the forest sector is the Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (GPG-LULUCF), prepared by the IPCC (IPCC, 2003). This document provides supplementary methods and good practice guidance for estimating, measuring, monitoring and reporting on changes in carbon stock and GHG emissions from LULUCF activities. The guidance is to be used for the definition of GHG national inventories and for the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. The GPG-LULUCF is designed to be consistent with other guidance from the IPCC. In this regard, even if the GPG-LULUCF takes into account frameworks related to forest and forestry developed by other institutions (e.g. FAO, CIFOR or ITTO), it defines its own framework. In order to use this guidance successfully, it is necessary to understand differences and similarities between IPCC definitions and other definitions. Chapter 2 of the GPG-LULUCF is a good entry point, which defines six categories of land in relation to which the guidance can be applied. These are forest land, cropland, grassland, wetlands, settlements and other land (see box 4). Box 4: Land use categories in the GPG-LULUCF

(i) Forest land This category includes all land with woody vegetation, consistent with thresholds used to define forest land in the national GHG inventory, sub-divided at the national level into managed and unmanaged, and also by ecosystem type as specified in the IPCC Guidelines (since forest management has a particular meaning under the Marrakesh Accords, a subdivision of managed forests as described in Chapter 4 of the GPG-LULUCF may be required). The category also includes systems with vegetation that currently fall below, but are expected to exceed, the threshold of the forest land category. (ii) Cropland This category includes land, and agro-forestry systems where vegetation falls below the thresholds used for the forest land category, consistent with the selection of national definitions.


30

(iii) Grassland This category includes rangelands and pasture land that are not considered as cropland. It also includes systems with vegetation that falls below the threshold used in the forest land category and are not expected to exceed, without human intervention, the threshold used in the forest land category. The category also includes all grassland from wild lands to recreational areas as well as agricultural and silvi-pastoral systems, subdivided into managed and unmanaged, consistent with national definitions. (iv) Wetlands This category includes land that is covered or saturated by water for all or part of the year (e.g. peatland) and that does not fall into the forest land, cropland, grassland or settlements categories. The category can be subdivided into managed and unmanaged according to national definitions. It includes reservoirs as a managed sub-division and natural rivers and lakes as unmanaged sub-divisions. (v) Settlements This category includes all developed land, including transportation infrastructure and human settlements of any size, unless they are already included in other categories. This should be consistent with the selection of national definitions. (vi) Other land This category includes bare soil, rock, ice, and all unmanaged land areas that do not fall into any of the other five categories. It allows the total of identified land areas to match the national area, where data are available. Carbon pools would not need to be addressed for this category, but the category is included for checking overall consistency of land area.

Source: IPCC, 2003

Further, Chapter 2 outlines three approaches for categorizing land areas using the categories defined previously. The approaches are basic land-use data, survey of land use and land-use change and geographically explicit land-use data. These approaches are not mutually exclusive and a mix of approaches can be used. Chapter 3 of the guidance provides advice on how to estimate emissions and removals of CO2 and non-CO2 GHG for two types of situations: those where land use remains the same over time; and those where land use changes to another category. Chapter 4 deals with supplementary methods and good practice arising from the Kyoto Protocol. It covers all activities under the Protocol, such as afforestation, reforestation and deforestation since 1990 (Art. 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol) as well as forest management, cropland management, management of grazing land and revegetation (Art. 3.4 of the Kyoto Protocol). Chapter 4 also provides advice on identifying project boundaries and sampling strategies for project activities under joint implementation as well as under the CDM. This makes Chapter 4 particularly important for designing, implementing and monitoring CDM project activities as well as for designing corresponding methodologies.

6 The situation of Africa Africa as continent is highly vulnerable to climate change. An analysis made by Intercooperation on behalf of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) illustrates that on one side the biophysical direct impacts of climate change, and specially those related to dramatic changes in rain patterns, will highly affect many African countries. Besides, and also of high relevance, the study points out that both the socio-economic and institutional structures in Africa are also highly vulnerable to changes in the climatic system


31

(Intercooperation, 2005). More detailed studies in e.g. Mali and Tanzania fully confirmed these results. In response to this dramatic situation, some African countries are preparing their National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA) with support from different multilateral institutions6. These NAPAs should identify priority activities that respond to their urgent and immediate needs with regard to adaptation to climate change. The rationale for NAPAs rests on the limited ability of LDCs to adapt to the adverse effects of climate change. In order to address the urgent adaptation needs of LDCs, a new approach was needed that would focus on enhancing adaptive capacity to climate variability, which itself would help address the adverse effects of climate change. The NAPA takes into account existing coping strategies at the grassroots level, and builds upon that to identify priority activities, rather than focusing on scenario-based modelling to assess future vulnerability and long-term policy at state level. In the NAPA process, prominence is given to community-level input as an important source of information, recognizing that grassroots communities are the main stakeholders. http://unfccc.int/adaptation/napas/items/2679.php With regard of the potential of the A/R CDM in Africa, the situation changes from country to country. In general terms, the major challenges are on the institutional side and as follows: for the NDAs there is a challenge in preparing the requirements for approving projects, in defining forest thresholds for each country and in defining “poor communities or individuals” for participating in the small scale projects (as required by Dec. 19/CP.9 and 14 CP.10). Further, issues related to land tenure can affect the participation of Africa in the A/R CDM as tenure and access to the carbon pools have to be clear in the PDD. This issue requires special attention as in many countries the offices responsible for the CDM do not belong to the same Ministry as the offices responsible for forest law enforcement. Therefore it is relevant to assist African countries in creating a coordinated institutional framework that promotes A/R CDM project activities. Some new and positive developments are worth mentioning here. In the past months, A/R CDM projects activities in 7 African countries have been included in the short list of the BioCarbon Fund (DR Congo, Madagascar, Niger, Ethiopia, Mali and Uganda). One project in Uganda has already signed the ERPA contract with the BCF. Further, the first validation process for 5 small-scale projects is going to take place very soon in Uganda. The Nile Basin Reforestation Project, which is an associated project to ENCOFOR ("ENvironment and COmmunity based framework for designing afFORestation, reforestation and revegetation projects in the CDM: methodology development and case studies"), will serve to meet the objective of expansion of the wood resources of Uganda. This expansion is crucial for the country to meet the growing national demand for wood resources and to reduce the pressure on the remaining natural forests in the region. Currently only a few thousand hectares of timber plantations remain in Uganda. The project will establish a plantation of pine and mixed native species in grassland areas within Rwoho Central Forest Reserve (for more information see http://www.joanneum.at/encofor/casestudies/uganda.html)

6 The following are the African countries included as LDCs and therefore those that can formulate a NAPA: Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Ruanda, São Tomé and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Togo, Uganda and the United Republic of Tanzania.


32

7 Looking forward

Regarding adaptation and forest ecosystems, there are new developments on the ground. A fast overview includes e.g. the “Tropical Forest, Climate Change and Adaptation” (TroFCCA). The project, which is implemented by CIFOR and CATIE is a research initiative on adaptation to climate change and the forest sector. During its four years (2005 – 2009), it expects to produce research relevant for policy processes in the countries where it will be implemented by:

Focusing its activities on development topics of regional/national priority and for which forests play a substantial role; these topics will be chosen in consultation with national governments and as part of a policy dialogue implemented through workshops.

Developing methodologies to assess vulnerability relating to the topics identified above.

Applying these methodologies to assess vulnerability to identify adaptation priorities.

Developing work on adaptation in conjunction with national partners, aimed at specifying adaptation needs and strategies in the context of the above development topics.

Identifying and developing ways to incorporate adaptation concerns into national policies, including sectoral ones.

Triggering innovative mechanisms to finance adaptation, like the participation of the private sector.

Establishing a regional policy dialogue to enhance regional cooperation on adaptation

Other initiatives such as the project on “Livelihoods and Climate Change” (IISD, Intercooperation, IUCN, SEI-B), are more focused on adaptation at the local level. This project is aimed at strengthening the role of ecosystem management and restoration (EM&R) activities in reducing the vulnerability of communities to climate-related hazards and climate change. A main output of this project is a community-based risk screening tool (CRiSTAL), which relates the livelihood approach and adaptation to climate change. In order to help project planners and managers to understand and enhance their project’s impacts on adaptive capacity, the tool is structured to: 1) set the climate context: identify the impacts of current climate hazards and climate change

in the project area, particularly on local livelihoods; 2) set the livelihood context: identify the resources needed to help people conduct their

livelihoods and cope with these impacts; 3) screen project activities: assess how project activities affect the availability and access to

resources that are central to livelihoods and coping strategies; 4) manage climate risk: adjust the project so that opportunities to enhance resource

availability / access are strengthened, and activities that undermine activities/access are adjusted.

These are just initial steps on the long road to enhance adaptation of forest ecosystems and forest dependent people to the impacts of climate change. All these efforts should be undertaken under a clear guidance of the principles and plans which each country has for sustainable development, as well as considering the specificities of each livelihood categories.


33

Only through coordination of inter-sectoral policies and with an understanding of macro-micro linkages will it be possible to increase resilience and adaptation capacities of natural and social systems. Regarding the potentialities for forestry due to the mitigation strategy it is important to recognise the development opportunities through the CDM. On one side, considering the difficulties to demonstrate the requirement of additionality, A/R CDM projects may not be large-scale traditional plantations. However, or perhaps because of these difficulties, other activities should be considered whereby opportunities, to create strategic partnerships between forest industry and local communities, could result in win-win situations (Robledo and Tipmann, 2004). The following examples illustrate some of these opportunities: a) Multi-component projects combining different activities and aimed at restoring or

rehabilitating forest land; b) Diversification of local income trough payment for the environmental service of

mitigating climate change; c) Bioenergy to increase productivity of the timber industry through the use of waste wood

and/or reduction of fuel wood consumption from natural forests as well as promoting bioenergy plantations on non forest land;

d) Reduction of conflicts with local communities through the promotion of partnerships between local communities (e.g. farmers, municipalities, indigenous peoples, etc…) and the timber industry);

e) Contribution to food security through activities in agroforestry and silvopasture on degraded land that can deliver important nutritional complements to local communities; and

f) Watersheds management: CDM payments could leverage projects for forests rehabilitation and restoration that have beneficial impacts on degraded watersheds.

The San Nicolas project in Colombia is a good example of a project with multiple positive effects. This project, financed by ITTO, CORNARE and EMPA7 is aimed at promoting sustainable forest management in an area of 72’000 ha. The project covers a CDM component (reforestation) and a non CDM component (forest restoration). A forest management plan has been agreed with the local community through a three year participative decision making process. The project has developed all the information required by the CDM and is currently presenting its own methodologies for approval. Besides, the project has implemented a capacity building programme that covers matters related to the CDM (e.g. biomass measuring or monitoring by community members), as well as techniques aimed to produce and commercialize many timber and non timber forest products (many NTFPs have been included due to their improvement in food sources for the local community). As a legal entity, the project created the Corporation MASBOSQUES. This is a public-private partnership that unites private sector, municipalities, research institutions, the local Catholic Church (with a high credibility in the region for conflict resolution matters) and more than 40’000 small farmers. MASBOSQUES developed a representation structure, agreed by all parties, which ensures that small farmers are key players in all decision-making processes. Additionally, each single farmer (without taking into account the size of his/her farm) can independently decide to participate in the CDM. This participation scheme used in the San Nicolas project has proved to reduce tensions in an area seriously affected by violence. The project has been included in the short list of candidates of the BioCarbon Fund.

7 ITTO: International Tropical Timber Organisation CORNARE: Autonomous Regional Corporation of the Rionegro-Nare Region EMPA: Swiss Federal Laboratory for Material Testing and Research


34

Even under the present situation, in which no project has yet been registered, the CERs market is slowly starting, specially due to the activities undertaken by some potential investors such as the funds developed by the World Bank (namely the Community Development Fund and the BioCarbon Fund). Additionally, it is expected that the CERs market will grow significantly before the end of the first commitment period in 2012. That let think This allows one to anticipate that the CDM can still represent an alternative for forestry projects that otherwise could never be implemented. An important fact in the development of A/R CDM projects is that the Executive Board (EB) of the CDM has already approved 4 methodologies for “full-scale” projects and the COP11 accepted the methodology for small-scale project activities. Further, the EB has approved some important clarifications on key issues such as eligibility tool, additionality tool, afforestation and reforestation in the baseline, etc. prepared by the Afforestation/reforestation Working Group. These methodologies and clarifications provide a framework for designing projects faster and more easily than previously. For more information see http://cdm.unfccc.int/Panels/ar Pilot projects should systematically search for and use synergies between mitigation and adaptation activities in such a way that projects have a measurable impact.


35

References Aukland, L, P. Moura-Costa, S. Bass, S. Huq, N. Landell-Mills, R. Tipper and R. Carr, 2002

“Colocando los cimientos para el MDL. Preparando al sector uso de la tierra. Una guía

rápida a los MDL”. IIED, Londres Not in text

J. O. Niles, S. Brown, J. Pretty, A. S. Ball and J. Fay 2002, „Potential carbon mitigation and

income in developing countries from changes in use and management of agricultural and

forest lands“. Contribution to the Special Theme Issue ‘Carbon, biodiversity, conservation

and income: an analysis of a free-market approach to land-use change and forestry in

developing and developed countries’. The Royal Society, 10.1098/rsta.2002.1023 Not in

text

IISD/IUCN/SEI-B/Intercooperation, 2003 2002 ?. “Climate change and livelihoods.

Combining disaster risk reduction, natural resource management and climate change

adaptation in a new approach to the reduction of vulnerability and poverty”.

ITTO, 2002. “ITTO Yokohama Action Plan 2002 – 2006”. Yokohama, Japan Not in text ?

IPCC, 2001: “Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

[Houghton, J.T., Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Nouguer, P.J. van der Linden, X. Dai, K.

Maskell, and C.a. Johnson (eds)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United

Kingdom and New Your, USA.

IPCC, 2003. “Good Practice Guidance for Land-Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry”. Draft

presented during the COP 9

Intercooperation, 2005. Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change and Climate

Variability: The role of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation. Report to

SDC, Bern. November, 2005

Jung, M. 2003. “The role of forestry sinks in the CDM – Analising the effects of policy

decisions on the carbon market” HWWA Discussion paper 241. Hamburgisches Welt-

Wirtschafts-Archiv. Hamburg Institute of International Economics. Hamburg, Germany.

Not in Text

Madlener, R, C Robledo, B. Muys, B. Héctor and J. Domac, 2003 “A sustainability

framework for enhancing the long-term success of LULUCF projects”. CEPE, working

paper 29. ETH Zentrum, Zürich. Not in text

Robledo, C and C. Forner, 2004 2005 ?: “Introducción a la adaptación de los ecosistemas

forestales y del sector forestal” Elaborado para la FAO, Borrador para comentarios.


36

Robledo, C. and R. Tippmann Tipper ?, 2004: “Opportunities and challenges for the timber

industry to participate in CDM activities”. Prepared for the FAO advisory committee on

paper and wood products. In print

Scherr, S; A. Khare and A. White, 2003: “Current status and future potential of markets for

ecosystem services of tropical forest”. Report prepared for ITTO. Forest Trends,

Washington. Not in text

Shin, S. 2003. “Kyoto-Protocoll, Wettbewerb- und WTO- Handelssystem“. HWWA

Discussion paper 215. Hamburgisches Welt-Wirtschafts-Archiv. Hamburg Institute of

International Economics. Hamburg, Germany Not in text

UNCTAD, 1994. “International Tropical Timber Agreement”. Not in text

UNFCCC, 2001. “Marrakech Accords”, FCCC/CP/2001/13/.

UNFCCC, 2002: Report of the Conference of the Parties on its eighth session and Delhi

Declaration, FCCC/CP/2002

UNFCCC, 2003. „Estimation, reporting and accounting of harvested wood products“.

FCCC/TP/2003/7

UNFCCC, 2004: Report of the Conference of the Parties on its ninth session,

FCCC/CP/2003/6

UNFCCC, 2005: Report of the Conference of the Parties on its tenth session, FCCC/CP/2004/10/ Wright, E. and J. Erickson, 2003. “Incorporating catastrophes into integrated assessment:

Science, impacts and adaptation” in Climate Change 57: 265 – 286. Kluwer Academic

Publishers, Netherlands. Not in text

UNFCCC (2003) Caring for climate not in bibliography, but in text Meer, Kramek and Wjik (2001). Not in Bibliography, but in text


37

Climate Change and Forests: Impact of international forestry processes on CDM forestry and on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation Blaser, Jürgen; Intercooperation This presentation begins by explaining the science of climate change including its causes and potential consequences worldwide. Based on these facts the speaker makes an emphasis on the urgency to act. Further, forest policies with special regard to those of the tropics are presented. Current forest policies show that a fundamental transition is underway. Key elements of such a transition are changes in forest ownership, changes in demand and supply, the growing value of forest ecosystem services and changes in forest administration. After a brief review of the international forest policy regimes, the speaker explains how, in spite of international agreements on important issues, there is still a lack of coherence. The fact that too many players coming from different communities of practice are involved in forest policy makes it also difficult to create a more coordinated regime. Further, the speaker analyses the role of forests in the UNFCCC negotiations. This section of the presentation considers the potential role of forest in reducing vulnerability and in increasing adaptation capacity, as well as the possibilities and limitations offered for forestry activities in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). At the end of his presentation the speaker introduces some considerations on the issue of reducing GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. The speaker explains the relevance that these emissions have in the context of climate change and also the important opportunity offered to the tropical forest in the new discussions within the UNFCCC.


38


39

The relationship between CDMs and National Forest Programmes Wencelius, Francois; FAO The speaker commences his presentation by explaining the potential relationship between the CDM – as a global mechanism – with the National Forest Programmes (NFPs) as a country’s specific process for policy formulation towards sustainable forest management. With this purpose, the speaker explains the principle and actions behind the NFPs. Based on this background, the speaker states that the NFP can be a good instrument for mainstreaming climate change into the national forest policies. He considers the NFP as an appropriate instrument for raising awareness in the forest sector with regard of the CDM, for solving CDM related conflicts in forestry and for engaging reforms in the forest sector, which are needed for using the CDM. Unfortunately this potential has not yet been fully used. Consequently, the speaker proposes some actions are needed to solve this difficulty. Some of these actions can be implemented though the activities of the NFP Facility, which is presented by the speaker in some detail. This inclusion of the CDM in the NFPs is possible because activities in the NFP Facility are mainly determined by partners. It means that, if requested by a country, CDM issues could be considered in the National Forest Programme. Therefore, based on the specific requirement of a given country, the NFP Facility can clearly contribute to mainstream climate change issues into the national forest policy.


40


41

The Role of CDM Forestry Projects in Poverty Alleviation Karnosky, David F.; Michigan Technological University The first part of this presentation offers a general view on key elements for linking CDM to poverty alleviation. Afterwards, the speaker shows some cases studies from Ghana. The presentation starts introducing different institutions or initiatives worldwide that are interested in CDM forestry and as a mean for poverty alleviation. Next, the speaker shows the poverty indices for Western Africa. Bearing this information in mind, he illustrates his reasoning for CDM reforestation as a means for poverty alleviation in this region, which covers different elements such as the high percentage of poor among rural communities, the dependency of the poor on natural resources and non-sustainable management practices. In this context, the CDM can be an important mechanism for alleviating poverty if a multifunctional approach is used that combines carbon credits with forestry production and agroforestry. Subsequently, the speaker summarizes the conditions needed for a successful CDM in Western Africa as well as its challenges and opportunities. Two concrete case studies are presented including experiences and lessons learned:

1. Kranka, mahogany mixed with food crops 2. Samartex, Oda Community Agroforestry Project, including ITTO sponsored

Mahogany silviculture.


42


43

Procedures, Modalities and Legal Aspects Robledo, Carmenza; Intercooperation. and

Approved Methodologies and EB clarifications for CDM Forestry Projects, with special consideration of the simplified methodology for small-scale project activities. Galinski,Wojciech; UNFCCC Secretariat. These two presentations are aimed at clarifying the set of rules, modalities and procedures for forestry activities in the CDM, as well as explaining some key issues of the methodologies approved by the Executive Board of the CDM for afforestation and reforestation project activities. Initially some indicative data on carbon in tropical forestry are provided. The presentations then explain the regulatory framework for forestry activities in the CDM and the CDM project cycle. Subsequently, the presentations provide a detailed explanation on the key elements of Decision 19/CP.9 “Modalities and procedures for afforestation and reforestation project activities within the CDM”. These elements are: eligibility of land, eligible activities, additionality, baseline, leakage and permanence. Finally, the presentations describe the four approved methodologies for “large” projects and the simplified methodology for small scale projects (those below 8 KTonne C average sequestration per year).


44

Session 2: Experiences, lessons and challenges from CDM projects

45

Session 2: Experiences, Lessons and Challenges from CDM Projects


46

Portfolio of Projects in Africa Julie Fischer; UNDP The presentation begins with an overview of the UNDP activities in Africa. UNDP has a portfolio of $300 million of projects in the Sustainable Land Management area – of which $118 million is funded through the GEF and remainder through grants provided by donors, International NGOs, and governments. The portfolio focuses equally on capacity building and on field-level investments. About 20% of the portfolio addresses forestry related issues, 20% focuses on rangelands, and 30% on croplands. An additional 10% covers all three landscapes in an integrated fashion. The remainder of the projects are either global in nature (focusing on knowledge management) or target capacity building. The forestry projects cover a diversity of issues, among them: community-based forest management, co-management of natural reserves, restoration of degraded forests and forest policy reform. After this overview the speaker presented the following four UNDP forestry projects in more detail:

Morocco – “Restoring the environmental functions, ecological integrity and socioeconomic services of Middle-Atlas forest landscapes”

Zambia – “Sustainable land management in miombo woodlands” Mozambique – “Reducing land degradation through sustainable forest management in

Cabo Delgado Province” Kenya – “Improving land use management for livelihood enhancement and

environmental protection in the Dryland Forests” At the end the speaker presented some conclusions concerning the CDM replication potential of UNDP projects.


47


48

Defining “Forest” for the Clean Development Mechanism Dieter Schoene, FAO This presentation starts by explaining the issues that each country has to consider in order to fix the thresholds for “forest” in the CDM. The speaker then explains some important ambiguities that need to be overcome before deciding on the definition. Some of these ambiguities (e.g. “what is a tree?”) are a consequence of the definition of forest provided by the decision in the Kyoto Protocol. Subsequently the speaker elaborates a process proposed for facilitating this decision making. This process has 8 steps, which are clarified in detailed:

1. Define policy objectives 2. Match project types 3. Optimal crown cover, height? 4. Prior vegetation parameters? 5. Rank by policy relevance 6. Choose feasible combinations 7. Choose optimal crown cover and height 8. Select area threshold


49


50

Choosing a Forest Definition for the Clean Development Mechanism

Till Neeff; FAO Heiner von Luepke; FAO Dieter Schoene; FAO Developing countries must define “forest” before they can host afforestation and reforestation projects under the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol. To do so, they must chose country-specific values from a range provided in the Marrakech Accords for minimum area, crown cover and tree height. Good practice involves choosing a minimum strip width. Definitions in the Marrakech Accords and in the IPCC Good Practice Guidance leave some ambiguities. Existing country definitions of “forest” do not contain all or, sometimes, any quantitative parameters; simply adopting them for the CDM is not an option. Therefore, all developing countries vying for forestry projects under the CDM will have to choose parameter values. Only few have done so. Parameter values affect land eligibility for the CDM, feasibility of project types and the match with national policy goals. Choosing parameter values that maximize eligibility and feasibility may conflict with those that match economic and socio-environmental expectations. Given a multitude of goals and project types, a large spectrum of soils, sites, current land-uses and ownership patterns, there are no generally valid, optimal choices. A stepwise decision process and simple graphical techniques provided here may aid Non Annex I (NAI) countries in choosing optimal parameter values for the forest definition. Forest, Afforestation and Reforestation as Defined for the Clean Development Mechanism The Kyoto Protocol limits carbon sequestration projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) during the first Commitment Period to afforestation and reforestation (A&R). The Marrakech Accords define: “Afforestation” is the direct human-induced conversion of land that has not been forested for a period of at least 50 years to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources; “Reforestation” is the direct human-induced conversion of non-forested land to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources, on land that was forested but that has been converted to non-forested land. For the first commitment period, reforestation activities will be limited to reforestation occurring on those lands that did not contain forest on 31 December 1989 [FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.1]. Most projects are expected to involve reforestation (Dutschke 2002), necessitating proof that forest land was converted to non-forest land use before 1990. Therefore, the definition of “forest” is crucial for the prior and contemplated future state of the land within the prospective project boundary.


51

For the CDM, developing countries must choose the parameter values from the ranges8: “Forest” is a minimum area of land of 0.05-1.0 hectares with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10-30 per cent with trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 2-5 metres at maturity in situ. A forest may consist either of closed forest formations where trees of various storeys and undergrowth cover a high proportion of the ground or open forest. Young natural stands and all plantations which have yet to reach a crown density of 10-30 per cent or tree height of 2-5 meters are included under forest, as are areas normally forming part of the forest area which are temporarily unstocked as a result of human intervention, such as harvesting or natural causes, but which are expected to revert to forest; [FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.1] Alternate values for definition parameters can have significant impacts. When FAO redefined forest between the 1990 and 2000 Forest Resource Assessments, reducing minimum height from 7 to 5m, area from 1.0 to 0.5 ha and crown cover from 20% in developed and 10% in developing countries to a uniform 10% for all, global forest area as a result increased by 300 Million ha or approximately 10% (FAO, 2000a). The selection of the forest definition is binding only for the first Commitment Period, 2008-2012. Even countries with very diverse ecosystems must choose one set of parameters for their entire territory9. “Forest” is not defined by land use, but rather by the current or expected physical properties of vegetation cover (Verchot et al. 2005). Even land cover systems that are not intuitively perceived as forests may qualify, e.g. orchards, oil palms, trees planted in shelter belts in fields, along riversides or highways, as well as urban tree plantings (Dutschke 2002). Therefore, a wealth of possible projects arises beyond usual forest plantations. As of September 15, 2006, nineteen NAI countries had reported their forest definitions. In many other countries, discussions have begun. Given that CDM projects can start anytime and that competition among host countries will be intense, countries must decide as soon as possible. Remaining Ambiguities of Definitions The definition of a tree: The Marrakech Accords (MA) do not define a tree. According to FAO, a tree is: “a woody perennial with a single main stem, or, in the case of coppice, with several stems, having a more or less definite crown; includes bamboos, palms and other woody plants meeting the above criteria” (FAO 2005). Banana plantations would not qualify as forests, even though the constraints of minimum height, area and crown cover might be satisfied. Conversely, oil-palm plantations, bamboos, or fruit orchards may be eligible if they match the definition. Potential vegetative cover: The forest definition refers to potential features of trees, leaving space for a wide range of possible interpretations. Even temporarily unstocked or under-stocked areas could be forests, as long as they are “expected” to attain the thresholds for crown cover or tree height at maturity. The definition probably does not refer to long-term potential natural vegetation, since this would render most lands forests. On the other hand, 8 The IPCC Good Practice Guidance stipulates selecting in addition a minimum strip width for “linear forests”. (IPCC, 2003). FAO uses a threshold of 20 m. However, since the Marrakech Accords only list crown cover, tree height and area, the UNFCCC records country definitions only following those parameters. 9 In some countries where landscape is highly variable, this might not be adequate (Dutschke 2002). Therefore, countries have discussed the introduction of biome-specific forest definitions; however, there are technical challenges (Rakonczay 2002). For now, the issue was deferred to be considered as an option for later CPs ?? only (FCCC/SBSTA/2004/L.26).


52

continuous suppression of natural regeneration due to grazing, or the reduction in size of trees due to pruning in some agroforestry systems, would render these permanently “non-forest”. Trees established on a degrading site may also never reach the predicted threshold for height. Reforestation occurs only on “lands that did not contain forest on 31 December 1989”. If forests regenerated naturally after 1990 on such land, a potential must already have existed before 1990. This issue of land eligibility was one of the reasons for the rejection of the first submitted CDM-AR project methodologies by the UNFCCC. Measures of stand height and crown cover: The MA do not define which measure of tree or stand height among those commonly used in forestry, e.g. mean height, top height, is to be applied. The differences between these measures can reach several meters (Prodan, 1965). Crown cover, as used in the MA forest definition, is correctly defined as the percentage of the ground covered by a vertical projection of the outermost perimeter of the natural spread of the foliage of plants, which cannot exceed 100%. It is synonymous with canopy cover (IPCC, 2003). However, crown density as applied in the MA forest definition, or crown closure as used in the IPCC GPG ?? refer to different concepts (Helms, 1998). Size of spatial assessment units: The MA contain minimum forest area as a parameter, but for developing countries no spatial assessment unit for crown cover. Consistency with the chosen minimum forest area is not required10. By choosing the assessment area sufficiently large, an area could conceivably contain a significant number of trees without being considered a forest, as long as the mean crown cover remains below the minimum value. Pre-existing patches of trees could be cleared before establishing a project without formally undertaking deforestation (Neeff 2005). Human-induced promotion of natural seed sources: While planting and seeding represent accepted forestry terminology, the term “human–induced promotion of natural seed sources” does not. It could be misunderstood and appears to reflect intended ambiguity about the eligibility, under the Kyoto Protocol, of natural succession to trees. Some tree species propagate, naturally or assisted by humans, not from seed, but through branch layering or new shoots rising on rhizomes (e.g. bamboo) or roots (e.g. Populus tremula, Robinia pseudacacia). Taking the definition literally, any assisted natural succession to trees on non-forest lands by these mechanisms would not constitute afforestation or reforestation. FAO defines “natural expansion of forest” as “expansion of forests through natural succession on land that, until then, was under another land use”. In using this term and requiring human intervention, e.g. by fencing against grazing or browsing or site preparation, the intent of the KP would be expressed unambiguously. Temporarily unstocked lands: Temporarily unstocked areas form part of a forest. However, “temporary” remains undefined in the Marrakech Accords. FAO has at times considered an unstocked area non-forest, if it is not expected to revert to trees within a period of 10 years (FAO, 2000). Considering Existing National Definitions In many cases, national forest definitions reflect specific biophysical and social conditions of countries; they are anchored in history, law and forestry practice. Applying such a national definition to the CDM would be simple, consistent, assure the legal status of project areas and link them to existing databases. However, while some national forest definitions resemble or

10 The Annex I countries have to choose and report spatial assessment units for application in the context of 3.3/3.4 activities (22/CP.7), which have to be consistent with the minimum forest area (4.2.2.3, GPG-LULUCF).


53

equal those of the KP or FAO, most countries’ definitions do not quantify some or any parameters. Therefore, national definitions can not be transposed in most instances. Types of national forest definitions in NAI countries Of the 122 NAI countries which also reported their definitions to FAO, 44 countries employ functional definitions only, referring to ecological zones, forest types and land use. Forty countries used at least one quantitative threshold to define forest nationally. 21 countries applied the FAO forest definition. 17 did not define forests nationally and none of the NAI countries had a complete set of forest parameter values that could directly be used for the CDM11. Therefore, all NAI countries opting for forestry CDM projects will have to define a set of values. For the Global Forest Resource Assessment 2005, the most widely used parameters were, in descending order, minimum canopy cover, minimum height and minimum area (FAO 2005). Values used most often correspond to values employed by the FAO forest definition i.e., minimum height 5 m, canopy cover 10%, and minimum area 0.5 ha (Figure 1).

crown cover (%)

0 20 40 60 80

Nu

mb

er

of

cou

ntr

ies

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

minimum height(m)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Nu

mb

er

of

cou

ntr

ies

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

minimum area (ha)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Nu

mb

er

of

cou

ntr

ies

0

2

4

6

FAO

FAO

FAO

Figure 1: Distribution of parameter values for crown cover, height and area in national definitions of NAI-countries and FAO parameters.

Choosing Parameter Values The following ten steps may facilitate the choice of parameter values for the forest definition:

1. Formulate country-specific policy objectives for the CDM in forestry;

2. Identify project types, e.g. planted forests, agro-forest practices, urban tree plantations that match these policy objectives and rank by priority;

3. For all contemplated project types, identify a range of feasible and optimal parameter values for height and crown cover;

4. From local knowledge or geographic information systems, delineate project areas that appear promising ex ante;

5. For these areas, collect relevant data, e.g. land-use patterns, characteristic height and canopy cover values for classes of prior vegetative cover, ownership sizes, sequestration potential, opportunity costs, product markets, social and environmental conditions and local stakeholder attitudes;

11 In many cases, there were several differentiated definitions for specific forest types, e.g. dense forests, open forest, forest-grasslands, or degraded forests. In these cases, thresholds were combined following personal judgement.


54

6. Based on this assessment, identify prime areas for afforestation and reforestation CDM projects and rank prior land cover classes to be converted by priority;

7. For these classes, identify parameter values that would preclude the existing vegetative cover from being considered as “forest” ex ante;

8. Step 7 and 3 will indicate unfeasible combinations of prior conditions and project types; methods for this crucial step are described below;

9. Establish feasible prior conditions-project type combinations and chose optimal parameter values for height and crown cover;

10. Select minimal area based on ownership patterns and parcel size distribution of ownerships.

Currently, detailed information on the prior state of vegetative cover, such as canopy cover, tree heights, forest fragmentation or parcel sizes is missing for large parts of the world (Indonesia, 2002). Remote sensing with a resolution necessary for quantifying such measures is economically unfeasible (Dutschke, 2002). Information on growth, yield, wood density, biomass functions and sequestration potential is also lacking for many prospective project types (Rakonczay, 2002). Hence, expert judgment may have to substitute for firm data; decisions will have to be taken often under uncertainty. While mathematical decision making models for an optimal choice of minimum parameter values in the forest definition exist, e.g. linear programming, Bayesian decision analysis or simulation, data requirements for these models are unlikely to be met, and the effort of establishing them might be disproportionate to prospective benefits for countries. The following elaborates individual steps in the decision process described above, and illustrates policy objectives, prior land cover classes, and common project types and simple graphical techniques to arrive at an optimal solution. Furthering national policy objectives with the CDM International climate change agreements and the CDM will not be a panacea for funding problems in land use and forestry, but they can provide new incentives to employ afforestation and reforestation as a tool to further sustainable development. In this context, countries may see a role for the CDM in achieving a wide range of policy goals. They might seek to maximize eligible area for the CDM to expand the resource base for domestic forest industries through plantations or rehabilitation, or for renewable wood energy. They might perceive CDM forestry projects not only under the aspect of climate change mitigation, but also as a means for adapting to climate change, enhancing development and food security for smallholders or rural communities. Under the rules for the CDM, afforestation could well serve the goal of increasing livelihoods and human well-being in urban centres or agricultural landscapes. The protective function of new forests for biodiversity, soils and water might be as important in some landscapes as the carbon they accumulate. Accommodating prior site conditions The Global Forest Resource Assessment 2000 (FAO, 2001) provides a distribution of prior land cover classes for the pan-tropics and permits establishing actuarial transition probabilities to plantations (Table 1).


55

Table 1: Transitions to plantations 1990 -2000 for the pan-tropics (FAO, 2001)

Transition to plantation from land cover class

Million ha in the year 2000

%

Closed forest 1.9 37

Open forest 0 0

Fragmented forest 0.2 4

Long fallow 0.2 3

Short fallow 0.4 7

Shrubs 0.2 4

Other land cover classes 2.3 45

In the past, plantations have replaced mostly closed forests or non- forestry land uses. The stringent restrictions imposed by CDM rules and modalities prevent closed forests, and most open forests and long fallows from being converted to plantations. Only the following land cover classes could conceivably furnish sites for afforestation and reforestation under CDM: Fragmented forests: In 2000, FAO identified a total of 223 Million ha of such forests. Individual fragments of the original forest are likely to exceed any threshold for height. Forest fragments in human-dominated landscapes, tend to be below one ha in size (Laurance, 2005), Given a goal to render such lands eligible for CDM projects, e.g. to reconnect scattered parcels of remaining forests, a low minimum area could render interstices between fragments eligible for projects and preserve existing fragments. Alternatively, a large assessment unit combined with a high minimum crown cover might keep average canopy cover over the entire project area below a high threshold value and render the entire area eligible for A&R. Open forests with crown cover below 30%: FAO defines open forests as having a canopy cover of between 10% and 40% and inventoried 290 Million ha of these by the year 2000. Conceivably, some open forests, e.g. very severely degraded natural forests, could be eligible for A&R projects, if countries use the upper limit of the available range to define a forest and if these lands would not naturally revert to the forest stage. Short fallows: In 2000, FAO surveyed 147 Million ha of such lands in the tropics. With the short return time to agriculture, the fraction of parcels with woody vegetation is smaller than in long fallow lands, and fields predominate. The system might conceivably not be considered as forest or reverting to forest, if average height of regenerating tree species or average canopy cover over an assessment unit is expected to remain below thresholds. In most cases, however, individual parcels of these lands will have been forest after 1990 and will not be eligible for the CDM. Shrubs: In 2000, shrub lands made up 151 Million ha in the tropics alone and 1’300 Million ha globally. Such lands are dominated by woody perennial plants, generally more than 0.5 m and less than 5 m high at maturity without a definite crown. Land may contain scattered and clustered trees. To exclude the risk that such lands could be forests under the Protocol, thresholds for crown cover of trees and minimum height should be at the upper boundary. Clearly, shrub lands on better sites could present a large potential source of lands for the CDM. Other land cover with less than 10% woody vegetation: Irrespective of the minimum parameter values chosen for area, crown cover and height, there is no risk that land under this


56

category might be forests ex ante. Parameter value choice can focus on prerequisites for desirable project types instead. In 2000, such lands amounted to 1’017 Million ha in the pan tropics. Facilitating project types Major potential project types include those listed below (see Figure 1). Agroforestry Agroforestry practices are diverse in their woody and herbal components, management and biophysical settings (Montagnini and Nair, 2004), but total system productivity will depend strongly on crown-cover (Kant, 2005). Introducing a small tree component into denuded, purely agricultural landscapes to establish some agroforestry practices (Pancel, 1993; Appendix 1), such as protein banks for animal fodder, multipurpose trees on croplands, trees on rangelands, estate crop trees with pasture, or trees for soil conservation and reclamation would necessitate a relatively low canopy cover threshold in order to avoid productivity losses for the agricultural components of the systems. Other agroforestry practices with a more substantial woody component, such as Taungya systems, tree gardens, or some estate crop combinations operate optimally with higher tree stocking and would be feasible as afforestation projects even under prior conditions that include scattered trees with a crown cover at or above 10%. Agroforestry practices that produce fodder through browsing, fuel wood through coppicing, or hedgerows and alley cropping practices employing smaller trees all require a low threshold for height to qualify ex post as forests. Choosing a small minimum forest area would facilitate smallholder participation. For living fences, shelterbelts, windbreaks, woody hedgerows selecting a low strip width would maximize eligibility, unless minimum crown cover requirements are met at the assessment unit level. Urban forestry Urban forestry can take very diverse forms and shapes; possible project types for the CDM could range from afforestation on relatively large surfaces, where the choice of the forest parameters is not critical, to small scale plot, strip- and alley planting. To reach “forest” status for the latter type of urban greening, thresholds for crown cover, minimum area and height should be at the lower end of the ranges. Productive plantations In the most typical case, large productive plantations are established with fast-growing tree species on shrub lands, short fallows, cropland or grazing land of good site quality. Fragmented and severely degraded forests with low height and sparse crown cover which are not expected to revert to high forests might also be converted. After conversion, the planted forest will typically quickly attain 30% crown cover, and 5 m height. A high value for crown cover (30%) and height should be chosen for the land to be eligible ex ante (Kant, 2005). Protective plantations On the other hand, choosing a minimum crown cover and low heights at maturity might be optimal for protective plantations close to the natural timberlines in mountains, under boreal conditions (Köhl, 2000), or in dry lands, where timber quality is not the concern. Such


57

protective plantations could be effective even if small; a low area threshold may therefore be indicated. Permanent tree crops and wood-energy plantations A low value for minimum height may be necessary to ensure that bio-energy plantations or agricultural systems involving crops from small trees are eligible. Oil-producing tree species, such as olives are often cut back severely in order to increase yields and to facilitate harvesting of the fruits. Small-scale afforestation and reforestation Projects under this special category, created by Parties specifically for low income individuals and communities in support of rural livelihoods, could comprise a total area of from less than 100 ha up to 4000 ha and any project type described above. However, in order to facilitate “bundling” of small-holder plots, minimum area needs to reflect prevailing parcel size distributions. In many regions, small-holder farms could only participate if low area thresholds are chosen. Integrating Prior Site Conditions and Project Types

Figure 2

% crown cover

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

he

igh

t (m

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

prior stand and priorityposteror stand and priority

Figure 3

% crown cover0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

he

igh

t (m

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

height'

height''

NOTE: last line in box should read posterior not posteror Figures 3 and 4 2 and 3? : Comparing prior and posterior stand parameters; see text for explanation. Contrasting prior land cover characteristics with feasible parameter values for contemplated project types helps to eliminate unfeasible options and facilitates the choice of the lower boundaries for crown cover and height, as illustrated in Figures 2 and 3. Paired values of crown cover and height of typical existing stands for a hypothetical landscape of heavily fragmented and degraded forests are plotted. Feasible values for height and crown cover of the contemplated plantations are also plotted. Plot symbols express by their relative size the rank, value or/or utility of prior and posterior stand types for policy goals. Vertical and horizontal dotted lines represent minimum values. Numbering the quadrants formed by these intersecting lines clockwise, lines should be chosen so as to maximize the number (or area / utility) of existing stand types in quadrants one, three, and


58

four, while simultaneously maximizing the number (area, value, utility) of contemplated stand types in quadrant two. Figure 2 depicts prior stand characteristics of hypothetical heavily fragmented, degraded remnants of a forest, and stand characteristics for productive plantations. On all lands, the plantations are feasible, a crown cover of 30% and a minimum height of 2 m would be the optimal choice, maximizing available area. Figure 3 represents a hypothetical intensively managed short fallow landscape to be utilized for sustainable agroforestry practices with a low component of trees. A minimal crown cover of 30% and the largest possible value for height of 5 meter (“height”) maximize eligibility of existing lands for the CDM. However, with those parameter values, only a single agro forest practice, which is also not the most desirable (Quadrant 2), could be established on eligible land. Selecting a lower thresholds for height of 2m (“height’’) would not affect land availability, but would increase availability of agroforestry options, include project types of greatest utility and, therefore, represent a better choice. Integrating parcel size distribution

Cumulative frequency distribution of parcel size

parcel size (ha)

0 1 2 3 4 5

cum

ula

tive

fre

qu

ency

(%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

parcel sizecumulative frequency minimum area 1 ha

Figure 4: Establishing parcel size distribution by the scarce data method

ordered parcel

size rank

percentile of the

distribution 0.01 1 9.09 0.03 2 18.18 0.04 3 27.27 0.50 4 36.36 0.60 5 45.45 0.60 6 54.54 0.80 7 63.63 1.20 8 72.72 2.00 9 81.81 4.50 10 90.90

The parameter value for the definition of minimum area may strongly influence participation by rural people in areas where small-holders prevail. However, in many developing countries records to establish a distribution of the size of individual holdings may not be readily available. Expert estimates may substitute for objective data. An easily applied and quite reliable sampling method is the “scarce data method” (Snedecor and Cochran, 1978; Schoene, 1983). According to this method, the “k” th observation in a random sample of “n” values which have been ordered by size is an estimator of the “k/n+1” th percentage of the underlying cumulative frequency distribution. Even relatively few observations suffice to estimate the underlying population distribution. Figure 4 provides an example using the distribution of parcel sizes to decide on minimum forest area. For a minimum area of 1 ha, 62% of small-holders could not participate in the CDM; obviously a lower threshold should chosen if smallholders are to benefit from the CDM.


59

What Parameter Values Have NAI Selected Countries Up To The Present? Figure 5 provides the distributions of values reported for these parameters to the UNFCCC (UNFCCC, 2006), with FAO values given as a reference.

minimum crown cover (%)

10 20 30

Nu

mb

er

of

co

un

trie

s

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

minimum height (m)

2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Nu

mb

er

of

co

un

trie

s

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

minimum area

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.0

Nu

mb

er

of

co

un

trie

s

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

FAO

FAOFAO

Figure 5: Distributions of minimum parameter values chosen by NAI countries by October 2006, compared to the FAO definition as a reference. By choosing the minimum crown cover towards the upper end of the range reporting countries have tried to eliminate the risk of prior vegetation being considered as forests and ineligible for the CDM. China, the Dominican Republic and Nicaragua are the only exceptions. A minimum height of below 5 m indicates that other countries, Albania, China, Vietnam Yemen, Niger, Nicaragua, and Mali, may consider also project types other than highly productive plantations to fulfil their policy goals for the CDM. Almost half of all reporting countries, among them India or China, chose a small minimum area, apparently addressing prevailing ownership patterns and policy goals.

Conclusions Non-Annex I countries interested in hosting forestry CDM projects must choose parameter values for the definition of forest from given ranges under the CDM. Minimum crown cover, minimum height, and minimum area are required. Good practice calls for also selecting a minimum strip width. Some terms, such as “tree”, “height”, “temporarily unstocked state”, “expected return to forest”, and “promotion of natural seed sources” remain ambiguous. Together with the significant role of spatial assessment units these issues might be clarified by the Executive Board of the CDM. Neither transposing existing national definitions of forest, nor resorting to the FAO definition will alleviate the need for a national choice. The selection will affect eligibility, extent, prospects, and impacts of forestry CDM projects. Parameters should match prior site conditions, allow for the desirable project types and facilitate national policy goals. Optimal values will vary by country.


60

FAO data on existing country definitions, historic transitions to planted forests, and details about possible project types provide a decisions background. A stepwise decision process and relatively simple graphical techniques may facilitate choice of optimal parameter values for the forest definition by NAI countries.


61

References Dutschke, M. 2002. Sustainable forestry investment under the Clean Development

Mechanism: the Malaysian case. HWWA Discussion Paper 198. FAO. 2000. FRA 2000: On definitions of forest and forest change. Forest Resource

Assessment. Working Paper 33. Rome.14 p. FRA FAO ?. 2000a.Comparison of forest area and forest area change estimates derived from

FRA FAO ? 1990 and FRA FAO 2000. Forest Resources Assessment Working Paper 59.

FAO. 2001. Global Forest Resource Assessment 2000. FAO Forestry Paper 140, FAO, Rome.

FAO. 2005. Global forest resource assessment. http://www.fao.org/forestry/site/24690/en FAO, Rome.

FAO.2006. Definitions related to reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries. FAO Forestry Paper. In print.

Indonesia. 2002. Views from Parties on issues related to modalities for the inclusion of afforestation and reforestation project activities under the Clean Development Mechanism in the first commitment period. FCCC/SBSTA/2002/MISC.22/Add.3 Submission to the UNFCCC Secretariat.

IPCC. 2003.Good practice guidance for land use, land-use change and forestry. IGES. Hayama, Japan.

Helms, J.A. 1998. The dictionary of forestry. Society of American Foresters. Bethesda. Md. USA. 210p.

Kant, P. 2005. Definition of forests under the Kyoto Protocol: choosing appropriate values for crown cover, area and tree height for India. Indian Forester.

Köhl, M. 2000. Reliability and comparability of TBFRA-2000 results. Pages 27-41 in UN-ECE/FAO Forest Resource Assessment, New York.

Montagnini, F., and P. K. R. Nair. 2004. Carbon sequestration: an underexploited environmental benefit of agroforestry systems. Agroforestry Systems 61:281-295.

Laurance, W. F. 2005.Forest-climate interactions in fragmented tropical landscapes. In: Tropical forests and global atmospheric change. Y.Malhi and O.Phillips, eds.p.31-38.

Nair, P. K. R., editor. 1989. Agroforestry systems in the tropics. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Not in text

Neeff, T. 2005. Ainda há incentivos para o desflorestamento no Mecanismo de Desenvolvimento Limpo? Boletim Brasileiro de Meteorologia.

Pancel, L. 1993. Tropical Forestry Handbook. Vol. I and II. Springer. Berlin Prodan, M. 1965. Holzmesslehre. Sauerlaender. Franfurt. 644 p. Rakonczay, Z. 2002. Biome-specific forest definitions. FCCC/TP/2002/1 Report to the

UNFCCC Secretariat. Schoene, D.1983. Eine Alternative zur Vollkluppung. Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift 22: 571-

572. Snedecor, G.W. and W.G.Cochran. 1978. Statistical methods. Iowa State University Press,

Ames, Iowa. UNFCCC. 2005. Website of the UNFCCC. http://unfccc.int August 2005. UNFCCC.2006. Website of the UNFCCC. http://cdm.unfccc.int/DNA Verchot, L. V., R. Zomer, O. van Straaten, and B. Muys. 2005. Implications of country-

level decisions on the specification of crown cover in the definition of forests for land area eligible for afforestation and reforestation activities in the CDM. to be determined. Meaning ?


62

APPENDIX I

Criteria for the choice of high and low parameter values for the CDM forest definition.

Criteria for choosing low values Criteria for choosing high values

Permanent crops or bio-energy

plantations at height < 5 m

Large areas of croplands / pasture-lands with crown

cover > 10%?

Height at maturity

Area

Activities on areas < 1 ha

Highly fragmented landscapes with patches < 1 ha?

Agroforestry with a low tree component

< 30%

Plantation in mountainous, boreal or dry forests with

height < 5 m

Plantation in dry forests with crown

cover < 30%

Restoration of degraded shrubland

at height < 5 m?

Crown cover Restoration of degraded forests at

crown cover > 10%?

Urban forestry an option?

Main project type productive

plantations


63

Appendix II

Agroforestry Practices12 In Small-Scale A&R13

System Practice Combination Components

Agrisilvicultural systems

1.Improved fallow trees planted during non-forest phase, if land not expected to revert to forest

w: fast growing h: agricultural crop

2.Taungya crops during tree seedling stage

w: plantation species h: agricultural crops

3. alley cropping trees in hedges, crops in alleys

w: coppice trees h: crops

4. tree gardens multispecies, dense, mixed

w: vertical structure, fruit trees h: shade tolerant

5.Multipurpose trees on cropland

trees scattered, boundaries

w: multipurpose trees h: crops

6. estate crop combinations

w: coffee, coconut, fruit trees h: shade tolerant

7.Homegardens multi-storey mixes around homes

w: fruit trees h: crops

8. trees in soil conservation, reclamation

w: multipurpose fruit trees h: crops

9. shelterbelts, windbreaks, live hedges

around farmland plots w: trees h: crops

10. Fuel wood production firewood species around cropland plots

w: firewood species h: crops

Silvopastoral systems

11.Trees on rangelands scattered trees w: multipurpose, fodder f ??: present a: present

12. Protein banks trees for protein-rich cut fodder

w: leguminous trees h: present a: present

13. Estate crops with pasture

Example cattle under coconut palms

w: estate crops F ??: present a: present

Agrosilvopastoral; systems

14.Homegardens with animals

around homes w: fruit trees a : present

15.Multipurpose woody hedgerows

trees for browsing, mulch, soil protection

w: coppicing fodder trees a, h: present

16. Aqua forestry trees lining ponds w: leaves forage for fish

NOTE: No F/f in explanations below

12 Pancel, 1993 13 w: woody species; a: animals; h: herbaceous(crop) species


64

Past Afforestation and Reforestation Activities in Africa: Insights and Lessons for the CDM – Peter Lowe, FAO - South Africa The starting point of this presentation is an overview of the global trends in plantation area, followed by a more detailed explanation on the current situation and trends in the different regions of Africa. Even if considerable statistical information is available, the accuracy and reliability of this information needs to be considered, especially if this information is to be used for the CDM. The speaker then provides insights on the state of the art of different forestry activities in Africa: protection forest, energy plantations, production forest and carbon planting; including key issues and recent trends. In order to use the new opportunities, some plantations should be considered that includes different dimensions: site, land use/cover, socio-economic aspects and institutional agreements. Finally the speaker explains some relevant financial issues for the forestry CDM in Africa, especially financial barriers and probity.


65


66

Case Study from Asia-Pacific Facilitating Reforestation for Guangxi Watershed Management in Pearl River Basin Xiaoquan Zhang; Chinese Academy of Forestry Bernhard Schlamadinger;Joanneum Research Neil Bird; Joanneum Research This presentation describes a large scale project in two counties in China: Cwangy and Haunjiang. The project has a multi approach objective that combines carbon sequestration, conservation of soils and biodiversity plus increments in the income source for local farmers. Accordingly, species included in this project were selected considering the interest of various stakeholders (e.g. farmers and forestry companies), as well as biodiversity and soil concerns. The speaker then presents the two different models for regulating land tenure that were developed by the project. The presentation goes on to explain the major methodological issues as addressed in the project including eligibility, additionality, baseline approach, project scenario and considerations of potential leakage. Based on this information, the presentation shows the estimated anthropogenic removals by sinks expected in the case of China. This section ends with the presentation of the major considerations included in the monitoring plan. Finally the speaker makes some general recommendations for other potential projects.


67


68

Case Study from Latin America: Alternative Financing Model for Sustainable Management in The San Nicolas Forest Carmenza Robledo; Intercooperation Javier Blanco; Ecoversa The presentation starts with a description of the general conditions in the region of the San Nicolas Valleys in Colombia before the project and the circumstances that enable the implementation of the corresponding ITTO projects PD 54/99 (F) and PD 240/03 (F). The project is aimed at testing a method for long term financing of sustainable forest management that combines all potential sources of timber and non timber products with payments for ecosystem services. The first phase of the project - PD 54/99 (F) - focuses on payments for carbon sequestration in areas eligible for the CDM, and the second phase - PD 240/03 (F)- focuses on the quantification and valuation of other forest ecosystem services. All these services are quantified for a master management plan designed with the local community. Besides the clarification of CDM, technical issues such as eligibility of land or quantification of the carbon potential, the key approach of the San Nicolas project is the participation of the local stakeholders in decision-making. As a result of implementing this approach, the project has facilitated the creation of a public-private-civil society partnership called MASBOSQUES, which is responsible for managing the project, providing capacity building for local farmers and distributing the CER benefits. All these technical and social aspects as well as the risk analysis undertaken by the project and the monitoring plan are described in the presentation.


69


70

Case Study from Africa: An Analysis of the Opportunities of Afforestation/Reforestation CDM Projects in Ghana: Case Study in the Upper West Region Elisa Grieco; University of Tuscia, Italy This presentation is divided into four sections: description of the project area, procedures used for integrating community demands and interests, project idea and conclusions. The project is located in the upper west region of Ghana, which is characterized by a tropical climate, a vegetation of Guinea savannah, an economy based on agriculture and the presence of five ethnic groups. The procedures used combine identification and assessment of the institutional interest, interviews with the local villagers and verification of the suitable land among the proposed sites. One of the results of the interviews with the villagers is the identification of four major problems: lack of firewood, recurrent fires, lack of fodder and water shortage. Based on planning criteria that include functional aspects and structural characteristics, the project designed a system for the 700 ha area considered eligible for the CDM. This system combines a fire break strip with a wind break strip and a strip of native agroforestry species. For the quantification of potential carbon benefits, the project used the approved simplified methodology for small scale projects (below 8Kton average carbon sinks per year). The major conclusion in the presentation is that agroforestry activities are a resource to amplify and strengthen the CDM Small Scale benefits, especially when they include in an effective way the principles of sustainable development in disadvantaged communities.


71


72

CDM Bio-energy Projects in Africa – Alois P Mhlanga; African Development Bank The speaker first presents the ADB Finesse Africa Programme, which is aimed at assisting countries in Africa to formulate appropriate policy and regulatory frameworks and develop capacity to generate a pipeline of investment projects in renewable energy and energy efficiency. The presentation then describes the approach currently used to design a CDM strategy in the ADB. This strategy shall help to improve access and increase the competitiveness of African projects within the CDM market. Such a strategy needs to be based on an understanding of the challenges and financial and legal barriers relevant in the African context. Complementary to the CDM strategy shall be the Clean Energy Investment Framework (CED IF), which considers the current energy deficit in Africa and the requirements made by the G8. The speaker explains in some details the three pillars of the CRD IF, which are:

• widening energy access for poverty reduction; • enhancing investment in clean and sustainable energy; • adaptation.


73

Session 3: Markets for carbon credits from CDM projects

74

Session 3: Markets for Carbon Credits from CDM Projects


75

Supply and Demand of Emissions Credits from CDM Forestry Projects Robert Tipmann; Ecosecurities The presentation begins by showing the results of an analysis of the supply side made for 5 Asian countries plus Brazil. The analysis explains what are the types of activities preferred as well as who are the major players in offering projects. The speaker then explains 5 steps envisaged for generating and commercializing CERs as follows: Project idea note, Project concept note, Letter of Intent plus Letter of endorsement, Project Design Document (PDD) plus Approval, Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA) and Payment. With regard to the state of affairs and trends in the GHG markets for forestry CERs, the speaker presents information that combines the trade on carbon credits with the fact that many Annex I countries won’t be able to fulfil their commitments without using the CDM. The analysis also includes recent developments in the approval of methodologies for forestry activities in the CDM. The presentation then offers an overview of the market. It explains the demand cap set to CERs from forestry projects, presents potential buyers including funds, governments, the private sector and brokers and other factors influencing the price of tCERs. Finally, the speaker presents an outlook including the potential for the inclusion of tCERs in the EU ETS ??and some possibilities for a post-2012 regime.


76


77

Resources for CDM Forestry Projects Development in Africa: ITTO’s Capacity Building Programme Dr. Ma Hwan Ok; ITTO The speaker first makes a presentation of the International Tropical Timber Organization, its mandate, work, main donors and project portfolio, as well as the ITTO’s project cycle calendar and the fellowship program. He continues showing ITTO’s experiences in the CDM from three countries: Korea, Indonesia and Colombia. These experiences demonstrate that if the potential offered by the CDM is to be fully utilised, tropical countries need some extra support. The ITTO project on Building capacity to develop and implement Sink-CDM of the Kyoto Protocol in Tropical Forestry Sector is an answer to these needs. The objective of the project is to promote sink-CDM of the Kyoto Protocol through Public-Private-Partnerships, linking host developing countries with industrialized investor countries. Initial outputs of this project are the Guidebook for A/R CDM project developers on how to identify and formulate A/R CDM project activities, the financing of six regional workshops to provide training for potential project developers in A/R CDM host countries as well as the fact that six Project Design Documents have been submitted to CDM EB. Finally the speaker presents some considerations for promoting CDM forestry in the sub-Saharan Africa.


78


79

MDG: Carbon Facility. Increasing Access of Developing Countries to Carbon Finance Maryam Niamir-Fuller; UNDP/GEF The starting point of this presentation is a review of the achievements and challenges of the Millennium Development Goals. The speaker then focuses on the need for environmental financing that encompasses any source of funding that can be mobilized to achieve environmental goals that are national and/ or global priorities. In this context, one of the advantages of the carbon finance market is that it mobilizes important private investments. Ideally these investments should be complementary to the MDGs. Thus the MDG Carbon Facility is committed to realize the development dividend of the emerging carbon finance market by developing a portfolio of GHG reduction projects that provides a broader range of environmental/development (MDG) co-benefits than that available through existing carbon market products. The MDG Carbon Facility is managed by the Finance Unit of the Environment and Energy Group of UNDP, under the supervision of an MDG Carbon Executive Board. Finally the speaker highlights the need of using the potential MDG dividend of renewable energies and afforestation/ reforestation in the CDM as well as the new issue of emission reduction from avoiding deforestation in developing countries.


80


81

Interest in CERs from CDM Forestry Projects in the EU Region Aulikki Kaupilla; Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Finland This presentation first explains some considerations of the European Union (EU) on the CDM, mainly that the EU considers flexible mechanisms, including CDM, a valuable tool, the effective functioning of which should be ensured also post-2012. The EU sees some challenges in the A/R CDM derived specially from the fact that the modalities and procedures for forestry activities were agreed two years later than those for energy projects. It causes a delay in the implementation that is highly relevant for forestry activities.

The speaker then presents the EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS) and its regulations for CDM forestry projects. Of particular note is that LULUCF was not included in the Linking Directive for 2005-07. However, the Directive is currently being reviewed. The revised Directive could be ready for implementation by 2009/2010.

The speaker then describes three of the seven public purchase programmes in EU member states; namely Italy, France and Finland. Finally the speaker presents some conclusions including recommendations for host countries: improvement in institutions and governance, capacity building and reporting, good management of existing CDM and other projects and the need for linking practical knowledge and experiences with international negotiations.


82


83

Carbon Credit Markets in the Asia-Pacific

Tatsushi Hemmi; Pacific Consultant Co., Japan


84

Carbon Market in South America Javier Blanco; Ecoversa Initially this presentation explains the development of the global carbon market, in which the CDM is a major supplier. The three major CDM sellers participating in this market are China, India and Brazil. The segment of the market covering South America is highly dominated by Brazil. Then the speaker introduces the main drivers promoting participation of host countries in the CDM: establishment of the National Designated Authority (DNA), setting clear rules for national approval, regional presence of market intermediaries and identification of sectors with potential for emissions reduction/capture. Major issues on the demand size are then explained, including who are the buyers and intermediaries present in the region as well as a brief description of “what” has been sold and the prices in these transactions. At the end the speaker presents the development of forestry activities in the CDM market worldwide and the specificities for South America as well as some reflections on future trends.


85

Session 4: Reducing emissions from deforestation

86

Session 4: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation


87

Deforestation under the UNFCCC: Future opportunities Claudio Forner; CIFOR The presentation starts by clarifying the context, including the objectives, of the UNFCCC, and the six sectors considered in the Convention and the role of forests as sinks and sources. Then the speaker explains how the issues of sinks and sources from forest have been considered in the IPCC, the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol and illustrates the different controversies faced in the past. The speaker then exposes the current situation since the issue of reducing GHG emissions from deforestation has to be addressed by the SBSTA. This section includes some reflections on views and proposals submitted by parties and observers as well as some considerations on issues that can create controversy in the future.


88


89

Deforestation under the UNFCCC: the Birth of a New Opportunity Claudio Forner; Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) [email protected] The UNFCCC has agreed to consider emissions from deforestation in developing countries. A process ending in 2007 will provide conclusions on incentives to stimulate related actions, however, it is unlikely (and even not desirable) that an instrument be established until there is certainty on the future road of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. This paper provides a brief review of the past, present and future of reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries. 1. Introduction The eleventh session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has marked an important milestone for international forest policy. An agreement to consider incentives to reduce emissions from deforestation in developing countries could lead to the establishment of an international instrument to curb deforestation. It is likely that such an instrument be some sort of financial mechanism to directly support forest conservation or sustainable management. The interest in combating forest cover loss within the UNFCCC derives from the fact that deforestation is a major source of emissions, particularly in the developing world (see figure 1). FAO estimates that about 12.9 million hectares of forests were lost annually during 2000-2005. Emissions from land use change are believed to have contributed to 20 – 25% of total anthropogenic emissions during the 1990s. Moreover, for some developing countries, deforestation itself constitutes more than 50% of total greenhouse gas emissions. Figure 1. The global carbon budget

With this in mind, discussions on a future instrument will take place having as a starting point the objective of the UNFCCC: to stabilize greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, Parties have also recognized that the causes of deforestation as well as the benefits from reducing it go beyond carbon and forestry. This paper provides a brief review of the past, present and future of deforestation within the UNFCCC.


90

2. The past The significance of the biosphere within the global carbon cycle leads to land use change and forestry activities playing an important role in the global greenhouse gas budget. For this reason, the UNFCCC itself includes several provisions relating to the protection and enhancement of carbon sinks and reservoirs (mostly forests). It does not explicitly specify, however, that deforestation should be addressed. The first provisions on deforestation are contained within the Kyoto Protocol. Article 3.3, which sets the scope for land use change and forestry within the protocol, specifies that emissions from deforestation shall be accounted by developed countries toward meeting emission reduction commitments. In other words, developed countries are obliged to account emissions from deforestation as part of their efforts to reduce emissions. Deforestation was proposed as an eligible activity under the CDM during negotiations on rules for the Kyoto Protocol, including for the clean developed mechanism (CDM). The idea of some delegates was that reduced deforestation could have been used to issue CERs equivalent to the amount of avoided emissions. The process faces great controversy for several reasons. First, there were concerns on the amount and price of reducing deforestation, displacing, first, technology alternatives within the CDM and, second, efforts by developed countries to reduce emissions in house. Some Latin American countries, supported by the United States and Canada primarily, faced the opposition of Brazil and China. In the end, deforestation in developing countries was left out from the Kyoto Protocol as the negotiation process could not agree on an approach that would satisfy all Parties. Eligible activities within the CDM were limited to afforestation and reforestation, with a cap of 1% of base year emissions of each developed countries (e.g. the market is limited because each Annex I party can only use forestry CERs up to 1% of its base year emissions). As part of the agreement, a window to finance deforestation was opened under financing adaptation through a language that included fragile ecosystems, but then again, without a direct reference to deforestation. 3. The present The fact that tropical deforestation was left out of the Kyoto Protocol represented a source of disappointment for many governments, NGOs and international organizations. On the one hand, a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions was not part of the efforts to combat climate change and, on the other, some developing countries were left out from mitigation as their potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions largely lies in the land use, land-use change and forestry sector. Figure 2 illustrates the contribution of deforestation to total greenhouse gas emissions of selected Parties.


91

Figure 2. Sectoral greenhouse gas emissions for selected countries, percentage.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bolivia Brazil Malaw i Niger Panama Sri Lanka Togo Tanzania

Other sectors

Forestry

Source: UNFCCC GHG database, latest available year for each country. This disappointment has triggered a new process that has brought emissions from deforestation back to the UNFCCC table. This proposal has been primarily fuelled by the rainforest coalition, which, given the strength and success of the carbon market, is seeking new international mechanisms to curb deforestation. The process has started in the form of “conclusions by the COP”, less formal that a COP decision but a mandate that needs to be addressed. Such a mandate has requested Parties to consider incentives to stimulate action to reduce emissions from deforestation and to report back to the COP by the end of 2007. The above means that, although a process has started, it is still unclear which road it will take. That is, there isn’t any specification on what alternatives shall be considered, for example, whether incentives refer to the carbon market, a new fund, a new protocol with commitments or any other. Discussions are also taking place in the light of the consideration of the future of the UNFCCC, which includes a possible second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol or an alternative. This means that any conclusions on incentives to reduce emissions from deforestation will likely be fed into the process for the future of the UNFCCC. Before elaborating on available proposals to reduce emissions from deforestation, it is worth looking at the state of discussions for the broader process. There are currently two paths that are evolving in parallel. One is the consideration of a second commitment period and, the second, is referred to as the “long term dialogue” and focuses on action under the Convention beyond Kyoto. With no doubt, the main political development will be the consideration of a second commitment period, as this will set the continuation of efforts that are already in place, against the need to start from scratch with a new instrument. The process for the future is also unclear at this stage. It is marked by the fact that major emitters are not bound by the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including those from emerging economies from the developing world. Other issues that will form part of these discussions include whether the UNFCCC can go forward with a cap and trade system, equity with regards to the use of the atmosphere for polluting, the need to strengthen the CDM and the need to take into account national circumstances.


92

Coming back to discussions on deforestation, parties have acknowledged that deforestation is a very complex process resulting from social, environmental and economic factors that interact at many levels. Given the political and technical difficulties linked to deforestation, Parties have indicated that: National circumstances need to be taken into account and, thus, flexibility is required in

the design of the instrument; Principles of equity, sustainable development, poverty alleviation, sovereignty and

synergies need to be incorporated in the design and development of the instrument; There will be a need to ensure the long-term effectiveness of the instrument, which

implies long-term and certain source of funding; ODA could be used to create an enabling environment; Action that has been taken in the past by some countries should be recognized. Despite uncertainties of the outcome, there are several proposals on the table. Most interested Parties are looking for a financial solution that strengthens current efforts in place, aside from capacity building. Actual proposals vary but can be grouped into the use of the carbon market and the establishment of a transfer payment instrument. Options for the first include making “avoiding emissions from deforestation” an eligible activity under the CDM, where the incentives would be the proceedings resulting from the purchase of CERs. A second alternative is that developing countries take on voluntary commitments to reduce national deforestation relative to a baseline, in a similar way that emission reduction commitments work for developed countries; incentives would be the ability to trade allowances, analogous to emissions trading or joint implementation. On the other hand, transfer payments could include a commitment to increase ODA or the establishment of a fund specifically to curb emissions from deforestation. The above-referred options have advantages and disadvantages. The use of the market has the potential to offer a secure and long-term source of funding to reduce deforestation. It also provides a direct channel to compensate or reward those who deforest reforest ??. On the negative side, the consideration of the carbon market will be controversial and it is highly unlikely that an unrestricted mechanism be agreed (e.g. similar to what happened to afforestation and reforestation under the CDM). Furthermore, there will be limitations with regards to what deforestation can be reduced as well as who could be compensated: some deforestation results from large scale agriculture whose benefits are larger than what the carbon market can pay and, second, another portion of deforestation is the result of squatting and illegal logging, undertaken by unidentified people. Regarding transfer payments, although these could trigger lower controversy and be less demanding in terms of technical requirements, they have the disadvantage of offering a less secure and longer-term source of funding, as they would depend on public funding. Agreeing on the most adequate instrument will be the result of negotiations. Parties will not only take into account the advantages and disadvantages of available alternatives, but also how these would affect their interests, including implications for the carbon market, for the overall accounting of emissions and, ultimately, the effectiveness on reducing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. The consideration of the issue starts with an inherited controversy: the use of forests to offset greenhouse gas emissions, a factor that complicated negotiations in the past and left avoided deforestation out from the CDM. The bad news is that deforestation is difficult to deal with, both politically and technically; that most concerns


93

with deforestation still remain among big UNFCCC players; and that views on how deforestation should be addressed are diverging. But there is also good news bringing an optimistic air for the future. First, there is great interest among all negotiating Parties in arriving at a solution, including some Parties that had a negative attitude in the past; second, there is a mandate which needs to be addressed, meaning that Parties need to make an effort to agree; third, there are new players and new constituencies, which brings more energy and negotiating power to those interested in the process moving forward; and, finally, the willingness from a group of developing countries to take on commitments to reduce deforestation and bare part of the costs. 4. The future Setting incentives for deforestation within the UNFCCC will likely occur in several stages and depend, first, on how the process until 2007 evolves and, second, on the outcomes of the long term dialogue for the future of the UNFCCC. If both processes are successful, it is likely that discussions on incentives to reduce deforestation will feed their conclusions into the longer term process, specifying the option (or options) which would fit into a future broader arrangement. In the shorter term, aside from exchanging views on the effectiveness of several incentives and policy approaches, Parties will discuss two main elements. First, what sort of instrument will be established and how it will be incorporated within the UNFCCC? More specifically, this means that discussions will consider whether the reduction of emissions from deforestation can made equivalent to reducing emissions from other sectors; and whether an instrument that issues credits that could be used to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions will be allowed. The second issue is who will pay for the reduction of emissions. In the case of transfer payments, this means that governments will agree to increase ODA or provide resources to a fund; and in the case of the carbon market this means that, under governments’ commitments to reduce emissions, the private sector would purchase credits from reduced deforestation. This is likely to bring several complications as it is highly unlikely that developed countries will agree to bare the costs alone. In conclusion, at this stage it is indeed difficult to look at a crystal ball and to be able to predict the future. There are uncertainties regarding the process on deforestation itself as well as the on the future of the UNFCCC; thus, it is almost impossible to state whether deforestation will be part of an overall future arrangement under the UNFCCC either within the carbon market or as a new fund. What is certain is that there is substantive interest in finding a way forward and that past negotiations have left an amount of lessons learned. The UNFCCC has demonstrated that agreements are possible and that it is also possible to establish international mechanisms that are effective in addressing environmental problems.


94

Reduction of GHG Emissions through Avoiding Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD): Committing Forests as Carbon Reservoirs. Jürgen Blaser; Intercooperation Carmenza Robledo; Intercooperation This presentation begins with an explanation of the context of deforestation and forest degradation in the tropics. This context includes the hot spots of deforestation world wide, the countries with the highest deforestation rates, the deforestation drivers in the tropics by regions and a clarification of the difference between deforestation and forest degradation and its implications in the framework of the UNFCCC. It follows a description of the major lessons learned by the cooperation programmes in the past. These lessons can be summarized as a) the fact that the main drivers of deforestation are outside the sector, b) the acceptance of need for agricultural land to feed people, c) the recognition that “avoiding deforestation” is often a non-issue for the primary beneficiary, and d) the understanding that avoiding deforestation is not always a socially acceptable solution. Then the presentation describes the major challenges for ensuring that the reduction of GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) can become an instrument to maintain carbon pools and support sustainable development. An answer to this challenge is the approach of “committed forest”, which is explained including its definition, criteria for sites selection and the challenges for its implementation.


95


96

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation: Methodological Issues Dieter Schoene; FAO The speaker begins by showing the changes in forest area between 1990 and 1995 and illustrates why considering emissions from deforestation and forest degradation within the UNFCCC is a reasonable cause. The speaker then presents a route map indicating the major methodological issues that have to be faced. Different facets of the deforestation process are described, including net forest lost and forest transition. Based on these considerations the speaker inquires after the understanding of differences in the definition of deforestation and the carbon pools that should be considered. Parallel to this, the presentation looks at the difficulties existing in getting accurate data on deforestation in developing countries. The speaker explores other relevant issues on the theme of avoiding deforestation, such as forest carbon vs. area change, leakage and baseline options. At the end the speaker appeals for using existing networks and support programmes.


97


98

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries: Methodology Issues Dieter Schoene; FAO 1. Introduction FAO has periodically assessed global forest area and area changes since 1948 as part of its efforts to conserve and enhance the natural resource base and assist Member Nations in reducing food insecurity and rural poverty. Therefore, FAO welcomes the initiative “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries” (RED) by its Member Nations Costa Rica, Papua New Guinea and the eight countries supporting it. The following focuses on: forest area and historic deforestation since 1948 forest change processes and relevant definitions linking deforestation to greenhouse gas emissions forest “degradation”, disturbances, leakage within forests potential scale of reductions and compensations issues related to baselines and additionality issues related to monitoring and verification forest policy context and capacity building synergies between RED, country reporting under UNFCC and Global Forest Resource

Assessments (FRA) 2. Deforestation, other forest change processes and relevant definitions 2.1. Deforestation and forest area changes FAO has assessed and documented forest area and area changes since 1948 (Table 1). Clearing of forests to yield higher returns from land has a long history. Historically, deforestation has been much greater in temperate regions than in the tropics. It is obvious that an increasing human population has had a negative impact on the extent of forests. Agriculture has expanded and replaced vast areas of forests in all parts of the world to meet the demand for food and fibre. Only relatively recently has deforestation become a negative concept as awareness of environmental issues increased and as the importance of forests for sustainable development and food security was better understood. However, agricultural expansion and deforestation is still in many countries one of the main options for economic development and a means of providing a livelihood for poorer people. Table 1: Historical deforestation

Year Forest Area

Global

(109 Ha )

Net Deforestation

Tropics

(106 Ha)

Net Forest Area Change

Tropics

(106 Ha)

1948 4.0

1953-1963

3.8 15

1980 - -10.2


99

Year Forest Area

Global

(109 Ha )

Net Deforestation

Tropics

(106 Ha)

Net Forest Area Change

Tropics

(106 Ha)

1988 3.6 15.3 -11.4

1990 3.4 - 13.6

1995 3.4 14.2 -12.7

2000 3.9 -12.3

2005 4.0 - is a figure missing here? One of the conclusions of the 1948 assessment was: “All these investigations made valuable additions to our knowledge, but all suffered from certain fundamental difficulties: the most important of these were the lack of reliable national inventory information and the lack of commonly accepted definitions of some of the more important forestry terms.” This statement remains largely true today, almost 60 years later. While technical and scientific advances have greatly increased the potential to improve the information base, many countries still lack the training, institutional and financial resources to conduct periodic assessments. Data in Table 1 outline historical trends, but are not strictly comparable, as definitions of forests have changed. Quantified parameters have mostly not been employed before 1980 and have not been uniform for developed and developing counties thereafter. However, FRA 2000 and 2005 employed a uniform and identical definition of forest (Figure 1).

FRA parametersFRA parameters

20200.50.510105520052005

20200.50.510105520002000

---- / 100/ 10010 / 2010 / 207 7 19901990

----10 / 2010 / 20--19801980

widthwidthmm

areaareahaha

densitydensity

%%

heightheightmm

FRAFRA

other wooded land: >5%<10% other wooded land: >5%<10% oror >10% and <5m>10% and <5m

Figure 1: Quantitative parameters for defining forests in FRA

2.2. Other forest change processes Besides outright deforestation, there are other change processes in forests that cause greenhouse gas emissions and removals. Parties essentially need to decide which of these processes to include in RED and which greenhouse gas emissions and/or removals to associate with each transition. FRA 2000 illustrates such a transition matrix for tropical forests (Table 2), where states meaning ? could be expanded or collapsed to meet Parties’ needs.


100

Table 2: Transition matrix, FRA 2000

As elegant as it seems, it will generally not be possible to link each transition within the forest or from forest to other lands to a fixed carbon stock attrition or accrual. Average carbon stocks differ strikingly between countries (Figure 2) and most likely even more so for stands within.

BBiioommaassss ccaarrbboonn ddeennssiittiieess iinn ddeevveellooppiinngg ccoouunnttrryy ffoorreessttss

Figure 2: Distribution of country biomass carbon densities Relevant definitions Based on past experiences of FRA, discussions would benefit from unambiguous terminology and definitions. Relevant definitions from FRA and references to other globally applicable definitions are provided in Appendix 1. New definitions in the context of this process are net forest loss, as opposed to deforestation, and net forest area gain, as opposed to afforestation. A further clarification is needed for the term forest “degradation”. Aware of potential difficulties, SBSTA in Decision 11/CP7 invited IPCC, inter alia, “to develop definitions for

c a rb o n d e n s ity ( t /h a )0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 4 0 1 6 0 1 8 0 2 0 0

Fre

qu

ency

0

5

1 0

1 5

2 0


101

direct human-induced “degradation” of forests … and methodological options to inventory and report on emissions resulting from these activities….” There is considerable amplitude in meaning. Nevertheless, most globally established definitions allude to the basic notion of a human-induced, long-term, negative change in the forest’s structure, function and capacity for the provision of goods and services in general. Degradation has thus the clearly negative connotation of a long-term impairment of a forest. Such a long-term impairment, however, can realistically only be assessed ex post, after a given observation period; degradation in this sense is not measurable during a short assessment period. A useful definition should also serve the purpose of the negotiation process, namely a strong link to greenhouse gas emissions resulting from an activity. Again, the notion of forest degradation does not meet this criterion: certain forms of degradation, such as very slowly reversible soil compaction, impacts of acid rain or felling damages to residual trees, may not result in carbon emissions. Conversely, reductions in crown cover or growing stock that do cause carbon emissions, i.e. in sustainable selective harvesting, thinning or shelter-wood cuttings, do not degrade a forest. On the contrary, these measures may improve it. Overall, forest degradation appears as an unfortunate term for the purpose of addressing emissions from “forests superfluous ? remaining forests” (IPCC, 2003). Significantly, the IPCC task force established under 11/CP7 could not agree on any definition of forest degradation for this purpose. Similarly, the Second Expert Meeting on Harmonizing Forest-related Definitions (FAO, 2003) recommended using another term than “degradation”, such as “stock reduction” or carbon stock attrition (as opposed to accrual) in the context of carbon monitoring in forests remaining forests. 3. Linking deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions There are manifold, usually beneficial effects of reducing deforestation that are as important as the goal of reducing emissions. Many of these correlate strongly with forest area. However, it is greenhouse gas emissions from forest ecosystems that are the point of departure for RED under the climate agreements. Unfortunately, actual emissions relate weakly to forest area losses - a consequence of the natural variability of forest ecosystems, past human interventions, and the fate of wood removals. Accepting, as a first approximation, deforestation as an ongoing long-term, essentially constant process (e.g. applying the tier 1- approach of the 1996 IPCC Guidelines), release of carbon and trace gases from wood removals during deforestation can be assumed to be essentially instantaneous, eliminating the need for an accounting model14 for forest products. Still, the range of possible emissions from a deforested area remains high; uncertainty will be reduced to varying degrees by iteratively assessing changes in individual carbon pools (Figure 3). On the average, biomass, soils, deadwood and litter store respectively 44%, 46%, 6% and 4% of total carbon in the ecosystem to a soil depth of 30 cm (FAO, 2005). For reliable assessments, gross losses in forest area, growing stock and/or biomass density, and soil carbon losses from conversion should be assessed as a minimum. 14 Particularly when subsistence agriculture is the cause of deforestation, this assumption may be fairly realistic.


102

4. Linking attrition or accrual of carbon stocks and disturbances to emissions from remaining forests Decision CP/2005/L.2 does not directly address emissions that may occur from all carbon pools if fellings, disturbance losses, or attrition reduce stocking within forests without exceeding the threshold for deforestation. In the extreme, a country could reap incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation, while contributing on a much larger scale to emissions from degrading its remaining forests. Up to now, this issue has rarely been addressed, particularly in developing countries. Past global forest resource assessments, for instance, demonstrate a pronounced lack of country information on changes in growing stock, biomass and carbon within their forests, caused by selective harvesting, over-cutting, mortality, and disturbances on one hand, and re-growth and net annual increment on the other hand. Of all countries communicating declines in total forest carbon stocks over the 1990-2005 period (FAO, 2005), three quarters, overwhelmingly developing countries, presumed identical carbon densities at the beginning and the end of the 15-year period. Therefore, reduced total forest carbon stocks, as reported, may reflect deforestation only15. Supporting this view, percent carbon loss is in many cases directly proportional to percent loss in forest area (Figure 4). Carbon densities in the remaining forest were assumed constant for lack of information. In reality, these densities may have increased or decreased; total losses of biomass carbon stocks and emissions from the entire forest could be under- or overestimated significantly (Houghton, 2005)16.

15 Of the two countries with the highest carbon losses, Brazil and Indonesia, only Indonesia recorded also significantly lower carbon density in 2005. 16 In contrast, the majority of all countries reporting significant total carbon stock increases (mainly European countries, USA, Chile, China, Japan, India) also documented substantially higher carbon densities, indicating a higher likelihood that stocks were actually assessed repeatedly.

Figure 3: Linking deforestation to GHG emissions: reducing uncertainty by iteratively assessing carbon pools

Net area loss

Growing stock loss

Biomass loss

Soil Carbon

loss

deadwood loss

litter loss

true GHGemissions

Remaining

uncertainty

Grossarealoss

Including more carbon pools


103

Few reliable estimates of gross emissions from selective logging and disturbance and of ?? exist. Achard et. al. (2004) and Asner et. al (2005) estimate that carbon losses due to these events increase carbon emissions from deforestation by 12 -25%, with carbon releases per ha from biomass alone of 25-60 t C/ha.(Asner et. al., 2005; FAO, 2005). Reduced Impact Logging can significantly reduce these carbon emissions (Feldpausch et. al. 2005; Marsh and Tay, 1996). Roughly, carbon emissions from disturbances or conventional logging on 5 to 8 ha correspond to the emissions from one ha of deforestation. Carbon in above-ground biomass growth of natural forests amounts to 0.5-2 t C/ha (IPCC, 2003; Niles, 2002). What measure is to be used in RED? Deforestation, or net forest area loss? Gross or net emissions within a forest; and from which pools? 5. RED and causes of deforestation and forest degradation RED will only succeed in contributing to the ultimate objectives of the UNFCCC, if incentives will eliminate or temper proximate causes of deforestation and degradation, e.g. agricultural expansion (permanent cultivation, cattle ranching, shifting cultivation, colonization), wood extractions (wood and fuel-wood removals, charcoal) or infrastructure extension (transport, settlements). Moreover, in order to succeed, the underlying causes must also be addressed (economic factors, policy and institutional factors, technological factors, cultural and socio-political factors, demographic factors). In addition, other factors are at work, e.g. land characteristics (soil quality), biophysical drivers (floods, drought, climate change) and social trigger events (e.g. war, rebellions). Usually, an entire complex of underlying, proximate and other causes is at work in “tandems” (Geist and Lambin, 2001, Contreras-Hermosilla, 2000). However, for any new policy addressing and seeking to stem deforestation and carbon stock attrition in forests, essential information about the state of the forests, trends, and its multiple uses and functions are prerequisites. Mere carbon stock and change assessments, e.g. from satellite imagery, will not enable a policy an appropriate policy? change towards forests.

Figure 4: Carbon changes in forests as a function of forest area change

ReliabilityReliabilityCarbon trends 1990Carbon trends 1990--20052005

area change ( % )-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

bio

mas

s ca

rbon c

han

ge

( %

)

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

Indonesia

Brazil

1: 1 line


104

6. Regional aspects for RED and potential scale of reductions

ANNUAL NET CHANGE IN FOREST AREA

Figure 5: Relative deforestation by region and period Clearly, deforestation is most pronounced in Latin America, where it is on the rise, and in Africa, where it has subsided somewhat (Figure 5). Carbon stocks and flows in Africa are shown in Figure 6. It is significant, that carbon emissions from Central African deforestation exceed all reduction commitments by Annex I countries. Figure 6: Carbon stocks and emissions in Africa

.5

Carbon Carbon stocks stocks

((GtGt))

Carbon Carbon emissions emissions

(Mt)(Mt)

24

9

62

202

45

288

Africa’s roles in the carbon cycle

7. Issues related to baselines and additionality Both concepts are related and have been defined in the context of the CDM projects: the baseline describes and quantifies what would happen without the CDM project; additionality demonstrates that the project would not have been carried out without the CDM. Project proponents in the CDM demonstrate additionality by establishing viable alternatives to the project activity, by showing that among viable alternatives the project alternative is not the most economically desirable and would have been implemented in any case Meaning not


105

sufficiently clear . Alternatively, they demonstrate that the CDM project faces barriers that are removed only via the CDM not sufficiently clear. In the context of RED, the baseline definition remains valid, even if elicitation might be more difficult. Monitoring and demonstrating continuing conditions for additionality appear more problematic at the country level than at the project level. However, given that deforestation pressure has persisted for decades in many countries, it is unlikely to vanish during the validity period of the baseline. As deforestation has continued unabated or accelerated in many countries, sufficient actuarial evidence suggests that there are barriers to reduce emissions without the incentives from RED. Determining a reasonable baseline appears more important than establishing additionality at the country level. 7.1 Establishing a baseline for RED Parties might consider the following aspects for establishing modalities for credible baselines: availability and quality of historical data (see below) historical basis, validity period; revisions scope and comprehensiveness of the baseline: forest definitions, gross or net

deforestation, net area change, degradation and forest transitions, applicable pools and gases ( see above)

available capacities; who should assess, verify the country baseline? 7.1.1. Data availability and quality based on historic records Very significant information gaps about of word missing/superfluous forests in developing countries have been documented (Saket, 2003; FAO, 2000; FCCC/SBSTA/2004/INF.7). Reporting to FRA 2000, half the developing countries based their information on forests on expert estimates only ( Figure 7); only 10% of countries could provide information on forest area change, only about one quarter could quantify growing stock, biomass and removals, and essentially none provided an estimate on net annual increment. In many cases and in consensus with its Members, FAO has substantiated and complemented country data from other sources and its own surveys ( FAO, 2001).

forest resource assessment in forest resource assessment in developing countriesdeveloping countries

9%

30%

10%

51%

fieldsampling

detailmapping

coarsemapping

expertestimate

Figure 7: Data collection methods for forests by developing countries for FRA 2000

FRA 2005, the most recent global assessment, has gathered information on forest area from all countries for the years 1990, 2000 and 2005, based on the best available information. Accuracy and reliability of individual country data vary considerably. A few countries (mostly industrialized countries) have highly reliable data based on continuous national forest inventories, but most countries rely upon old inventory data and/or vegetation mapping.


106

Despite technical support to countries for national forest assessments17 a majority of developing countries do not possess information that allow reliable assessment of deforestation and net change of forest area at country level, and very few, if any, could assess forest carbon stock attrition. Data that relate to emissions from specific carbon pools are even less available (Figure 8).

Country response rates onCountry response rates oncarbon poolscarbon pools

gr. stockbiomass

biomass C

deadwood Clitte

r C soil C

resp

onse

rat

e (%

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

by numbers by area

Figure 8: State of country information on individual carbon pools. Capturing deforestation and carbon stock changes within the forests of developing countries more reliably would require repeat remote sensing combined with terrestrial assessments with entirely new capacities, institutions and considerable financial resources. 7.1.2. Historical basis for baseline and validity periods Since in FRA 2005 data for the year 2005 are extrapolations, and since definitions of assessments prior to 1990 varied, data for the 1990-2000 period best approach the conditions requirements ? for estimating a baseline for net deforestation or net forest area change. As explained above, forest carbon stock attrition and emissions from transitions within the forests cannot be assessed. For statistical and practical reasons and considering cost and reliability, estimating reduced emissions from deforestation and/or degradation appears infeasible for a period of less than a decade. Revising a future baseline will have to avoid those countries that have progressed most.

17 (http://www.fao.org/forestry/foris/webview/forestry2/index.jsp?siteId=6161&sitetreeId=24673&langId=1&geoId=0


107

Year

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Fo

rest

Are

a (M

ha)

600

610

620

630

linear decreasepercent decrease

baseline options

Figure 9: Projecting a baseline based on absolute area or percent 7.1.3. Baseline options Baselines could be based on absolute rates of deforestation in ha percentage reductions predicted rates from mathematical modelling expert assessments and/or negotiations Figure 9 illustrates differences based on absolute or percentage based baselines. Given that accessibility, suitability and supply of forest land decreases over time, linear extrapolation appears unrealistic. Baselines could be based on the current rate of deforestation expressed in absolute terms (hectares per year) or as a percentage annual change. The forecasting of the baseline scenario could involve a more or less complex modelling of future deforestation or it could be defined through a negotiation process. Establishing a generally applicable, system based model to establish deforestation baselines appears infeasible, given the multitude of proximate and underlying causes and the number of possible tandems (Geist and Lambin, 2001). Modelling for specific countries or regions appears more realistic. However, given the time, costs and resources involved for establishing a set of such models and the scarcity and reliability of data for establishment and validation, baselines based on expert estimates and or negotiations may be a practical alternative. Establishing the baseline requires knowledge of past deforestation or changes in forest area and a forecast of the most likely scenario without new policies and incentives (“business as usual”). The FRA 2005 dataset can be used for establishing a baseline for net change of forest area (but not for deforestation) provided that the data reported by the countries are considered to be reliable enough for that purpose. The other option is to make a new and independent ex post assessment of deforestation and forest area change for countries that wish to get incentives from this new instrument. A new assessment for baseline establishment will increase the up-front costs, particularly if forest degradation is included in the scope for the baseline.


108

8. Issues related to monitoring and verification If possible, the methods agreed upon for monitoring (and verification) forest changes should be applied also for gathering historical data as an input to the establishment of a baseline. This is possible when using remote-sensing methods and historic images. Monitoring deforestation and net change of forest area can be made using remote sensing (RS), field inventories or a combination of both. RS is cheaper and gives the possibility to go back in time, using old satellite images. The disadvantage is that RS only addresses land and tree cover, so land use changes are difficult to assess. In order to assess land use changes, RS needs to be combined with ground observations. Assessments can be full cover or sample based. If sample based, change assessments should use permanent sample units in order to increase accuracy of the change estimates. The sample must be representative for the whole country and sufficiently large to give accurate estimates, particularly considering that deforestation is quite a rare event – less than 1 percent of the forest area on average can be expected to be annually affected. If RS based, due attention must be given to the sensors to be used (quality, resolution, life span, availability of historic data), as images from different sensors cannot be easily compared. A minimum size of an area unit must be defined for accounting changes. Attrition of carbon stocks, in contrast to deforestation, is difficult to quantify and monitor. It usually would involve periodic ground observations of permanent sample plots. In order to reduce marginal costs, the possibilities to build upon other monitoring frameworks, such as the global remote sensing information framework planned for FRA 2010 should be considered. In order to implement a mechanism to reduce emissions from deforestation, efficient monitoring and verification will be needed. Since data collection and processing is demanding, expensive and time consuming, existing global forest information frameworks might be used as a basis. 9. Issues related to international and trans-boundary leakage

leakageLiberia's Timber Exports before and after 1998

logging ban in China

Year

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Ro

un

dw

oo

d v

olu

me

(Mm

3)

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

exports to other countriesexports to China

Figure 10: Course of log exports before and after the logging ban in China 1998


109

The logging ban introduced in China in 1998 provides a clear example that leakage may be troublesome (Zhu Chunquan et. al. 2004). 10. Synergies between RED, reporting under UNFCCC and the Global Forest Resource Assessments programme 10.1. Processes for global monitoring and assessment Over nearly six decades, the FRA process has produced some experiences that are relevant to the current attempts to reduce deforestation under the international agreements on climate change:

close collaboration with all countries produces highly relevant data, transparency, and feedback to countries that has been shown to be vital for many questions of national forest policy, including policies to tackle deforestation and its causes;

by using sustainable forest management as a reporting framework, scope meaning clear ? and reporting detail details ? are relevant to international arrangements and agreements related to forests and to development , e.g. the Millennium Development Goals;

biomass and carbon changes are being reported for most of the world’s forests; coordination and harmonization with other international reporting processes within the

Collaborative Partnership on Forests, e.g. UNFCCC, CBD, UNECE, ITTO, and the regional processes on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management are feasible;

terminology and definitions are chosen by common consent and used by all parties to the process;

the history and long-term involvement of countries and stakeholders in the FRA process provide a solid base and a framework, that has a track record of being able to incorporate new developments and requirements.

10.2. Meeting future international needs for forest information Organizing, implementing and analyzing assessments of the world’s forests are costly. However, efforts and expense can be justified by wide use of data for multiple purposes, minimizing the marginal costs for any single purpose. Creating a stand-alone effort for the sole purpose of measuring deforestation and related greenhouse gas emissions would come at a high total cost and may not produce additional, essential information needed for crafting an effective policy to reduce deforestation and manage forests sustainably in the national context. Established partnerships, functioning networks and the honed procedures of the FRA process, together with the GTOS in full activities hosted by FAO and FAO’s in-house remote sensing capacity, might offer a solid basis and many synergies to integrate at a reasonable marginal cost additional information on forest changes related to emission of greenhouse gases. Further, the close proximity and feedback to national policies and programmes is likely to be positive for integrating climate change issues in forestry. Efforts that are already well underway to define scope and methods for FRA 2010, consider:

complementing and substantiating national reporting with a sample-based global survey to (a) collect data by region and biome, (b) provide data for all forest change processes as defined above, including deforestation, degradation and fragmentation, (c) establish a link to national monitoring systems;

supplementing national reporting to better cover aspects relevant to biodiversity, climate change and desertification;


110

harmonizing reporting at national and international levels to minimize replicate and/or incompatible datasets;

providing data that are more applicable to NAI countries (added), i.e., country reporting on GHG emissions and removals from their forests in National Communications under the UNFCCC.

UNFCCC, IPCC and other international Conventions are official parties to the ongoing preparatory process for FRA 2010 (Kotka process); in addition, many participants contribute to several international processes, thus effectively linking and harmonizing these processes. 10.3 Capacity building Capacity building, which would need to be an integral part of any system for assessing reduced GHG emissions from avoided deforestation, is already an integral and major part of the FRA process with the goal of improving the long-term quality of national assessments and their applicability for sustainable forest management, conservation and development. To that end, FAO has created and already successfully implemented in many countries a programme of financial and technical support to National Forest Assessments, which could incorporate elements relevant to reducing emissions from deforestation with relative ease and at modest marginal cost (see www.fao.org/forestry/site/24672/en). The figure below has no No, is not referred to in the text, and is not easily understood.

Existing support programme

1km

F1

F7

F3

OWL4

F5

OL6

OL8

F2

••areaarea••volumevolume••increment, harvestincrement, harvest••biomassbiomass••trees outside foresttrees outside forest

••managementmanagement••biodiversitybiodiversity••products, servicesproducts, services••rightsrights

11. Assessing feasibility ex ante Where earlier efforts to curb deforestation seem to have failed, will novel payments for avoided emissions of greenhouse gases under the international climate change agreements provide sufficient incentives to reduce deforestation? Can legal and institutional frameworks be crafted that channel incentives to where they bridle the most active primary and underlying causes of deforestation? Are the costs of negotiating and establishing a functional regime, setting baselines, monitoring and verification prohibitive when compared to potential new revenues created for developing countries? Can numerous ancillary benefits of reducing deforestation be quantified and considered? The current rate of deforestation is 13 M ha per year and average long-term emissions caused by deforestation are 110 t C/ ha. If the initiative succeeds in reducing deforestation by 5%, approximately 70 Mt of carbon emissions would need to be compensated annually at agreed or market prices. Before entering into detailed


111

technical issues on how to design a global mechanism, a feasibility analysis should establish the fundamentals for future negotiations. Please list details of the bibliography- the following are referred to in the text: Achard et.al. (2004) Asner et.al (2005 Contreras-Hermosilla, 2000 FAO, 2000; FAO, 2001 FAO,2003 FAO, 2005. several FAO 2005- the same refs? FCCC/SBSTA/2004/INF.7 Feldpausch et. al. 2005; FRA, 2000 FRA, 2005 Geist and Lambin, 2001, Houghton, 2005 IPCC 1996Guidelines IPCC, 2003 several IPCC 2003- the same refs? Marsh and Tay, 1996 Niles, 2002 Saket, 2003; Zhu Chunquan et. al. 2004


112

COMIFAC Submission on Avoiding Emissions from Deforestation Sébastien Malele; Directeur de la Gestion Forestière, RDC The speaker first presents the Conference of Ministers in charge of Forest in Central Africa (COMIFAC). The Conference encompasses the Ministries of Cameroon, Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, RCA, RDC, Burundi, Ruanda and Sao Tomé and Principe. The speaker explains the state policy cannot be one state policy: state policies? but still not sure this is what is meant agreed within the COMIFAC and the Plan of Convergence as well as the creation of the Congo Basin Forest Partnership and the initiatives for sustainable management and certification promoted by COMIFAC. The speaker then describes COMICAF’s initiative for promoting a mechanism that allows the creation of a carbon market within the UNFCCC that helps to finance the fight against deforestation and forest degradation. This initiative proposed the creation of a Fund for Emission Reduction from Deforestation (FRAD). The presentation includes the principles for funding allocation as formulated by COMIFAC.


113


114

Financial and Investment Issues Related to Avoided Deforestation Robert Tipmann; Ecosecurities The presentation starts by trying to answer the question concerning how much additional finance do we need, or rather want to make available, to stop the current deforestation. As a comparison the speaker then presents the status quo of activities on conservation/avoided deforestation and includes in the analysis various income sources including timber and non-timber forest products as well as payments for ecosystem services, especially carbon credits under the voluntary market. Consecutively the speaker describes different policy options for addressing avoided deforestation in the UNFCCC and their financial implications. The speaker goes on to present some calculations on the potential new income that could be generated in/for Africa and presents the key economic elements of a project in this context: investment issues and financing. The speaker ends by presenting some ideas on how to engage the demand side, especially the donors.


115

116

Recommendations of the International Workshop on the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Opportunities and Challenges for the Forest Industry Sector in the sub-Saharan tropical Africa Accra, Ghana, 2nd to 4th October

117

Based on the reporting of the working groups the workshop participants agreed on the following recommendations:

Special attention should be given to support capacity building for African countries at different levels (negotiators, project proponents, brokers, etc).

Prompt action:

1. Donor countries and multilateral institutions are encouraged to fund a pre-COP 12 meeting between African negotiators and representatives of EU, Japan and other Annex I countries on African specific issues for the coming negotiations.

2. ITTO is encouraged to explore the possibility of a side event at COP 12 to report on the recommendations of this Workshop so as to further enhance elevate one word too many: clarify ? African priorities, issues and concerns related to CDM.

3. ITTO is encouraged to facilitate regional Workshops aimed at increasing the capacities in producer countries for the appropriate use of the CDM in the forest sector as well as for exploring the new use of the use of the new concept/approach Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation.

4. Public awareness of the value of CDM in the forest sector should be enhanced.

5. Multilateral institutions should give priority to the role forest ecosystems and the forest sector play in adapting to climate change.

Policy, legal and institutional constrains to CDM: Multilateral institutions are encouraged to explore options for facilitating the

participation of the African francophone communities in the preparation of PDD’s for A/R CDM project activities. This should especially consider the possibility of translating the approved methodologies and tools into French.

Promote synergies to other environmental agreements.

Integrate climate change issues into government policies, laws and

frameworks as well as departmental policies and frameworks. There is a need for awareness creation among relevant institutions and policy

makers.

118

There should be inter-ministerial coordination (from Presidency not clear ) on CDM and climate change issues.

Where language is a barrier, documents should be translated into French.

Establishment of expert networks on CDM and Climate Change issues.

There is a need for community involvement in project acceptance. Capacity building at the top and at the bottom.

There should be dedicated personnel for CDM projects. For example two

specialists in the Forest Service.

Attracting investments into CDM projects in Africa:

The European Union is encouraged to consider the inclusion of forestry CERs in the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme post 2012.

Multilateral institutions should simplify procedures for accessing funding for the preparation of A/R CDM project activities.

Efficient national approval systems (DNA) need to be in place or established to allow the processing of projects.

Foster partnership between local CDM project developers and international partners.

Identify existing projects/programmes in the forestry and land use sector and involve carbon credits (e.g. Cameroon).

Prepare guidelines and criteria to attract investors (carbon and financial due diligence).

Identify the products of your project projects, besides carbon, and their markets.

Identify investor conditionality before project investments (investment climate, large areas of land, land tenure, proximity to port).

Identify investors that take the higher risks in Africa – overseas and within Africa (e.g. China, Japan, South Africa)

Involve financial institutions/banks into production & pricing of CERs as bonds for long-term investments (e.g. Zimbabwe).

119

Provide technical and financial assistance to prepare CDM projects (e.g. CFC)

Make financial institutions aware of potential CDM investments based on proper investment offers.

Establish committees or secretariat a secretariat/secretariats? to build capacity in CER generation/CDM.

Target international investors who look out for social commitments to rural development (social corporate sustainability, e.g. Japan).

Capacity building for Africa in CDM projects:

African countries need support for building up capacities in the appropriate use of approved methodologies and other tools with regard of A/R CDM project activities.

African countries should be better supported to build capacity and to enhance their knowledge on forestry issues in the climate change negotiations, especially on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and afforestation and deforestation in the CDM, to ensure that their priorities and needs are addressed.

Sufficient training of local staff to increase capacity to formulate A/R CDM projects.

Project ideas – Formulating CDM Forestry projects for Africa:

Multilateral institutions and potential CER buyers are strongly encouraged to organize a workshop to consider potential project ideas from African countries.

African countries should address the issue of land tenure and property rights so as to facilitate the investments in Africa, including trade of CERs from forestry projects.

Multilateral institutions should jointly explore with national partners the potential that the Programmatic CDM can offer in order to facilitate and reduce transaction costs for A/R CDM projects in Africa. The programmatic CDM allows non-Annex I countries to formulate national level programmes that include CDM activities in specific sectors.

Balance community needs/requirements with investor needs.

120

Develop capacity for tapping CDM opportunities; technical expertise e.g. carbon/biomass calculations, project design, understanding of procedures etc.

Multi-sectoral cooperation e.g. Ministries of Lands, Environment, Forestry, Trade, etc.

Platform/network for information sharing on CDM e.g. models, best practice

showpiece etc. Production of manuals/guidelines and samples examples of approved CDM

projects in on various project activities.

Reducing emissions from deforestation:

Serious consideration should be given to further develop the concept of “committed forests as carbon reservoir reservoirs” as well as an appropriate trading mechanism.

Raise awareness in Annex-1 countries of their role in providing a ‘market for deforestation’ is this really what is meant? not reforestation? .

Introduce international market instruments to modify demand.

Raise awareness of avoided deforestation concept in non-Annex 1 countries.

Promote the development of collaborative resource management regimes that ensure direct benefit at the local level.

CDM & Poverty alleviation:

Simplify modalities and categories to participate in CDM projects.

Better definition of ownership of CERs.

Poverty Impact Assessment tools/requirements.

Empowerment of target groups (community, women, poor, local government).

121

ANNEXES

122

AGENDA

123

LIST OF SPEAKERS – CDM WORKSHOP

Name of Speaker/ Institution E-mail Address Status

1 Philip M. Gwage, - Absent

2 Julie Fischer, UNDP - GEF [email protected] Present

3 Jürgen Blaser, Swiss Intercooperation [email protected] Present

4 Francois Wencelius, FAO [email protected] Present

5 Maryam Niamir-Fuller, UNDP [email protected] Present

6 David Karnosky [email protected] Present

7 Carmenza Robledo, Swiss Intercooperation [email protected] Present

8 Wojciech Galinski, [email protected] Present

9 Claudio Forner [email protected] Present

10 Dieter Schoene, FAO [email protected] Present

11 Peter Lowe, FAO, South Africa [email protected] Present

12 Neil Bird, Joanneum Institute [email protected] Present

13 Elisa Grieco [email protected] Present

14 Alois P Mhlanga [email protected] Present

15 Robert Tipmann [email protected] Present

16 Dr. Hwan Ok Ma, ITTO [email protected] Present

17 Aulikki Kauppila - Finland [email protected] Present

18 Tatsushi Henmi, Pacific Consultant Co., Japan

[email protected] Present

19 Javier Blanco [email protected] Present

20 Andy Kuleshov [email protected] Present

124

ITTO MEMBER COUNTRIES Present – 15 Absent - 5 Total - 20

Name Organisation Address/ Country Tel/Fax Email Remarks

1 Yves Yalibanda Ministère des Eaux, Forêts, Chasse & Pêche

B. P. 830

Bangui

Central African Republic

+ 236 50 50 54 [email protected]

Absent

2 Theodore Mbaro Ministère des Eaux, Forêts, Chasse & Pêche

BP 830

Bangui

Central African Republic

+ 236 50 30 09 [email protected]

present

3 Itoua Adelaide Ministère de l’Economie Forestière et de l’Environnement

41 rue Bonga

Talangai

Brazzaville

BP:72

Republic of Congo

- [email protected]

Absent

4 Ngoya-Kessy Alain Marius (Dr.) - 25, rue Mayombe Talangai

Brazzaville

Republic of Congo

+ 242 5517871 [email protected]

Present

5 Mr. Germain Zasy Ngisako Chef de Division, Inventaire Forestier, SPIAF, Ministère de l’Environnement

Rue Pumbu No. 35

Kinshasa/ Gombe

+ 243 998683972

Mob 243 815036309

[email protected]

Present

125


DR Congo

6 Mr. Casimir Ngor Babutetu Directeur DR Congo

[email protected]

Present

7 Celestine Ntsame-Okwo Ministère de l’Economie Forestière,

B.P. 199

Libreville

Gabon

+ 241 761381

+ 241 773744

[email protected]

Absent

8 Claudine Moussounda Ministère de l’Environnement, de la Protection de la Nature, de la Recherche et de la Technologie

B.P. 19332

Libreville

Gabon

+ 241 06-26-77-84

+ 241 07 18 01 29

[email protected]

Absent

9 Mr. M. A. Oyebo Director

Federal Department of Forestry

Abuja – Nigeria

Nigeria - [email protected]

Absent

10 Dr. C. O. Gardener National Designated Officer for CDM Projects

Nigeria - - Present

11 Jean Robert Onana Chef de la Cellule de Cooperation Représentant du MINFOF

Cameroon

+ 237 997 3349 [email protected]

Present

126


12 Joseph Armathe Amougou - B.P. 25013

Yaoundé

Cameroon

+ 237 965 1022 [email protected]

Present

13 Victoria Cole Forestry Development Authority

P. O. Box 3010

Monrovia

Liberia


Present

14 Robert B. Fallah Forestry Development Authority

P. O. Box 3010

Monrovia

Liberia


Present

15 F. S. Amoah Forest Services Division

Accra

P.O. Box 527

Accra

Ghana

+ 233 21 776145/6

+ 233 21 772728

[email protected]

Present

16 Emmanuel Tachie-Obeng Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

P. O. Box M 326

Accra

Ghana

+ 233 21 664 697/ 664698/

+ 233 21 662690

[email protected]

Present

17 Dja Manan Lucien Coordonnateur du project & inventaire des gaz à effect de serre

P.O. Box 20 BP 650

Abidjan 20

Cote d’Ivoire

+225 20 211183 [email protected]

Present

18 Me Kouame Martial Directeur des Projects de la Recherche et de la Cartographie SODEFOR

01 BP 3770

Abidjan 01

Cote d’Ivoire

+225 22 483000 /+225 22 482948

+225 22 449907

[email protected]

Present

127


19 Koffi Volley Environnmentaliste, Direction de l’Environment

BP 4825

Lome

Togo

+228 221 3321 /932 4088

+228 221 0333

[email protected]

Present

20 Sama Boundjouw Ingénieur des Eaux et Forêts

Chef Division de la Foresterie de l’Agroforesterie et de la restauration des cours d’eau

Direction des Eaux et Forêts

BP 759

Lome

Togo

+228 221 4604 /902 6808

+228 221 0333

[email protected]

Present

128

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS – CFC MEMBER COUNTRIES Present – 18 Absent – 6 Total invited - 24

Item No.

Name Organisation Address / Country

Tel / Fax Email Remarks

1 Ms. Kuena Morebotsane

Lesotho Meteorological Services

P. O. Box 14515

Maseru 100

Lesotho

+ 266 22 317250

+ 266 22 325057

[email protected]

Present

2 Mr. George C. Harawa Senior Environmental Economist

CDM Desk Officer

Environmental Affairs Department

Lingadzi House

City Centre

Private Bag 394

Lilongwe 3

Malawi

+ 265 1 771111

+ 265 1 773379

[email protected]

Present

3 Lucas Marcolino Miranda

- Angola - - Absent

4 Futhi Felicity Magagula

Ministry of Agriculture & Co-ops

Forestry Section

P. O. Box 162

Mbabane

Swaziland

Mob: + 268 625 8079

+ 268 40 42731/9


5 Mr. Fode Dabor Ambassador

Sierra Leone

Avenue de Tervueren

410 – b 1150

Brussels

(Sierra Leone)

[email protected]

Absent

129

Item No.



6 Dr. Beli Neya DPF / INERA

04 BP 8640

Ouagadougou

Burkina Faso

+ 226 70 28 31 72

+ 226 50 31 50 03

[email protected]

[email protected]

Present

7 Abdoulkader Oudoum Abdallah

Direction de l’Aménagement du Territoire et de l’Environnement

BP 2091

Djibouti

+253 35 10 20

+ 253 35 48 37

[email protected]

Absent

8 Dr. Abdalla Gaafar Mohamed

Chief of Technical Affairs Forests National Corporation

P.O. Box 658

Khartoum

Sudan

+249 83 471575

+249 83 472659

Cell +249 9 11102030

[email protected]

Present

9 Alfred N Gichu P.O. Box 30513-00100 Nairobi

Kenya

+020 3754904/5/6

+0203764249 or

020 3763669


10 Lamin Bojang Asst. Director of Forestry Forestry Department

No. 5 Marina Parade

Banjul

Gambia

Mobile

+220 986 9026

[email protected]

Present

11 Balde Safiatou Diallo Directrice Nationale du contrôle de la qualité de vie

BP 761 Conakry Cell + 00224 60 29 55 21

[email protected]

Absent

130

Item No.



au Ministère de l’Environnement

Guinea + 00224 30 46 85 46

+ 00224 30 46 85 46

12 Mr. Boubacar Sidiki Dembele

Point Focal National du MDP

BP 23 57

Bamako

Mali

+ 223 223 10 74

+ 223 223 58 67

[email protected]

Present

13 Chrysologue Mutwa Ministry of Commerce & Industry

BP 492

Bujumbura

Burundi

+257 741671 Mobile

+257 249805

+257 225595


14 Ali Abdourazak Directeur de l’Agriculture, de l’Elevage et de la Pêche de Ngazidja

B.P. 532

Moroni-Hamraba

Comoros

+ 731134 or 330600 [email protected]

Present

15 Mr. Rakotondrasoa Norbert

Point Focal Adjoint de la Convention sur le Changement Climatique et collaborateur technique à la Division Génèrale de l’Environnement

BP 571

Antsahavola

Antananarivo

Madasgascar

+ 261 32 02 478 46

+ 261 20 2241 919

[email protected]

Absent

16 Kagenza Polly Mark Ministry of Commerce, Industry, Investment Promotion, Tourism and Cooperatives (MINICOM)

Rwanda + 250 08447300 [email protected]

Present

17 Eng. Hoda Salah El-Din Rashed

Land Reclamation MARL

Undersecretary for

7 Nadi El-Seid St.,

+ 012 2767085 Mobile


131

Item No.



Afforestation and Environment

Dokki, Cairo

Egypt

+ 202 3373790 or 202 7609323

+ 202 3354983

18 Dula Shanko Lebeta Deputy Director General National Meteorological Agency

P. O Box 1090

Addis Ababa

Ethiopia

+ 551 22 99 or

+ 661 57 79

+ 251 1 551 70 66

[email protected] Absent

19 Mohamed Tasreef Khan

Dept Commissioner of Forests

Guyana Forestry Commission

Guyana + 592 623 0505 Mob

+ 592 225 3521

[email protected]

Present

20 Darlington Duwa General Manager Zimbabwe Forestry Commission

Zimbabwe

Fax: + 26344 97066 [email protected]

Present

21 Mr. Aklossou Cocou Cesar

Direction du Développement Industriel

BP 363

Cotonou

Benin

+ 229 97 44 7132

+ 229 21 30 30 24

[email protected]

Present

22 Cham Cham Assedek Niger


23 Dr. James Shergold Epila-Otara

Senior Research Officer Forestry Resources

[email protected]

Present

132

Item No.



Research Institute,

Kampala,

Uganda

24 Iwan Krolis General Director Stichting voor Bosbeheer en Bostoezicht (SSB)

Drb Martin Luther Kingweg perc no. 283

Paramaribo

Suriname

+0597 483131

+0597 483051


133

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS – FAO MEMBERS REPRESENTATIVES? Present - 5

Item No.



1 Fernando Salinas FAO

Regional Office for Africa

Accra - Ghana - [email protected] Present

2 Atse Miyapi FAO



3 Mrs. Ada Ndeso-Atanga

FAO



4 Lonneke Bakker FAO Accra -


5 M Laverdiere FAO Accra - [email protected] Present

134

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS – OBSERVERS & OTHER MEMBERS Present - 7

Item No.

Name Organisation Remarks

1 Takako Wakiyama JOCV-FPDC Present

2 William L. Amoah Youth in Green Project Present

3 W. K. Agyemang Bonsu EPA - Accra Present

4 Clare Brogan Consultant DFID Present

5 Naa Adei Boateng Consultant Present

6 J. Baidoo-Williams MOFA Present

7 E. Akwesi Owusu GREL - Takoradi Present

135

Glossary

Mitigation This section presents the definitions regarding mitigation as these are given in the decisions of the UNFCCC. Actual net greenhouse gas removals by sinks is the sum of the verifiable changes in carbon stocks in the carbon pools within the project boundary, minus the increase in emissions of the greenhouse gases measured in CO2 equivalents by the sources that are increased as a result of the implementation of the afforestation or reforestation project activity, while avoiding double counting, within the project boundary, attributable to the afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM. Afforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of land that has not been forested for a period of at least 50 years to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources. Baseline net greenhouse gas removals by sinks is the sum of the changes in carbon stocks in the carbon pools within the project boundary that would have occurred in the absence of the afforestation or reforestation project activity under the clean development mechanism (CDM). Carbon pools are those carbon pools referred to in paragraph 21 of the annex to draft decision -/CMP.1 (Land use, land-use change and forestry) and are: above-ground biomass, below-ground biomass, litter, dead wood and soil organic carbon. Cropland management is the system of practices on land on which agricultural crops are grown and on land that is set aside or temporarily not being used for crop production. Deforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of forested land to non-forested land. Forest is a minimum area of land of 0.05-1.0 hectares with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10-30 per cent with trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 2-5 metres at maturity in situ. A forest may consist either of closed forest formations where trees of various storeys and undergrowth cover a high proportion of the ground or open forest. Young natural stands and all plantations which have yet to reach a crown density of 10-30 per cent or tree height of 2-5 metres are included under forest, as are areas normally forming part of the forest area which are temporarily unstocked as a result of human intervention such as harvesting or natural causes but which are expected to revert to forest. Forest management is a system of practices for stewardship and use of forest land aimed at fulfilling relevant ecological (including biological diversity), economic and social functions of the forest in a sustainable manner. Grazing land management is the system of practices on land used for livestock production aimed at manipulating the amount and type of vegetation and livestock produced.

136

Leakage is the increase in greenhouse gas emissions by sources which occurs outside the boundary of an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM which is measurable and attributable to the afforestation or reforestation project activity. Long-term CER or “lCER” is a CER issued for an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM which, subject to the provisions in section K below no section K, expires at the end of the crediting period of the afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM for which it was issued. Net anthropogenic greenhouse gas removals by sinks is the actual net greenhouse gas removals by sinks minus the baseline net greenhouse gas removals by sinks minus leakage. Project boundary geographically delineates the afforestation or reforestation project activity under the control of the project participants. The project activity may contain more than one discrete area of land. Reforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of non-forested land to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources, on land that was forested but that has been converted to non-forested land. For the first commitment period, reforestation activities will be limited to reforestation occurring on those lands that did not contain forest on 31 December 1989. Revegetation is a direct human-induced activity to increase carbon stocks on sites through the establishment of vegetation that covers a minimum area of 0.05 hectares and does not meet the definitions of afforestation and reforestation contained here. Small-scale afforestation and reforestation project activities under the CDM are those that are expected to result in net anthropogenic greenhouse gas removals by sinks of less than 8 kilotonnes of CO2 per year and are developed or implemented by low-income communities and individuals as determined by the host Party. If a small-scale afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM results in net anthropogenic greenhouse gas removals by sinks greater than 8 kilotonnes of CO2 per year, the excess removals will not be eligible for the issuance of tCERs or lCERs. Temporary CER or “tCER” is a CER issued for an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM which, subject to the provisions of section K below no section K , expires at the end of the commitment period following the one during which it was issued.

137

Abbreviations

A/R- AR Afforestation/Reforestation ARWG Afforestation and Reforestation Working Group of the Executive Board of the CDM CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme CATIE Centro Agronomico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CDM Clean Development Mechanisms CED IF Clean Energy Investment Framework CER Certified Emission Reduction (tCER: temporary CER; lCER: long-term CER) CFC Common Fund for Commodities CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research COMIFAC Conference of Ministers in Charge of Forest in Central Africa COP Conference of the Parties CP ?? (page 50 bottom) DNA National Designated Authority DOE Designated Operational Authority EB Executive Board of the CDM ENCOFOR Environment and Community based Framework for Designing Afforestation EPA Environmental Protection Agency ERPA Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement ETS Emission Trading Scheme EU ETS European Union Emission Trading Scheme FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation FRA Forest Resource Assessment FRAD Fund for Emission Reduction from Deforestation GEF Global Environmental Facility GHG Greenhouse Gases GPG Good Practice Guidance-LULUCF IACTT Information for African Climate Technology Transfer IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ITTA International Timber Trade Agreement ITTO International Tropical Timber Organisation IUCN The World Conservation Union JI Joint Implementation KP Kyoto Protocol LDCs Least Developed Countries LULUCF Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry MA Marrakech Accords MDGs Millennium Development Goals MOP Meeting of the Parties of the Kyoto Protocol NAI/NA-I Non Annex I (countries) NAPA National Adaptation Programmes of Action NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development NFP National Forestry Programme PCF Prototype Carbon Fund (World Bank) PDD Project Design Document RED Reducing Emissions from Deforestation

138

SBI Subsidiary Body for Implementation SBSTA Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice SEMSOC Spatially Explicit Modelling of Soil Organic Carbon SFM Sustainable Forest Management TroFCCA Tropical Forests and Climate Change Adaptation UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development UNDP United Nations Development Program UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change WMO World Meteorological Organisation

CDM Final Workshop Proceedings - CD ROM - ITTO

Documents

Transcript of CDM Final Workshop Proceedings - CD ROM - ITTO