Monitoring, reporting and verification in NAMAs using SAMPLES

Todd Rosenstock, H Neufeldt, J Hickman, M Rufino, K Butterbach-Bahl, E Wollenberg, D Pelster, L Verchot, C Arias-Navarro, G Saiz, E Diaz-Pines, M Richards, D Gil-Kim+

SBSTA 42 | Bonn | 5 June 2015

Why do we need more and better data?

Low-emissions development

Global negotiations

Climate finance

Based on existing data, we know very little about African agricultural GHG fluxes

3

Nitrous oxide emissions from increasing fertilizer use in Africa

• Government subsidy programs

• NGOs (e.g., Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa)

• Used in private sector (Unilever), MRV (Gold Standard), & farmers

• Differ in input requirements, speed of assessment and ease of use

• Largely based on the same input data and models

Impact assessment with ‘GHG calculators’

Colomb et al. 2012

Small-scale spatial heterogeneityContext- specific measurement methods

At ~4 time points

Ultimately we need more data

Nyando, Kenya

Beyond field measurements of emissions

The Problem The Approach Outcome

Variable & uncertain

Accuracy unknown Comparatively little

effortMRV and inventories

based on activities

Arial photo

Crowd sourcing

Remote sensing Enabling carbon

finance and robust national policy

Rapid assessments e.g. scorecards

Activities

Mapping pro-poor mitigation opportunities

Measurement guidelines

Capacity development

Integrated assessment of

farming systems

Priorities for research and development

Consistent and comparable data

Human and institutional

infrastructure

Socially acceptable, place-based

solutions

CCAFS’ Standard Assessment of Mitigation Potential and Livelihoods (SAMPLES) Programme

http://samples.ccafs.cgiar.org

Activ

ities

Out

com

es

Thanks for a future