Category: Theme 4: Climate change adaptation and mitigation


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • A taste of COP22: A midway summary of the week’s global climate negotiations

A taste of COP22: A midway summary of the week’s global climate negotiations


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Barry Aliman, 24 years old, bicycles with her baby to fetch water for her family, Sorobouly village near Boromo, Burkina Faso. Climate change will affect rainfall patterns and the availability of water. Photo: Ollivier Girard/CIFOR
Posted by

FTA
Barry Aliman, 24 years old, bicycles with her baby to fetch water for her family, Sorobouly village near Boromo, Burkina Faso. Climate change will affect rainfall patterns and the availability of water. Photo: Ollivier Girard/CIFOR
Barry Aliman, 24 years old, bicycles with her baby to fetch water for her family, Sorobouly village near Boromo, Burkina Faso. Climate change will affect rainfall patterns and the availability of water. Photo: Ollivier Girard/CIFOR

By Stephen Leonard, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Climate negotiations are now progressing into the final days in Marrakesh with a handful of outcomes established already. The 22nd session of the Conference of the Parties (COP22) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is now into its second week, with negotiations split across several tracks.

Here’s a taste of what’s been on the table this past week in Morocco.

Let’s start with the alphabet soup: The Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement (APA) is dealing with issues such as guidance for future Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), transparency, global stocktake, adaptation communications, and compliance.

The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) is dealing with the technical issues associated with the new Article 6 mechanism on market and non-market approaches, as well as agriculture. The first meeting of the new permanent body under the Paris Agreement — known as the CMA — has now also opened this week.

Climate change will affect agricultural production. Photo: Daniel Tiveau/CIFOR
Climate change will affect agricultural production. Photo: Daniel Tiveau/CIFOR

THE PARIS ‘RULE BOOK’

The opening of the CMA is an important development here in Marrakesh, because this is occurring as a result of the rapid and record-breaking entry into force of the Paris Agreement and will be where the ‘rule book’ for the implementation of the Paris Agreement will be adopted.

At the COP21 in Paris, there were a series of decisions expected to be finalized for adoption at the first session of the CMA, known as CMA 1. Due to the early entry into force of the agreement, CMA 1 is now happening much sooner than expected.

Obviously, these rules are not completed and will require a few years to develop — the CMA will open in Marrakesh, and it will determine its mode of work moving forward into 2017 and 2018.

ESTABLISHING THE NEW ROADMAP

In the APA, these negotiations have developed a series of roadmaps and work programs, for THE provision of submissions, expert roundtables and workshops on several topics.

Some additional sessions will occur early in 2017 to keep the technical work moving. These work programs will focus on the APA agenda items: guidance for mitigation and NDCs, accounting, adaptation communications, transparency, and compliance amongst other things.

In addition to the Roadmap that has been agreed amongst the Parties, there has been a very rich exchange of views on substance that forms a body of material under development that will inform future negotiations.

Meas
Measuring carbon stock: Mangrove forests together with peat swamp forests are one of the largest carbon stock holding ecosystems. Photo: Daniel Murdiyarso/CIFOR

Discussions on mitigation, features and accounting of NDCs relate to what will be voluntary contributions and what may be mandatory. There will be guidance on accounting and environmental integrity, and avoiding double-counting has been highlighted as key areas.

There may be different levels of guidance for accounting to allow for flexibility for country capacities. Accounting for NDCs will of course be a relevant space for land-use accounting to become one of the major issues. An expert roundtable will be held on 6 May 2017, which is open only to Parties and not to observers.

Discussions on adaptation communications as a component of NDCs have been focused on issues such as timing of communications, purpose of the communications, and how these communications link to other processes. An expert workshop will also be held on 6 May prior to the mid-year UNFCCC meeting together with a round of submissions on the topic due on 30 March 2017.

On the topic of transparency, again, a process will be put in place concerning submissions, technical papers and workshops. It is clear that we are talking about transparency of ‘actions’ and ‘support’, and the submissions will focus on areas, such as how the new system can build on the current system, and what is actually needed over and above what is there.

An important consideration here on the issue of forests and land use relates to the role of social and environmental considerations in the new transparency framework, as the current system is essentially focused on measuring, reporting and verification (MRV) of carbon.

The topic of global stocktake (GST) remains contentious, as there continues to be uncertainty around what the actual outcomes of the GST will be. Parties remain concerned it will become a top-down approach to force countries to increase their ambition.

This is also linked with the upcoming Facilitative Dialogue, which will be held in 2018, which is a bit like a trial run of the GST to be held in 2023. It is widely accepted that these processes need to be designed to inform and inspire countries to increase ambition and enhance their climate actions, however just how this is to be done will be the subject of ongoing negotiations.

In the lead up to the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue, countries will have the benefit of the special report currently underway by the IPCC concerning the 1.5 degree temperature goal agreed in Paris.

MARKETS AND NON-MARKETS

The SBSTA is doing work of high significance related to market and non-market approaches, and the new ‘mechanism’ under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.

The Article 6 discussions are split out into three tracks, the first being more broadly what the mechanism is about, the second being how it relates to markets, and the third being how it relates to non-market approaches.

This new ‘mechanism’ is intended to take over from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and whether it includes REDD+ as both a market and non-market context remains uncertain.

The forest carbon trading debate is occurring in the market track, whereas in the non-market track discussions are moving in the direction of how to ensure finance for those countries unable to access, or unwilling to access, markets.

Due to the level of contention around the markets issue, and the complexities associated with achieving phase one of REDD+, many countries will need finance via non-market approaches.

It is also worth mentioning that the joint mitigation-adaptation approach to REDD+ is also considered a non-market approach. This is perhaps one of the more interesting discussions related to the role of REDD+, especially in the light of the decision by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which has also not yet decided to include forest carbon.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is also working to complete its results-based payments framework, and the topic of what to do with REDD+ credits (if established) — whether to retire them or whether they can be traded — will no doubt come up too in future meetings later this year and early 2017.

The arguments for carbon trading and offsetting remain the same. Those in favor of markets continue to argue the importance of generating finance and stimulating private sector investments in favor of forests, and the arguments against continue to revolve around concerns related to rights, the commodification of nature and non-permanence of forest carbon sequestration.

However, now new dimensions enter the debate where we are confronted with a shrinking carbon budget, a 1.5-degree target and a desire on the part of many countries to retain their own emissions reductions to apply against their NDCs.

More specifically on REDD+, there was a consultation event held by the GCF which was very well attended, standing room only. This was interesting, with examples related to progress toward achieving results provided by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Brazil, the Norwegian International Forest Climate Initiative (NICFI) and the KfW Development Bank. The GCF will now hold further workshops and consultations to develop their results-based payments system.

As with all other items of this COP, the SBSTA outcome here will be procedural, with a series of submissions and workshops going into 2017. The link to the draft SBSTA decisions can be found here (see agenda item 12). This is however one of the more unfortunate outcomes as observers have been excluded from participation in this round of submissions.

There has also been an agenda item on agriculture considered here under the SBSTA, where there continues to be a deadlock between developed countries and developing countries over the question of the role of agriculture in mitigation, as well as what to do now that the two-year work program has been completed.

The outcome here is basically to continue working on the topic at the next SBSTA meeting, but it is safe to say the issue has not progressed here at all. See agenda item 7 to find out more.

SLOW AND STEADY WINS THE RACE

Overall, the conference has been slow-moving and has been overshadowed by the U.S. election, which has created much uncertainty, but at the same time has created opportunities for other countries to show their resolve get on with the job and keep working on implementing the Paris Agreement. Many countries have already made statements that they remain committed to implementing the agreement.

As the session moved into a gear change with the High Level sessions commencing, well- attended by Ministers and Heads of State, the expectations are that the outcome of COP22 will be a clear indication from world leaders that there continues to be global momentum to address climate change and that we now have a clear way forward with a much-needed roadmap to put in place the ‘rule book’ to implement the Paris Agreement.

This blog is related to the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Four unexplored big wins in agriculture: tackling climate change through landscape restoration

Four unexplored big wins in agriculture: tackling climate change through landscape restoration


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA
28958502692_b93eeac4d5_k-2-1080x675
Photo: CIAT

By Georgina Smith, originally published at CIAT’s blog

Four solutions lie in how we farm our food and treat our landscapes: this session aims to throw light on some of the tools that can tackle climate change head-on.

During this session, we call on the audience at the on-going 22nd Conference of the Parties (COP 22) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Morocco to consider these:

The first big win: trees on agricultural land could sink four times more carbon. Recent studies show that carbon sequestered by trees on agricultural land is not well accounted for. If it was, researchers argue in this study: “Global Tree Cover and Biomass Carbon on Agricultural Land: The contribution of agroforestry to global and national carbon budgets,” total carbon estimates from agricultural land could be more than four times higher than they are.

Yet while carbon stored and sequestered by forests is widely recognized and land cover changes well monitored, carbon stored by trees on agricultural land needs to be measured better. Growing more trees on farm land could be a fast and easy route to increasing carbon sequestration, above and below ground, with a myriad of other benefits.

That entails mapping landscapes to guide decision makers about where to invest in certain management practices over others, and policies that enhance carbon sequestration on agricultural land to benefit farmers and society as a whole.

image-2-trees-on-farms

The second big win is that carbon can be absorbed back into the soil. The stock of carbon in the soil is twice as high as that in the atmosphere. Small changes in soil carbon can have big impact on atmospheric carbon.

This session discusses new research from the International Center for Tropical Agriculture and The Nature Conservancy, presenting an initiative that could offset all CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning that are not already absorbed by oceans and land.

Data and maps show the most up-to-date soil properties from World Soil Information and Food and Agriculture Organization and illustrate where carbon could be sequestered if practices to enhance soil organic matter were widely adopted.

Since agricultural soils, already managed actively, have lost significant amounts of carbon, they could also re-absorb carbon based on soil type and climate. What’s needed are site-specific tools for decision makers presenting the bigger picture on where soils are degraded, and where to invest to improve soil carbon stocks.

A third big win looks at protecting wetland and peatland ecosystems

These ecosystems contain around 20% of global soil organic carbon stocks. But tropical peat fires are a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions, producing transboundary “hazes” impacting human health, regional economies and ecosystems.

Huge opportunities to mitigate climate change lie in protecting these lands. But they are often under threat from commercial and development interests. Combined with contemporary agricultural practices on peatlands – land clearance, burning, drainage and fertilization – these landscapes and the carbon they store are at risk. How can they be climate-proofed?

The fourth big win shows how improving grasslands can provide a triple-climate-win. Brachiaria grasses sequester significant amounts of soil organic carbon – conservative estimates indicate a 2-3 fold higher annual sequestration rate than in other annual cropping systems.

A growing body of research shows that some varieties of brachiaria reduce N2O emissions from soils, a phenomenon known as biological nitrification inhibition. New research also finds 40% more milk and tens of millions of dollars in revenue are possible for African farmers adopting drought resilient brachiaria varieties.

Wider adoption of brachiaria grasses to improve grasslands has a tremendous potential to mitigate climate – especially in sub-Saharan Africa. But further research is needed to investigate commercial-quality seed in Africa, and tackle climate-related challenges like new pests and diseases.

“Unexplored big wins for climate change through landscape restoration,” is a side event at the Global Landscape Forum, on Wednesday November 16th, Ourika room, Kenzi Club Agdal Medina, Marrakesh, 11.00 – 12.30. The session is co-hosted by CIAT and the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems. 

For more information and next steps on action read our four briefs:

Big win 1: trees on agricultural land could sink four times more carbon.

Big win 2: Carbon can be absorbed back into the soil

Big win 3: Protecting Wetland and Peatland ecosystems 

Big win 4: improving grasslands

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Peter Holmgren: Sustainable solutions to climate change lie in the landscape

Peter Holmgren: Sustainable solutions to climate change lie in the landscape


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Look beyond carbon emissions to find solutions to climate change. Photo: Ian Britton/Flickr
Posted by

FTA
Look beyond carbon emissions to find solutions to climate change. Photo: Ian Britton/Flickr
Look beyond carbon emissions to find solutions to climate change. Photo: Ian Britton/Flickr

Originally published at Thomson Reuters Foundation and CIFOR’s Forests News

If we are to find sustainable solutions to climate change, we have to look at the bigger picture.

And in that picture climate change – and carbon emissions – aren’t everything. Neither are biodiversity, water, forests, agriculture or coastal habitats and oceans, gender or communities, education, poverty and inequality or energy. In the big picture, the picture that counts, they are all important.

Saying this doesn’t make me a climate sceptic or a climate denier, or even a climate cynic. Far from it. But as the world gathers for COP22 in Marrakesh, a year after the Paris Agreement, it is clear to me that if we are to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and meet our climate targets, we have to find a new way of doing things.

The overwhelming tendency, the modus operandi of development, is to operate in silos, or compartments, of our own disciplines, our own organisations, our own ministries and our own sectors, all of us working toward our own targets of success.

Focus on the landscape...Photo: Louis Putzel/CIFOR
Focus on the landscape…Photo: Louis Putzel/CIFOR

An agricultural ministry is told to increase production of a certain crop, and if they have to clear 25 percent of the nation’s forests and all the biodiversity within, roll over indigenous groups, so be it. Climate change – let’s leave that to the Environment Ministry. Campaigners and non-governmental organisations often tend to stay in their own silo too – focusing on a single issue with little regard for the relevance of any others. That has to change.

We have to look at each SDG in context with the others, and approach them as a whole. We have to tear down the walls that separate sectors, because they do not represent the situation on the ground anywhere. In the real world, there are broad landscapes within which different interests, demands, objectives and targets compete.

Approaching solutions holistically is at the heart of what is known as the landscapes approach and the global movement that is arising around it. The term is not known beyond development circles but it should be, because every stretch of land or sea touched by mankind makes up the millions of landscapes on this planet.

The approach is neither prescriptive nor inflexible. It is not top-down. It embraces compromise. It accepts that in any dispute about how to manage resources there will be a need for arbitration between different demands – small-scale farmers, big agro-business, international agreements, national and local governments, conservationists.

...and on the people in it. Photo: Aulia Erlangga/CIFOR
…and on the people in it. Photo: Aulia Erlangga/CIFOR

The objective is to seek multiple measurable benefits from every action and investment in a landscape – more food, more income, greater equality, and a healthy environment. It assumes there will be trade-offs with no absolute winners and no absolute losers.

Enter the Global Landscapes Forum, the biggest event under the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Three years ago, a small group of organisations including the World Bank, the United Nations Environment Programme, together with my organisation, the Centre for International Forestry Research, created a platform on the margins of the UN’s climate change meetings where every sector and discipline could connect, through the lens of the landscapes approach, the climate agenda and the 2015 SDGs.

Today GLF is taking on a life of its own. Last year, more than 3,000 people from 105 countries – everyone from California Governor Jerry Brown to a tribal leader from Borneo – joined us in Paris. Its sixth gathering is being held in Marrakesh on November 16.

It has grown into a global community of several hundred organisations, with tens of thousands of people from every continent, including scientists, lawyers, bankers, indigenous and community leaders, farmers and foresters, NGO personnel, journalists and policy makers, actively sharing their experiences, research, initiatives and knowledge. In short, we have created a global conversation on building sustainable landscapes that is changing the way we think, connect and act.

Already we have received pledges to restore 148 million hectares of degraded land from countries all over the world. The next target is to increase that to 400 million hectares – and to devise the action plans needed to implement and measure them.

Our vision is to reach far beyond expert communities and connect and inspire a billion people to join us by 2020. We believe this is vital not just for reshaping the climate and development agenda, but for building a world that is sustainable, more prosperous and more equitable.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • COP22 Special: The role of private actors on the world’s climate stage

COP22 Special: The role of private actors on the world’s climate stage


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Watch the COP22 side event: What is essential for transparency under the Paris Agreement?
Posted by

FTA
screen-shot-2016-11-16-at-1-13-48-pm
Presentation by FTA researcher Anne Larson at a side event on non-state actors at the COP22 in Marrakesh, Morocco.

By Suzanna Dayne, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

The landmark Paris climate change agreement was adopted by 195 nations – all pledging to keep global warming well below 2°C.

But many of the decisions, actions and outcomes on climate change are actually made by non-state actors such as local governments, multinational corporations, civil society organizations, indigenous peoples, smallholders and small- and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs).

Experts with the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry examined the role of non-state actors at a side event at the COP22 in Marrakesh, Morocco, on 10 November.

The panelists discussed the challenges and opportunities for these actors, particularly the private sector, to contribute to the achievement of nationally determined contributions (NDCs). They also looked at the importance of independent and transparent monitoring to verify whether commitments are met, and the role of the private sector in meeting them.

A WORD TO THE WISE

Under the Paris Agreement, more “non-state actors” (NSAs) are included in United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) initiatives. But using this term for such a wide-ranging group presents challenges since non-state actors are as diverse as their motivations and actions.

“There are many diverse groups that fall within the non-state actors category, all playing different roles in commitments to climate change, including companies, civil society, academia, NGOs, smallholders and indigenous peoples,” said Pablo Pacheco, a principal scientist at CIFOR.
Watch the COP22 side event: What is essential for transparency under the Paris Agreement?
Watch the COP22 side event: What is essential for transparency under the Paris Agreement?

“Even the private sector is very heterogeneous, comprising diverse sub-groups with different priorities and capacities, some of which are operating within informal economies,” he added. “So monitoring progress among this diverse group of actors is complicated.”

Pacheco and his colleagues emphasized that there cannot be a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to non-state actors and urge the UNFCCC to address this issue.

KEEPING PROMISES

In 2014, the UNFCCC launched the Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action (NAZCA) portal, which tracks actions that are helping countries achieve and exceed their national commitments to address climate change.

To date, more than 12,500 commitments have been made by corporations, investors, CSOs, cities and regions.

During the COP21 in Paris, this platform evolved into a more formal arrangement through the Global Climate Action Agenda, which has played a key role at COP22 in Marrakesh.

CIFOR scientists have found that although many international corporations have made voluntary commitments to reduce their negative environmental and social impacts in the agriculture and forestry sectors, there is still no systematic way to track and verify these pledges, or their impacts on climate change.

“These companies have self-reporting systems, but there remains issues of credibility, transparency and independence,” said Pacheco.

“It is important to have independent monitoring. There also needs to be awareness of the potential and limits of pledges by NSAs, because often, they don’t have specific targets and timeframes.”

Presentation by Arrild Angelsen at COP22 side event.
Presentation by Arrild Angelsen at COP22 side event.

Pacheco pointed out that there are a number of organizations, such as the World Resources Institute (WRI) and Global Forests Watch that monitor aspects of climate change, while other groups monitor trade flows and investments, including financial risk.

While it is important to have these diverse initiatives, Pacheco believes that a common definition of metrics and indicators is necessary.

“When it comes to monitoring, it is good to have diversity, but we need to discuss what needs to be monitored and how to do it transparently,” he said. “Not only at the global level, but also at the local level in ways that make sense for all the different stakeholders.”

FINDING COMMON GROUND

CIFOR scientists identified a major risk for smallholders and other local people who are marginalized and operate within informal economies. They argue that these actors face the risk of being excluded due to corporate attempts to build ‘deforestation-free’ supply chains. This not only impacts rural communities, but the environment as well.

To remedy this, better UNFCCC safeguards are required. “In spite of their risks, corporate commitments also have the potential to support smallholders and leverage resources to help them to uptake more sustainable practices,” said Pacheco.

One way to do this would be through the Green Climate Fund (GCF), according to Pacheco. 194 governments in 2010 established the fund to help developing countries formulate programs and policies that would help them mitigate and adapt to climate change.

These commitments, in spite of their risks of excluding certain suppliers, could be used to support smallholders and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to upgrade their production systems and, therefore, to be able to compete and benefit from sustainable supply chains.

“We need to bring these resources to more disadvantaged players to help them gain access to tenure rights, proper loans and financing,” said Pacheco.

“For example, if a company pledges not to buy from smallholders who are encroaching on forested land, these people will no longer have a source of income. So we need to engage them in the forestry market, provide better more efficient agricultural methods, provide resources and create alternative livelihoods.”.

Pacheco said SMEs would eventually need to get on board and be included in the monitoring process. He said a multi-stakeholder approach is needed that takes into account local diversity and values that do not disempower small suppliers.

“Many companies are clashing with informal economies, so we need to find ways to formalize these processes,” he said. “I think regularizing tenure rights and finding resources for these marginalized people is key.”

Pacheco added that initiatives stemming from the private sector need to be linked to governments, especially when it concerns land tenure and planning.

During the panel, CIFOR scientists argued that there is more than enough justification for the UNFCCC to develop guidelines that will assist engagement with non-state actors in climate mitigation and adaptation actions in a socially and environmentally responsible way to implement the Paris Agreement.

They say this could be done through information to be included in NDCs and through the modalities under negotiation to enhance the UNFCCC Transparency Framework. Voluntary commitments through transparent processes that are open to wider society are also needed. Finally, indigenous groups, including women, also need to be included in the process.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • COP22 Special: REDD+ monitoring is a technical and political balancing act

COP22 Special: REDD+ monitoring is a technical and political balancing act


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Analysis of the CO2 and H2O levels at Berbak National Park, Jambi, Sumatra, Indonesia. Photo by James Maiden for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Posted by

FTA
Monitoring deforestation so countries can track their greenhouse gas emission targets is more than a technical matter of satellite images and data. Photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT/CIFOR
Monitoring deforestation so countries can track their greenhouse gas emission targets is more than a technical matter of satellite images and data. Photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT/CIFOR

By Barbara Fraser, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Monitoring deforestation so countries can track their greenhouse gas emission targets might seem like a technical matter of satellite images and data.

But implementing systems for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of programs aimed at reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) has proven much more complicated, says Anne Larson, a scientist at the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

That’s partly because of the many layers of decision-making involved, from international agreements hammered out at global climate summits to national government policies and local government programs for forest-dwelling communities.

“We live in a world of multi-level governance,” says Larson, who will present findings from CIFOR’s research at a side event during the international climate conference (COP22) that kicked off in Marrakesh, Morocco this past Monday (Nov. 7).

“If we want to make a real impact on the ground in addressing climate change by controlling land-use change, we have to figure out how to improve communication and collaboration among those various levels of governance,” she says.

How well national and sub-national governments coordinate with each other—and how well they collaborate with international bodies—varies from place to place.

“We need to understand what is behind collaboration challenges, such as different perspectives on the problem and its solutions, different economic or political interests, or different goals,” Larson says. “And all of this is shaped by power dynamics.”

Monitoring REDD+ has been designed globally, but the systems have to be implemented nationally, and some components probably will have to be handled locally, such as here in the Amazon. Photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT/CIFOR
Monitoring REDD+ has been designed globally, but the systems have to be implemented nationally, and some components probably will have to be handled locally, such as here in the Amazon. Photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT/CIFOR

That can make it difficult to implement programs that appear to be straightforward technical solutions.

“MRV for REDD+ has been designed globally, but the systems have to be implemented nationally, and some components probably will have to be handled locally,” Larson says.

This will require a balancing act.

INCREASING TRANSPARENCY

Slowing deforestation and degradation requires good monitoring systems, but must also account for factors such as effective land-use planning, guaranteeing land tenure, and ensuring that local communities share the benefits of REDD+ programs.

While the technical experts who design the systems for measuring, reporting and verifying progress must base their work on unbiased scientific evidence, implementation requires political negotiations that must be transparent and participatory, Larson says.

In Peru, for example, CIFOR research found that government officials sought to centralize data gathering for MRV at the national level, but local and regional government officials also wanted access to the information and a role in decision making.

While the national government’s priority might be data about carbon storage and REDD+, local and regional governments need information for land-use planning. Communities, meanwhile, might be most interested in geo-referencing their boundaries or controlling intrusion by outsiders.

“Sub-national governments may not know what data is being collected and why, who has access to it and how they could use it,” Larson says.

Analysis of the CO2 and H2O levels at Berbak National Park, Jambi, Sumatra, Indonesia. Photo by James Maiden for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Analysis of the CO2 and H2O levels at Berbak National Park, Jambi, Sumatra, Indonesia. Photo by James Maiden for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

STRENGTHENING SYNERGIES

“The system should be designed from the beginning in the way that is most useful to everyone,” she adds. “It takes a lot of effort to bring the various levels of government together to talk about these things, but it is more effective in the long run.”

Communication and coordination are even more important when indigenous communities are involved, because systems must take cultural characteristics into account.

While MRV systems can be highly technical, the experts who design them must be able to discuss their social and economic implications with policy makers, national and local government officials, and members of civil society groups, Larson says. They also may need to offer training to government officials and representatives of community groups who lack technical experience.

In places like the Amazon basin, which is shared by nine countries, coordination among national governments is also important. In South America, the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization could facilitate such collaboration to “strengthen synergies and minimize overlaps,” she says.

“MRV isn’t just a matter of gathering and mapping data,” Larson says. “It’s crucial to pay attention to the political steps. If REDD+ programs are to be successful, they have to be negotiated through this complex political world.”

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • COP22 Special: Talking gender and climate change

COP22 Special: Talking gender and climate change

13 November, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA

Scientists working under the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry discuss the main issues related to gender and climate change in the lead-up to COP22 in Marrakesh. Are women considered in climate policy? How is gender understood in global climate commitments? CIFOR will be talking gender in Marrakesh at a number of events, including the Global Landscapes Forum on 16 November.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • COP22 Special: Why should we care about peat?

COP22 Special: Why should we care about peat?


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA

Originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Peat is partially decayed, dead vegetation that has accumulated over thousands of years. Though peatlands are generally saturated with water and difficult to set ablaze, they can become tinderboxes when they are drained to make way for agricultural plantations like pulp and paper and palm oil.

When peatlands burn, huge amounts of CO2 are released.

Although peatlands cover just 3-5 percent of the Earth’s surface, they store more than 30 percent of all soil carbon. And while the area of peatland currently classified as drained and degrading covers less than 0.4 percent of the global land surface, it is responsible for 5 percent of global anthropogenic emissions, according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

INDONESIA’S PEAT PROBLEM

Military troops help to extinguish peat fires in Indonesia. Photo by Aulia Erlangga/ CIFOR
Military troops help to extinguish peat fires in Indonesia. Photo by Aulia Erlangga/ CIFOR

Fires in forests and former forestlands occur in Indonesia in the dry season every year – particularly in the provinces of Riau and Jambi on the island of Sumatra, and West Kalimantan and Central Kalimantan on the island of Borneo.

However, the haze that spreads to other countries is no longer restricted to drought years, and has become increasingly frequent due to ongoing deforestation of peatlands in Indonesia.

The 2015 forest fires in Indonesia were devastating for the environment, resulting in 884 million tons of carbon dioxide being released in the region – with 97 percent originating from burning in Indonesia. The corresponding carbon emissions were 289 million tons, with 1.2 billion tons of associated carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions.

The gravity of this environmental crisis motivated Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo to pledge to restore two million hectares of the country’s degraded peatlands by 2020 to prevent future fires.

Under the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry, CIFOR is studying the complex socioeconomic, ecological and governance factors at play in peatland restoration, as well as directly engaging with communities on the ground in Dompas village, Riau province, Sumatra.

A NEW GLOBAL PEAT INITIATIVE

Peatland soil in Lake Sentarum, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Photo by Ricki Martin for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Peatland soil in Lake Sentarum, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Photo by Ricki Martin for Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

Policymakers at COP22 are now looking more closely at how peatlands can be better managed in order to curb carbon emissions. While the launch of the peatland hotspots map at COP21 in Paris last year marked the start of work to develop an online Global Peatland Atlas, more work needs to be done.

For one, there is a need for better mapping before restoration and conservation can begin in some areas. Additionally, new partners will need to be mobilized to make real progress towards sustainable peatland management. In an effort to achieve this goal, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is set to unveil its new initiative at the Global Landscapes Forum on 16 November in Marrakesh, Morocco.

The Global Peatlands Initiative aims to increase the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of peatlands in countries with significant peat deposits delivering benefits for agriculture, biodiversity and the climate. In terms of scale and scope, the initiative goes beyond any recent collaborative efforts on peat.

Among its founding members are: the governments of Indonesia, Peru and the Republic of Congo, UNEP, FAO, IFAD, the EC, Wetlands International, UNEP-WCMC, GRID-Arendal, Ramsar Secretariat, European Space Agency, WRI, Greifswald Mire Centre and SarVision/Sateligence.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Is household forest clearing affected by REDD+?

Is household forest clearing affected by REDD+?

12 November, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications

In this presentation, the presenter assesses whether REDD+ interventions have had an impact on forest clearing by rural household, and the local contexts that have influenced any change in behavior. Although clearing by smallholders is increasingly dominated by large scale commercial actors, it still plays a non-negligible role in global greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing forest clearing by households was the main rationale for sub-national initiatives to reduce emissions from forests and forest degradation (REDD+). However, REDD+ interventions to reduce local forest conversion and use could negatively affect the livelihoods among communities.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Top 10 things to watch out for at the COP22 concerning forests and land use

Top 10 things to watch out for at the COP22 concerning forests and land use


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Photo: Daniel Tiveau/CIFOSR
Posted by

FTA
Photo: Ollivier Girard/CIFOR
Photo: Ollivier Girard/CIFOR

By Stephen Leonard, Suzanna Dayne. Originally posted at CIFOR’s Forests News

At the COP21 in Paris last year, 195 countries reached an historic agreement – the first ever universal, legally binding global climate deal.

Yet while each country made emission-cutting pledges, the pledges remain on the whole inadequate to date, potentially putting the world on a dangerous path towards global warming by 3 degrees Celsius.

Currently, 89 countries have ratified the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on 4 November. Only three days later, the 22nd session of the Conference of the Parties (COP22) in Marrakesh, Morocco began.

It’s time to roll up our collective sleeves and get to work on the implementation of the Agreement.

TOP 10 THINGS TO WATCH OUT FOR AT COP22:

  1. Land Sector and the 1.5 degree goal:

The land sector will play a very significant role in limiting global average temperature increase to well below 2° or 1.5oC as agreed in the Paris Agreement. This sector is the second largest contributor to climate change according to the IPCC.

Restoring degraded ecosystems and reforestation can make a major contribution and it will be important to prioritise emphasis on these low hanging fruit rather than over-dependence on unproven technological solutions. At the forefront of priorities however, should be removal of fossil fuel subsidies and the phasing out of fossil fuels by at least mid-century.

A key point for COP22 negotiators will be to explore how this will be achieved by developed nations and how to financially support less developed countries, particularly in regards to the development of the 100 billion Road Map.

The special report being prepared by the IPCC on 1.5 degrees should inform the negotiations and provide new guidance in coming years. It will be crucial for the role of the land sector and forests to make up a major part of this work.

  1. REDD+:
Photo: Daniel Tiveau/CIFOSR
Photo: Daniel Tiveau/CIFOR

REDD+ is intended to reward developing countries for their verified efforts to reduce emissions and enhance the removal of greenhouse gases through a variety of forest management options. The Green Climate Fund (GCF), which supports developing countries to reduce GHG emissions and to adapt to climate change, is working to finalize its policy so that it can make results-based payments for REDD+.

A process has recently been put in place and a decision is expected on the topic at the next GCF Board meeting in December. One ongoing contentious topic concerning REDD+ relates to the use of forest carbon offsets.

Experts continue to argue that forest offsets do not reduce emissions from fossil fuels. This is an issue that is unresolved up until now in multiple forums including the GCF and the International Civil Aviation Organisation. Allowing forest offsets delays the much-needed phasing out of fossil fuels, so we can expect discussions on this topic in Marrakesh and beyond.

Also read about FTA events at COP22 in Marrakesh

  1. Agriculture:

Agriculture is responsible for around eight per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. But agriculture remains a sensitive and complex issue, especially for developing countries where food security is a major concern.

Agricultural expansion has led to environmental degradation and loss of forests, especially in tropical countries. Climate changes have already impacted many staple crops and impacted the beef and cattle sector, which is the mainstay for many communities.

These issues, if not addressed justly, will lead to increased hunger and malnutrition among the most vulnerable populations living in Africa, Asia and Central America. The Agriculture work plan that was established by the SBSTA in 2014 has now been completed and in Marrakesh, its next steps will be determined.

These could include a new work program focused on how to ensure food security in a changing climate, as well as work programs on the enhanced understanding of indigenous and traditional practices.

  1. Enhancing Transparency:
Photo: Ollivier Girard/CIFOR
Photo: Ollivier Girard/CIFOR

Article 13 of the Paris Agreement established an enhanced transparency framework. During COP22, negotiators will continue to develop the modalities and guidelines to implement it. A number of submissions have already been received from countries on this topic. There is a need to analyse the way monitoring, measuring, reporting and verification is approached.

Climate action is about more than just carbon, as should be the system of transparency. It will be important that human rights and social and environmental implications of all actions taken are included in the enhanced transparency system.

This extends to actions taken by the corporate sector, otherwise known as “non-state actors”. Efforts to mitigate climate change could have severe social consequences and at present, apart from the REDD+ Cancun Safeguards, there are no broadly applied safeguards within the UNFCCC against these possible impacts.

  1. Corporate Pledges and Zero Deforestation:

Companies like SC Johnson, Unilever and McDonald’s have all committed to zero deforestation supply chains. But how can this be achieved when raw materials are sourced from remote parts of the world, by companies that cross multiple borders? What mechanisms are currently in place to ensure monitoring activities are accurate? How do we ensure transparency and what reporting guidelines will be used in all these countries?

The UNFCCC’s Climate Action Agenda and Non State Actor Platforms have advanced this discussion significantly. COP22 provides the opportunities to look more closely and cound develop guidelines on how corporate actions may relate to the NDCs, the Enhanced Transparency Framework and the Global Stocktake, as well as the growing role of non-state actors in climate negotiations.

Learn about the Global Landscapes Forum 2016, the biggest side event of COP22 on land use and climate change

  1. Ecosystems:

Article 5 of the Paris Agreement states that parties are required to take action to conserve and enhance natural ecosystems. Meanwhile, the Preamble notes the importance of ensuring the integrity of all ecosystems, including oceans, and the protection of biodiversity.

The role of ecosystems and the importance of biodiversity is often understated, or ignored in the UNFCCC negotiations. However, the provisions mentioned throughout the text that require the need for environmental integrity in the NDCs (Article 4) and the Sustainable Development Mechanism (Article 6) should pave the way for further emphasis on climate, ecosystems integrity and biodiversity considerations.

What’s more, the Convention on Biological Diversity has recently released an important report that identifies climate change’s impact on biodiversity. It warns that geo-engineering technological solutions being proposed are also likely to have further negative impacts on biodiversity through land use change, a serious issue that should not be ignored.

  1. Coastal Ecosystems and Blue Carbon:

Coastal and marine ecosystems, in particular mangroves, are a key piece in the climate change puzzle, storing significant amounts of “blue” carbon from the oceans and the atmosphere. According to the Blue Carbon Initiative, coastal habitats account for about half of the total carbon sequestered in ocean sediments.

As the world’s largest archipelago, Indonesia’s coastal blue carbon holds great potential for climate change mitigation if unsustainable economic development is checked. But how can this be achieved? What financial incentives should be taken into account? Restoration and protection of mangrove ecosystems could play a more important role in terms of pre-2020 mitigation potential, a matter that the UNFCCC and the GCF should consider.

  1. Operationalizing Rights:

Climate change is widely recognized as a human rights issue. For this reason, human rights, rights of indigenous peoples and gender have all been included in the preamble to the Paris Agreement.

Gender and indigenous peoples considerations are also included in the sections on Adaptation (Article 7) and Capacity Building (Article 11). Significant efforts to ensure women are not left behind have been made within the Green Climate Fund, which has a comprehensive gender policy and a gender action planin place to help ensure that women, particularly those from developing countries, are included.

But unfortunately, no such progress has yet been made concerning indigenous peoples policies at the GCF. Ways to bring women and indigenous peoples into the process as equal stakeholders when projects are designed and ways to provide resources on the ground to implement them need to be identified. A broader human rights agenda needs to be operationalized. This long overdue work should commence in Marrakesh.

  1. Technology:

Technology is consistently high on the list of priorities to address climate change as it increases both accessibility and affordability. Tried and tested energy sources like wind and solar, as well as satellite and computer systems that track and map fires, deforestation and climate changes, are helping nations to meet their pledges.

But not all technology is created equally. For example, arguments both for and against investments in carbon capture and storage (CCS) are on the rise, and risks associated with geo-engineering have been raised. Both technologies will have significant impacts on land use, biodiversity, people and food security depending upon the level of their deployment.

It will be necessary for the provisions of the Paris Agreement, which establish the Technology Framework (Article 10), to enhance action on technologies and in doing so, ensure that such technologies are socially and environmentally sound. It is likely that the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) and the GCF will play an increasingly important role on this topic and should refrain from any investments in technologies that could undermine the global goal on adaptation (Article 7) to increase resilience and decrease vulnerability.

  1. Accounting:

Last, but not least, is land use accounting. Without measuring sinks and sources, it is impossible to know whether we are on track to achieve the Paris Agreement objectives. This subject is particularly complicated when it comes to land use. These complexities leave many negotiators at a disadvantage on the topic.

Experts agree that a good accounting system must be transparent, accurate, verifiable and efficient. As work is undertaken to put in place a new land use accounting system, it will be important that countries work towards comprehensive accounting and close existing loopholes. A system that clearly shows emissions from the land sector will be important and complexities associated with international trade of biomass to ensure its inclusion in land use accounting methodologies will need to be addressed.

FROM IMPLEMENTATION TO TRANSFORMATION

It is clear that participants at COP22 will have their hands full as they hammer out the “how to” aspects of the Paris Agreement. Implementation has been the buzzword since the Agreement was reached, but we are now faced with a new challenge resulting from the record time in which ratification occurred.

There remains much technical work to be done to ensure the Paris Agreement is implemented in a way that truly ensures the necessary transition of the global economy. We should hope that the rush to implement does not undermine the transformational potential of the Agreement and weaken the ‘rule book’ under development.

COP22 is the first COP since Paris. There is great uncertainty in regards to the way the politics will play out, especially with a US election happening during the first week. One thing we know for sure is that we already hold the answers to many climate needs and solutions. The greatest risk now to achieving the necessary transformational change are the forces, the vested interests and the actors that drive and influence the political agenda.

For more information on this topic, please contact Stephen Leonard at s.leonard@cgiar.org.
This research forms part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Agroforestry and Redd+ in Africa: potentials, challenges and the way forward

Agroforestry and Redd+ in Africa: potentials, challenges and the way forward

08 November, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Enhancing transparency in the land sector under the Paris Agreement: Non-state actors and corporate pledges, from rhetoric to reality

Enhancing transparency in the land sector under the Paris Agreement: Non-state actors and corporate pledges, from rhetoric to reality

07 November, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA

Key messages

  • Article 13 of the Paris Agreement calls for enhanced transparency in climate actions. At the same time, non-state actors (NSAs) are increasingly referred to within the text of decisions and initiatives by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). However, the continued use of such a broad and undefined term to represent a complex set of stakeholders – ranging from academia to private sector, civil society to indigenous peoples groups – is unhelpful. There cannot be a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to NSAs
  • The private sector is a complex and diverse sub-set of NSAs, with significant variations in capacity, motivations and priorities across companies and value chains. Their response to climate change will be key to setting and achieving the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) made by Parties to the UNFCCC.
  • A large number of international corporations have made voluntary commitments to reduce their negative environmental and social impacts in the agriculture and forestry sectors, within their own operations as well as those of third-party suppliers. Many of these pledges have now been registered on the UNFCCC non-state actor platform (NAZCA). As yet, however, there is no systematic way to track and verify these pledges and their impacts.
  • One major risk is that stringent and rapidly implemented corporate commitments related to sustainable and ‘deforestation free’ supply chains will exclude already marginalized smallholders, who often operate within broader informal economies, resulting in indirect detrimental social and environmental impacts. Aside from the Cancun safeguards, such risks remain unrecognized by the UNFCCC.
  • Public funds, such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), could be used to financially support smallholders and small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and upgrade their production systems through the adoption of improved practices and by facilitating their access to sustainable supply chains.
  • Governments, indigenous peoples groups and civil society organizations, as well as corporations themselves, are monitoring the progress and impact of NSA pledges at different spatial scales. But significant challenges remain regarding the alignment of methods, metrics and data sets, disclosure of information, and the verification and monitoring of indirect impacts.
  • There is currently no systematic way to track delivery of voluntary commitments through transparent processes that are open to wider society. Additional efforts, including national and international political architectures are needed.
  • There is justification for the UNFCCC to develop guidance around NSA engagement in climate mitigation and adaptation actions. This can help to distinguish between different groups of NSAs and track the activities undertaken by diverse private sector actors, to better understand how they contribute to achieving NDCs.

Authors: Gnych, S.; Leonard, S.; Pacheco, P.; Lawry, S.; Martius, C.

Topic: climate change, adaptation, mitigation

Series: CIFOR Infobrief no. 157

Pages: 8p.

Published at: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia

Publication Year: 2016

DOI: 10.17528/cifor/006257

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Enhancing transparency in the land-use sector: Exploring the role of independent monitoring approaches

Enhancing transparency in the land-use sector: Exploring the role of independent monitoring approaches


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA

There is a need for independent monitoring approaches (i.e. unbiased data, tools and methods) that stakeholders involved in land-use sector mitigation activities can rely on for their own goals, but which would also be perceived as transparent and legitimate by others and support accountability of all stakeholders in the framework of the Paris Agreement

Independent monitoring is not a specific tool, a single system or a one-serves-all approach. It is rather a diversity of approaches and initiatives with the purpose of increasing transparency and broadening stakeholder participation and confidence by providing free and open methods, data, and tools that are complementary to mandated reporting by national governments.

We identify key elements of independent monitoring:

  • transparency in data sources, definitions, methodologies and assumptions;
  • free and open methods, data, and tools, which are truly “barrier free” to all stakeholders;
  • increased participation and accountability of stakeholders;
  • complementarity to mandated reporting by countries;
  • promotion of accuracy, consistency, completeness and comparability of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates.

Independent monitoring should be considered an important mechanism for enhancing transparency in the land-use sector. Interested stakeholders can engage and benefit from independent monitoring approaches when starting to implement the Paris Agreement; we provide examples and recommendations as starting points.

Authors: de Sy, V.; Herold, M.; Martius, C.; Böttcher, H.; Fritz, S.; Gaveau, D.L.A.; Leonard, S.;Romijn, E.; Román-Cuesta, R.M.

Topic: land use, monitoring, forest management

Series: CIFOR Infobrief no. 156

Pages: 8p.

Published at: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia

Publication Year: 2016

DOI: 10.17528/cifor/006256

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • FTA events at UNFCCC COP22 in Marrakesh

FTA events at UNFCCC COP22 in Marrakesh


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Kenya, 2009. ©Center For International Forestry Research/Tim Cronin
Posted by

FTA
Kenya, 2009. ©Center For International Forestry Research/Tim Cronin
Photo: Center For International Forestry Research/Tim Cronin

Find out about events related to the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry at the 22nd Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP22) in Marrakesh, 7-18 November.

Forests and landscapes are set to play a key role in the new global climate and development agenda. The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) brings the latest scientific research, insights and experiences to discussions held alongside the negotiations. See below for details on CIFOR’s involvement.

The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) at COP22

Also see two related briefs:

Enhancing transparency in the land-use sector: Exploring the role of independent monitoring approaches

Enhancing transparency in the land sector under the Paris Agreement: Non-state actors and corporate pledges, from rhetoric to reality

Agroforestry for climate action commitments and the Sustainable Development Goals

A detailed program of ICRAF’s participation at the COP is available at

The World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) at COP22

The Paris climate change agreement came into force on 4 November 2016—an unprecedented event. And the Marrakech climate talks, COP22, will be all about turning that agreement into reality on the ground.

Trees in forests and on agricultural landscapes are central to climate change mitigation and adaptation, and to delivering on the Paris Agreement.

Agroforestry—agriculture with trees—is also instrumental to reaching the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that aim to eradicate hunger, reduce poverty, provide affordable and clean energy, protect life on land, reverse land degradation and combat climate change. Because of the carbon sequestration capacity of trees, agroforestry can contribute to countries’ reaching their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) is supporting national governments in Africa, Asia and Latin America in developing the tools, knowledge and capacity needed to successfully scale up sustainable agricultural solutions. We call for:

Scaling up agroforestry as a solution for climate change adaptation and mitigation via Nationally Determined Contributions;
Raising the investment in providing scientific evidence of agriculture’s contribution to climate change mitigation and adaptation;
Reducing land degradation and deforestation through agriculture with trees; Including sustainably produced bioenergy to the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative’s portfolio of options to end energy poverty.

ICRAF will co-host three events at the Marrakech COP22:

Innovation and deployment of technologies for climate change adaptation with support from the Climate Technology Centre and Network, event with Technical University of Denmark, DTU, at the Africa Pavilion on Friday 11 November from 12:00-13:30.

Woody Biomass Energy to Meet NDCs and SDGs in Developing Countries, side event with International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR) on Tuesday 15 November 2016 from 16:45-18:15; and

From commitment to action – developing strategies to operationalize integrated landscape approaches, event with CIFOR at the Global Landscapes Forum on Wednesday 16 November 2016, from 11.30-12.30.

 

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • How the Asia-Pacific is developing systems for measurement, reporting and verification

How the Asia-Pacific is developing systems for measurement, reporting and verification


Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications
Photo: Muhammad Nadzrin Abdullah/CIFOR
Tasek Merimbun Heritage Park, Brunei Darussalam, is one example of the valuable natural heritage of the Asia-Pacific region. Photo by Muhammad Nadzrin Abdullah

By Catriona Croft-Cusworth, originally published at CIFOR’s Forests News

Asia-Pacific nations are some of the world’s most vulnerable to the effects of global climate change. Rising sea levels, extreme weather events and impacts on food security threaten the densely populated and rapidly developing nations throughout the region.

However, this region also holds some of the world’s greatest potential for climate change mitigation through the reduction of emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, plus the conservation and sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks – what’s known as REDD+.

Now that the Paris Agreement has affirmed a role in the global climate change agenda for REDD+, a major challenge moving forward is finding accurate and transparent methods for the measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of the contribution of forests to reducing global emissions.

Regional leaders had the opportunity to share experiences in designing systems for MRV at the 2016 Asia-Pacific Rainforest Summit (APRS) held from 3-4 August in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam.

At a session titled ‘Keeping track of forests: systems for measurement, reporting and verification’, speakers had the chance to compare notes from Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Indonesia and Australia on developing national systems for MRV.

REGIONAL (AND GLOBAL) PIONEERS

Papua New Guinea is a global pioneer of REDD+, having introduced the concept together with Costa Rica at COP 11 in 2011. Home to the world’s third largest area of tropical rainforest after the Amazon and the Congo Basin, the country holds huge potential for REDD+.

This year, Papua New Guinea launched a public web portal to disseminate information on its national forest monitoring system.

Alfred Rungol, Acting Manager of MRV at Papua New Guinea’s Climate Change Development Authority, said he hoped the portal would bring greater transparency and better results for the country’s REDD+ processes.

“The establishment of a national forest monitoring system is a key element of REDD+,” he said in his presentation. “PNG needs to improve understanding of its forest and monitoring capacity for sustainable management and conservation.”

Indonesia, another early adopter of MRV systems in the region, has set up a detailed MRV system that generates information on past, present and future greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land-based activities under the Indonesian National Carbon Accounting System, or INCAS.

Haruni Krisnawati is one of the leading technical developers of INCAS, and a senior researcher in the Research, Development and Innovation Agency within the Indonesian Government Ministry of Environment and Forestry.

She shared Indonesia’s experience, calling the development of INCAS an important first step toward reaching the country’s ambitious targets on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions.

As Haruni explained in her presentation, INCAS is designed as a ‘tier 3’ GHG accounting system, meaning that it aims to implement the most sophisticated method outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its 2006 guidelines.

This means that it is “scalable and uses the best available data,” she explained, including data on country-specific technology-based emission factors.

MRV? THERE’S AN APP FOR THAT

Meanwhile, other nations in the Asia-Pacific are facing steeper challenges in introducing national systems for MRV.

Samuela Lagataki, Permanent Secretary of Fiji’s Ministry of Fisheries and Forests, said that his country faced serious challenges in accessing baseline data, coming up with measures and using datasets.

“We have found significant gaps due to a lack of capacity,” he said.

But help is at hand for Fiji and other nations in the region trying to navigate the complex procedure of establishing an MRV system.

The Australia-based Global Forest Observations Initiative (GFOI) has designed an application called REDDcompass, launched in April this year, which aims to guide users through the process of designing an MRV systems tailored to a specific nation’s needs.

On the second day of the Summit, Carly Green, Methods and Guidance Component Manager at GFOI, gave a live demonstration of REDDcompass, taking regional leaders through the process of “climbing the MRV mountain”, starting from the base of institutional arrangement and policy decisions, moving upward to measurement and estimation, and finally reaching the stage of reporting and verification.

GFOI is now working with consultants in Lao PDR to develop a REDD+ framework in that country. It’s hoped that the REDDcompass application can help to assess progress so far and identify priorities for moving forward.

“More countries are using freely available data. But there’s still a need to understand what’s going on within those pixels,” Green said.

“REDDcompass basically takes the guesswork out of what you have to do.”

This research forms part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry.

Latest post


Notice: Undefined index: id in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 3
  • Home
  • Smallholder farmers’ perceptions of climate change and the roles of trees and agroforestry in climate risk adaptation: evidence from Bohol, Philippines

Smallholder farmers’ perceptions of climate change and the roles of trees and agroforestry in climate risk adaptation: evidence from Bohol, Philippines

01 November, 2016

Notice: Undefined variable: id_overview in /home/ft4user/foreststreesagroforestry.org/wp-content/themes/FTA/template-parts/content.php on line 64
Posted by

FTA communications

Recent studies have highlighted the importance of trees and agroforestry in climate change adaptation and mitigation. This paper analyzes how farmers, members of their households, and community leaders in the Wahig–Inabanga watershed, Bohol province in the Philippines perceive of climate change, and define and value the roles of trees in coping with climate risks. Focus group discussions revealed that farmers and community leaders had observed changes in rainfall and temperature over the years. They also had positive perceptions of tree roles in coping with climate change, with most timber tree species valued for regulating functions, while non-timber trees were valued as sources of food and income. Statistical analysis of the household survey results was done through linear probability models for both determinants of farmers’ perceived changes in climate, and perceived importance of tree roles in coping with climate risks. Perceiving of changes in rainfall was more likely among farmers who had access to electricity, had access to water for irrigation, and derived climate information from government agencies and mass media, and less likely among farmers who were members of farmers’ organizations. On the other hand, perceiving of an increase in temperature was more likely among famers who were members of women’s organizations and had more off/ non-farm sources of income, and less likely among those who derived climate information from government agencies. Meanwhile, marginal effects of the regression on perceived importance of trees in coping with climate change revealed positively significant relationships with the following predictor variables: access to electricity, number of off/non-farm sources of income, having trees planted by household members, observed increase in temperature and decline in yield, and sourcing climate information from government agencies. In contrast, a negatively significant relationship was observed between recognition of the importance of tree roles, and level of education, and deriving income from tree products. In promoting tree-based adaptation, we recommend improving access to necessary inputs and resources, exploring the potentials of farmer-to-farmer extension, using participatory approaches to generate farmer-led solutions based on their experiences of climate change, and initiating government-led extension to farmers backed by nongovernment partners.

Authors: Rodel D. Lasco, Marya Laya O. Espaldon, Christine Marie D. Habito

Published at Agroforestry Systems, June 2016

Latest post


Back to top

Sign up to our monthly newsletter

Connect with us