Download CMM_1.3_Carbon_Climate_Negotiations_2015_05

Section 1. Overview of Climate Change
and Forest Carbon
1.3. Role of forest carbon and forests in global
climate negotiations
USAID LEAF
Regional Climate Change Curriculum Development
Module: Carbon Measurement and Monitoring (CMM)
Name
Affiliation
Name
Affiliation
Deborah Lawrence, Co-lead
University of Virginia
Megan McGroddy, Co-lead
University of Virginia
Bui The Doi, Co-lead
Vietnam Forestry University
Ahmad Ainuddin Nuruddin
Universiti Putra Malaysia
Prasit Wang, Co-lead
Chiang Mai University,
Thailand
Mohd Nizam Said
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Sapit Diloksumpun
Kasetsart University, Thailand
Pimonrat Tiansawat
Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Pasuta Sunthornhao
Kasetsart University, Thailand
Panitnard Tunjai
Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Wathinee Suanpaga
Kasetsart University, Thailand
Lawong Balun
University of Papua New Guinea
Jessada Phattralerphong
Kasetsart University, Thailand
Mex Memisang Peki
PNG University of Technology
Pham Minh Toai
Vietnam Forestry University
Kim Soben
Royal University of Agriculture, Cambodia
Nguyen The Dzung
Vietnam Forestry University
Pheng Sokline
Royal University of Phnom Penh,
Cambodia
Nguyen Hai Hoa
Vietnam Forestry University
Seak Sophat
Royal University of Phnom Penh,
Cambodia
Le Xuan Truong
Vietnam Forestry University
Choeun Kimseng
Royal University of Phnom Penh,
Cambodia
Phan Thi Quynh Nga
Vinh University, Vietnam
Rajendra Shrestha
Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand
Erin Swails
Winrock International
Ismail Parlan
FRIM Malaysia
Sarah Walker
Winrock International
Nur Hajar Zamah Shari
FRIM Malaysia
Sandra Brown
Winrock International
Samsudin Musa
FRIM Malaysia
Karen Vandecar
US Forest Service
Ly Thi Minh Hai
USAID LEAF Vietnam
Geoffrey Blate
US Forest Service
David Ganz
USAID LEAF Bangkok
Chi Pham
USAID LEAF Bangkok
I
II
III
OVERVIEW: CLIMATE CHANGE AND FOREST CARBON
1.1
Overview: Tropical Forests and Climate Change
1.2
Tropical forests, the global carbon cycle and climate change
1.3
Role of forest carbon and forests in global climate negotiations
1.4
Theoretical and practical challenges for forest-based climate mitigation
FOREST CARBON STOCKS AND CHANGE
2.1
Overview of forest carbon pools (stocks)
2.2
Land use, land use change, and forestry (LULUCF) and CO2 emissions and sequestration
2.3
Overview of Forest Carbon Measurement and Monitoring
2.4
IPCC approach for carbon measurement and monitoring
2.5
Reference levels – Monitoring against a baseline (forest area, forest emissions)
2.6
Establishing Lam Dong’s Reference Level for Provincial REDD+ Action Plan : A Case Study
CARBON MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING DESIGN
3.1
IV
V
Considerations in developing a monitoring system
CARBON STOCK MEASUREMENT METHODS
4.1
Forest Carbon Measurement and Monitoring
4.2
Design of field sampling framework for carbon stock inventory
4.3
Plot Design for Carbon Stock Inventory
4.4
Forest Carbon Field Measurement Methods
4.5
Carbon Stock Calculations and Available Tools
4.6
Creating Activity Data and Emission Factors
4.7
Carbon Emission from Selective Logging
4.8
Monitoring non-CO2 GHGs
NATIONAL SCALE MONITORING SYSTEMS
At the end of this session, learners will be able to:

Determine the essential steps for including forests in the
international climate negotiations

Analyze how afforestation/reforestation (A/R) evolved into
RED and then REDD+

Investigate the current issues in REDD+ negotiations

Evaluate the environmental, social, and political factors
influencing the adoption of REDD+

Lecture (60 minutes)

How has forest carbon been incorporated into action on global
climate? What were the major steps?

How did A/R become RED and then REDD+?

What is the current status of REDD+?

Why is forest-based mitigation promising—environmentally,
socially, and politically?

Pre-lecture assignment (two options, 60 minutes)

4 classroom activities, 3 background readings

Reference website

Have students read all of Tracing the official role of
forests in the international climate negotiations

Have students create a time line for the inclusion of
forests in the negotiations, note the

Name of text

Year of text

Treatment of forests

Divide the class into groups of seven students

Each student will be assigned one of the seven texts to
present to their group

Before class, or in class, break into groups and have each
student present

Date

Major decision taken

Which countries are affected

How is forest/land use change treated

How has forest carbon been incorporated into action on
global climate? What were the major steps?

How did afforestation/reforestation (A/R) become RED
and then REDD+?

What is the current status of REDD+?

Why is forest-based mitigation promising—
environmentally, socially, and politically?
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits

Who were the big emitters?
Who were the big
emitters?
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
What were the
major drivers of
GHG emissions?
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits


What are the major drivers of GHG emissions?
What are the major
Note: in 1992, deforestation was 20-25%drivers
of total
GHG
of GHG
emissions
emissions?
Note: in 1992,
deforestation was
20-25% of total
GHG emissions
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
Goal: “…stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in
the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous
anthropogenic interference with the climate system.”
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
Principle: “…common but differentiated responsibilities”
Developed and developing nations have different
obligations
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits

Context: global emissions growing

Fraction of global emissions due to tropical deforestation
still high

Key points

Formal agreement

Annex I vs non-Annex I
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits





Demonstrate the use of WRI’s Data Explorer at this web
page: http://cait2.wri.org
Divide the class into groups (at least 4)
Have groups identify top 5 emitters (countries) at say 3 or
4 times by key events (e.g., pre- Kyoto, time of signing
Kyoto, Bali Action Plan, and Copenhagen).
Have groups identify top emitters by total GHG emissions
including LULUCF vs. excluding LULUCF; only CO2 vs. all
GHG emissions; total emissions vs. on a per capita basis.
Have groups compare results and discuss.
Annex I (developed) countries

Article 2 “shall: ….Implement and/or further elaborate
policies and measures in accordance with its national
circumstances, such as:
… (ii) Protection and enhancement of sinks and
reservoirs of greenhouse gases … promotion of sustainable
forest management practices, afforestation and
reforestation;
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
Annex I countries

Article 3: Net emissions from deforestation shall be
included in the calculation of the 1990 baseline
emissions
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
1. The Bali Action Plan Decision 1/CP13 Para 1 (b) (iii)

“Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues
relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and
forest degradation in developing countries; and the role
of conservation, sustainable management of forests and
enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing
countries”
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
There were five main issues, which remain contentious:
1. Scope – what should be included in the definition of REDD
2. Measurement, reporting and verification (MRV)
3. The rights of indigenous people
4. Financing options
5. Institutional arrangements – whether REDD activities were
considered National or project level activities.

First time that developing countries made official
commitments

Agree that the goal is to limit warming to < 2° C

Developed countries commit up to US$ 30 billion for
adaptation and mitigation for the period 2010-2012

Copenhagen Green Climate Fund established to support
mitigation projects in developing countries
1. Requests developing country Parties, …
(a) To identify drivers of deforestation and forest degradation
resulting in emissions and also the means to address these;
(b) To identify activities within the country that result in reduced
emissions and increased removals, and stabilization of forest
carbon stocks;
(c) To use the most recent IPCC guidance and guidelines, … as a
basis for estimating anthropogenic forest-related greenhouse gas
emissions by sources and removals by sinks, forest carbon stocks
and forest area changes;
(d) To establish, according to national circumstances and
capabilities, robust and transparent national forest monitoring
systems …

Annex I countries commit to emissions targets by 2020

Non Annex I countries will implement mitigation actions
including national inventories

Included enhancing and maintaining carbon stocks (the
“+” in REDD+)

Conversation evolved from ‘what is included’ to
‘methods’ to ‘safeguards’

Forest discussions often paved the way for discussions of
the entire forum, for example on MRV, role of markets

Concept map of developments, not just time but key
issues:





Scope – what should be included in the definition of REDD
Measurement, reporting and verification (MRV)
Safeguards
 The rights of indigenous people
 Biodiversity and natural forests
Financing options
Institutional arrangements – whether REDD activities were
considered National or project level activities.
Scientists say: Stay below 450 ppm
Already hit 400 in 2013
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits
4/29/13
stabilization-wedges.jpg (1116×1097)
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits

Avoided deforestation

Avoided degradation

Conservation of forest carbon stocks

Enhancement of forest carbon stocks

Sustainable management of forests
•
•
•
History of UNFCCC
Including forests
Mitigation and other benefits

Developing nations transition to low emission
development without losing all forest

Developed nations obtain offsets to ease transition to
new energy economy

Buy in from all parties to the whole process

Kyoto: JI and CDM

UNFCCC: REDD+

Voluntary Carbon Market (corporate social responsibility)

European Trading System

State-level actions in USA
Are there extra
benefits to forest
mitigation?
These are co-benefits
Plus:
 Enforcement of current
laws
 New forest policy
 Good governance
 Transparency
 Equity
Biodiversity conservation  Land tenure reform
Water management
Human right

SBSTA Subsidiary body for scientific and technical advice
(this is where REDD started in 2005)

World Bank Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (informal
conversations about how to implement REDD+)

UNREDD (like World Bank group, above)

Bilateral agreements (Norway)


Since Kyoto the discussion of the role of forests in
tropical countries in GHG emissions has evolved from a
focus on reforestation to preventing deforestation and
forest degradation as well as improving forest C pools
(REDD+)
Reducing emissions from LULUCF in the tropics alone will
not resolve the problem of anthropogenic climate change
but it is one part of the solution and the payment
mechanisms set up allow both developed and developing
countries to participate

The conditions necessary for REDD+ to succeed
(Tranparency, Good governance, Equity etc) are all cobenefits as well
Eliash Review. 2008. Climate Change: Financing Global Forests
Korhonen- Kuhki et al. 2012.Multiple levels and multiple
challenges for REDD+ In Analyzing REDD+ Challenges and
Choices .Angelsen, A., Brockhaus, M., Sunderlin, W.D. and
Verchot, L.V. (eds) CIFOR Bogor Indonesia
Kholloway, V. and E. Giandomenico 2009. Carbon Planet White
Paper. The History of REDD Policy. Carbon Planet Limited
Adelaide SA
Dickson et al. UN-REDD Programme Policy Brief REDD+ Beyond Carbon:
Supporting Decisions on Safeguards and Multiple Benefits
Pacala, S. and R. Sokolow. 2004. Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate
Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies. Science, Vol. 305:
968–972.
Paz- Rivera 2011. REDD+ negotiations and key milestones from Cancun to
Durban
Palmer , C. 2011. Property rights and liability for deforestation under REDD+:
Implications for ‘permanence’ in policy design. Ecological Economics 70 : 571–
576

Have students read Carbon Planet White Paper - The
History of REDD Policy

Describe the critical issues facing Copenhagen (COP 15)

How were they resolved at COP 15?

What has changed since COP 15?

Follow up with Clea Paz’ UNREDD discussion of path from
Cancun to Durban