You are on page 1of 37

REDD+ MEASUREMENT

,
REPORTING AND
VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL
VERSION 2.0
FOREST CARBON, MARKETS AND COMMUNITIES
(FCMC) PROGRAM

DECEMBER 2014

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for
International Development. It was prepared by Tetra Tech.

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development by Tetra Tech ARD,
through a Task Order under the Prosperity, Livelihoods, and Conserving Ecosystems (PLACE) Indefinite Quantity
Contract Core Task Order (USAID Contract No. EPP-I-00-06-00008-00, Order Number AID-OAA-TO-11-00022).

Tetra Tech
159 Bank Street, Suite 300
Burlington, Vermont 05401 USA
Telephone: (802) 658-3890
Fax: (802) 658-4247
E-Mail: international.development@tetratech.com
www.tetratechintdev.com

Tetra Tech Contacts:
Ian Deshmukh, Senior Technical Advisor/Manager
Email: ian.deshmukh@tetratech.com

Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities (FCMC) Program
1611 North Kent Street
Suite 805
Arlington, Virginia 22209 USA
Telephone: (703) 592-6388
Fax: (866) 795-6462

Stephen Kelleher, Chief of Party
Email: stephen.kelleher@fcmcglobal.org

Olaf Zerbock, USAID Contracting Officer’s Representative
Email: ozerbock@usaid.gov

Editors:
• Jennifer Hewson, Conservation International
• Marc Steininger, FCMC & Conservation International
• Stelios Pesmajoglou, Greenhouse Gas Management Institute

Contributing authors:
• Angel Parra, Consultant; GHG inventory & LULUCF sector expert
• Gordon Smith, Greenhouse Gas Management Institute
• David Shoch, TerraCarbon, LLC
• John Musinsky, National Ecological Observatory Network
• Fred Stolle, World Resources Institute
• Kemen Austin, World Resources Institute
• Irene Angeletti, Greenhouse Gas Management Institute

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) has launched the Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities
(FCMC) Program to provide its missions, partner governments, local and international stakeholders with assistance in
developing and implementing REDD+ initiatives. FCMC services include analysis, evaluation, tools and guidance for
program design support; training materials; and meeting and workshop development and facilitation that support US
Government contributions to international REDD+ architecture.

Please cite this report as:
Hewson, J., M.K. Steininger and S. Pesmajoglou, eds. 2014. REDD+ Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) Manual,
Version 2.0. USAID-supported Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities Program. Washington, DC, USA.

REDD+ MEASUREMENT, REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL, VERSION 2.0 i

REDD+ MEASUREMENT,
REPORTING AND
VERIFICATION (MRV)
MANUAL, VERSION 2.0

FOREST CARBON, MARKETS AND COMMUNITIES
(FCMC) PROGRAM

DECEMBER 2014

DISCLAIMER
The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the
views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United
States Government.

REDD+ MEASUREMENT, REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL, VERSION 2.0 ii

..............................................................................................................2 CARBON POOLS AND THEIR MEASUREMENT .............................................19 2................6 EPA NATIONAL SYSTEM TEMPLATES .......................54 4......................34 3.................................................31 3............................................................................2 IPCC GUIDANCE...........4 THE FOREST CARBON INVENTORY TEAM ............................... 31 3............................ VIII 1...............................1 INTRODUCTION .................................. 1 1.....................................................................13 2.................... 8 2........................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ..................... 42 3..............................................1 PURPOSE..................1 INTRODUCTION .................................................3 KEY FUNCTIONS AND COMPONENTS OF NATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ........................................4 DEFINITIONS OF CARBON POOLS AND LAND USES ................................................................................................................................6 REFERENCES..............................................0 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS......................49 4.............................................. 17 2.............................................................TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS...........................26 2.............. 50 4......................5 EXAMPLES ....4 STEPS IN ESTABLISHING INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS...................3 INVENTORY AND REPORTING STEPS .............................................................................38 3.........................5 METHODOLOGIES FOR ESTIMATING EMISSIONS AND REMOVALS ..................... 4 1............................................................... 9 2....................................67 4.......................................0 FIELD-BASED INVENTORIES .................. III ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .............................3 CONCEPTS AND CONSIDERATIONS IN INVENTORY DESIGN .......0 ESTIMATING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND REMOVALS ..........................7 REFERENCES................69 REDD+ MEASUREMENT.................................50 4..............................................30 3......................................................................................................... VERSION 2..................................................0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................. 57 4.......................................................... 1 1............................5 FIELD WORK AND ANALYSIS ....................... REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL................2 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................2 ELEMENTS OF A MRV SYSTEM FOR REDD+ ..................3 REFERENCES..................................................22 2................................................0 iii ........... 9 2.................................... V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................41 3....................................66 4. SCOPE AND STRUCTURE ..............................................................6 CALCULATING CARBON STOCKS FROM FIELD DATA ........

.......................................................................................................... 118 5............................2 LAND USES AND CATEGORIES IN THE UNFCCC ..2 REPORTING............................................................................93 5..................................... VERSION 2.......................................76 4.........................6 REFERENCES...................................................................4 REFERENCES........................................................................................75 4...................84 5.....................................................82 5........1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 152 7...................................1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................ 125 6.................................................78 4...0 REMOTE SENSING OF LAND COVER CHANGE .............. 181 REDD+ MEASUREMENT................................................11 SELECTED RESOURCES ................3 NEAR-REAL TIME MONITORING AND ALERT SYSTEMS ..... REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL............................................. 4.......79 4.............................................2 COMMUNITY-BASED MONITORING .............9 THE GAIN-LOSS METHOD ................................................................................10 REFERENCES .......................................8 SELECTED RESOURCES.................... 151 7..............................................................................5 EMERGING AREAS OF RESEARCH................................................... 127 6..........................1 HISTORY OF REDD+ UNDER THE UNFCCC ....................................................................................... 82 5........................0 iv ...7 COMMON SATELLITE DATA SOURCES FOR LAND-USE MONITORING ......4 REMOTE SENSING OVERVIEW .....................................................7 DATA CHECKING ..............81 5........................................................... 109 5......................................................................90 5.............................................................. 165 7.................................. 114 5. 121 6..............8 CONSOLIDATING INVENTORY DATASETS .................................................... 152 7.................. 125 6...............................................3 OVERALL STEPS AND NEEDS.........................................................................0 THEMATIC REVIEWS ........................................... 141 6.......................................................................................0 REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE ............................................................3 VERIFICATION ......................................

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ACR American Carbon Registry AD Activity Data AFOLU Agriculture. VERSION 2. Forestry and Other Land Use AGB Aboveground biomass BCEFs Biomass conversion and expansion factors BRDF Bi-directional reflectance distribution function BURs Biennial Update Reports CH4 Methane CI Conservation International CMP Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol CO2 Carbon dioxide COP Conference of the Parties CV Coefficient of Variation DBH Diameter at Breast Height DEM Digital Elevation Model DTs Decision Trees EFDB Emissions Factor Database EFs Emissions Factors EM Electromagnetic EOS Earth Observation System EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FAS Fire Alert System FCMC Forest Carbon. REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL.0 v . Markets and Communities Program FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility REDD+ MEASUREMENT.

REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL.FIRMS Fire Information and Resource Management System FREL Forest Reference Emission Level FRL Forest Reference Level FSI Forest Survey of India FUNCATE Foundation of Space Science. Land-use Change and Forestry GPS Global Positioning System IDEAM Colombian Institute for Hydrology. Technology and Innovation MMU Minimum-mapping unit MRV Measurement. Reporting and Verification N20 Nitrogen oxide NAMA Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Strategies NASA National Aeronautics and Space Agency REDD+ MEASUREMENT.0 vi . VERSION 2. Applications and Technology GEF Global Environmental Facility GFIMS Global Fire Information Management System GFOI MGD Global Forest Observation Initiative Methods and Guidance Documentation GFW Global Forest Watch GHG Greenhouse gas GHGMI Greenhouse Gas Management Institute GIS Geographic Information System GLAS Geoscience Laser Altimeter System GOFC-GOLD Global Observation of Forest and Land Cover Dynamics GPG-LULUCF Good Practice Guidance for Land Use. Meteorology and Environmental Studies ILUA Integrated Land Use Assessment INPE Brazilian National Space Research Institute IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change KCA Key Category Analysis LDCM Landsat Data Continuity Mission LEDS Low Emission Development Strategies LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging LUC Land-use Change MADS Colombian Ministry for Sustainable Development MCT Brazilian Ministry of Science.

sustainable forest management and enhancement of forest carbon stocks.0 vii . SBSTA Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technical Advice SES Social and Environmental Soundness SINA Colombian National Environmental System SLR Side Looking RADAR SRTM Shuttle Radar Topography Mission TACCC IPCC principles of transparency.NCs National Communications NFMS National Forest Monitoring System NGGIP National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Program NGO Non-governmental organization NNs Neural Networks NRT Near-real Time PCA Principal components analysis PRODES Projeto De Estimativa De Desflorestamento da Amazoni (Brazilian Amazon deforestation monitoring program) QA/QC Quality Assurance and Quality Control QUICC Quarterly Indicator of Cover Change RADAR Radio Detection and Ranging REDD+ Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. accuracy. REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL. completeness. VERSION 2. plus the role of conservation. comparability. and consistency TOA Top-of-atmosphere UMD University of Maryland UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change USAID United States Agency for International Development USGS United States Geological Survey VCS Verified Carbon Standard WGs Working Groups WMO World Meteorological Organization WRI World Resources Institute REDD+ MEASUREMENT.

and Charles Scott of the US Forest Service. Maggie Roth. Deborah Lawrence of the University of Virginia. and Leif Kindberg of FCMC. Ronald McRoberts. Additional figures are from the websites of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. John Rogan of Boston University. Christine Dragisic of the US State Department. and Jamie Eaton of TerraCarbon LLC. the International Panel on Climate Change and the Landsat program. Brice Mora of the Global Observation of Forest Cover and Land Dynamics. Carly Green and Jim Penman of the Global Forest Observations Initiative. Asim Banskota of the University of Minnesota. including Colin Silver. SilvaCarbon Consultant.0 viii . VERSION 2.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank the various colleagues in our organizations who have commented on the text. Andrew Lister. Karyn Tabor. Axel Penndorf of BlackBridge. Michael Gillenwater of the Greenhouse Gas Management Institute. Megan McGroddy. Frank Martin Seifert of the European Space Agency's Centre for Earth Observation ESRIN. REDD+ MEASUREMENT. REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV) MANUAL. Mario Chacon and Johnson Cerda of Conservation International. including Ned Horning of the American Museum of Natural History. Rishi Das. and members of the USAID Climate Change office. Chris Potter of the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Ames Research Center. The authors also thank those who have made graphics available for use in this Manual.

This chapter is relevant to the activities highlighted on the following page. Section 3. sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+). REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter discusses key considerations on reporting and verification for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the role of conservation.3. Inventory and Reporting Steps. 6.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 125 .0 REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE Authors: Angel Parra and Stelios Pesmajoglou 6. of this Manual outlines the sequence of steps required for generating a national greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory.

STEP 2: Conduct key category analysis (KCA) for the relevant categories. Within the categories designated as key. pool or non-CO2 gas.STEP 0: Establish Institutional Arrangements. and worksheets where appropriate. STEP 5: Quantify emissions and removals. using the reporting tables. assess significant non-CO2 gases and carbon pools and prioritize such pools in terms of methodological choice. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. STEP 1: Estimate the land areas in each land-use category. for representing areas in the GPG-LULUCF. EFs represent coefficients that quantify the emissions/removals per unit area. STEP 6: Report emissions and removals estimates. STEP 3: Design a forest carbon inventory to generate Emissions Factors (EFs). for the time period required. ensuring that the requirements in terms of emission and removal factors are met.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 126 . AD represents the extent over which a human activity occurs. if using the gain-loss method. through stratification and other methods. carbon pool and non-CO2 source. STEP 4: Generate Activity Data (AD). STEP 7: Perform verification and implement quality control checks. appropriate to the tier level identified. estimating the uncertainty in each estimate. Document and archive information used to produce the national emissions and removals estimates following specific instructions under each land- use category. including expert peer review of the emission estimates following specific guidance under each land-use category. Emissions and removals estimates represent the product of the AD by the associated EFs.

such as the UNFCCC reporting framework. it provides an overview of requirements and mechanisms. Information must be well-documented. 2010). REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. other reported information may include data on forest areas affected.Regarding reporting.. including the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol. also known as a Forest Reference Emission Level or Forest Reference Level (FREL/FRL). The quality of GHG inventories relies not only on the robustness of the science underpinning the methodologies and the associated credibility of the estimates. In any international system in which an accounting procedure is foreseen. we will use the terms “developed countries” and “developing countries” as synonyms to the UNFCCC terms “Annex I Parties” and “non-Annex I Parties. For verification. First. emission factors used. those under the UNFCCC) and guidelines included in voluntary or compliance schemes and processes. developing countries 28 that are willing to develop REDD+ activities will have to establish a National Forest Monitoring System (NFMS) to assess anthropogenic forest-related GHG emissions by sources and removals by sinks (UNFCCC. methodologies employed. but also on the way the information is compiled and presented.2 REPORTING Reporting for REDD+ can be defined as the process used to translate information resulting from measurements or monitoring (for example. Depending on the specific activity. it describes the key provisions of decisions adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and discusses verification approaches included in the GPG-LULUCF.g. 28 In this section. However. as well as the amount of GHG removals as a result of forest conservation and enhancement activities. Land-Use Change and Forestry (GPG-LULUCF) and of software options available to facilitate reporting. the information reported in a country’s GHG inventory represents the basis for assessing that country’s performance. This section of the Manual discusses reporting requirements for REDD+ based on decisions adopted by the COP to the UNFCCC. as compared to its commitments or FREL/FRLs and could also form the basis for assigning any eventual incentives or penalties.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 127 . It encompasses the amount of GHG emissions avoided as a result of reduced deforestation and forest degradation. According to the decisions adopted by governments working under the aegis of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC. 6. in some cases. impact on deforestation drivers. effectiveness of measures put in place. and probably any future REDD+ mechanism. an overview of general reporting requirements under the UNFCCC is provided. such as the reporting worksheets and tables contained in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Good Practice Guidance on Land Use. Under the UNFCCC.” respectively. developing countries will have to demonstrate that they are reducing emissions from deforestation compared to a business-as-usual scenario. The reported information is often used to help improve the transparency of actions and verify emissions and removals claimed for different activities. transparent and consistent with specific reporting requirements and protocols (e. the UNFCCC terms may be used to accurately quote texts and requirements under the UNFCCC. As REDD+ actions should be results-based. information reported in GHG inventories provides the means by which the international community can monitor progress made by countries in meeting their commitments and in achieving the Convention's ultimate objectives. or application of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures. information generated by a forest carbon inventory and a land-use change analysis) into an agreed format. financial resources needed or used. This is followed by a discussion on reporting modalities for FREL/FRLs and reporting information on the implementation of results-based REDD+ activities.

Within the UNFCCC process. “Any other information that the Party (the country) considers relevant to the achievement of the objective of the Convention and suitable for inclusion in its (the country’s) communication. developing countries can submit information in the following ways: • In national communications (NCs).int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01. to the extent its (a country’s) capacities permit. including national inventories of anthropogenic GHG emissions by sources and removals by sinks (see Box 6. The Convention specifies the time frame for initial communications. Box 6.. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. To promote the provision of credible and consistent information. 2010). For example. These requirements differ across countries taking into account their specific capacities and capabilities. which is determined through decisions of the COP. if feasible.2. of the Convention sets the obligation for all countries – taking into account their common but differentiated responsibilities and their specific national and regional development priorities. and • In the context of nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs). (b) “A general description of steps taken or envisaged by the Party (the country) to implement the Convention”. • In biennial update reports (BURs).16..0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 128 . but does not establish a frequency for submission.php). Paragraph 1 (a). The need for robust and defensible estimates on REDD+ has been highlighted during UNFCCC negotiations leading to the recognition that REDD+ “results-based actions should be fully measured.pdf. using comparable methodologies to be promoted and agreed upon by the Conference of the Parties”. paragraph 73. material relevant for calculations of global emission trends”. reported and verified” 29 (UNFCCC.6.1 Overview of reporting requirements under the UNFCCC Under the UNFCCC.1).int/essential_background/aconvention/background/items/1379. periodically update. objectives and circumstances – to “develop. reporting requirements for developed countries are more detailed and stringent in terms of the amount of information provided and the frequency of reporting. specific guidelines have been developed detailing standardized reporting requirements. 29 Decision 1/CP.1. all countries are required to provide information relating to the implementation of the Convention. A comparison of key UNFCCC reporting requirements for NCs and BURs is given in Table 6. http://unfccc. publish and make available to the Conference of the Parties.1: General provisions of the Convention relating to reporting of information Article 4 (http://unfccc. including. and c. national inventories of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all GHGs not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.php) of the Convention requires each country to communicate to the COP the following elements of information: (a) “A national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.” Article 12 (http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/background/items/1362txt. using comparable methodologies to be agreed upon by the COP.

int/resource/docs/publications/08_resource_guide2. 31 The Manual is available in English. SF6 encouraged Sectoral Only summary tables are required Summary tables required.int/resource/docs/publications/08_resource_guide4. both of which are available on the UNFCCC website. N2O required.pdf. 1996) and subsequently revised at COP 8 (New Delhi. HFCs.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide1. and on the institutional arrangements put in place for this purpose. GHG emissions and removals.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 129 . sustainable development.int/resource/docs/cop8/07a02.int/resource/docs/publications/userman_nainc_en.2 Disaggregation to the IPCC good practice guidance for LULUCF and the sectoral report tables annexed to the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines encouraged Version of the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines required. see: http://unfccc. 2002) 30.pdf.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide3. including sector-specific information. CH4. The preparation and delivery of NCs depends on the availability of resources. the use of the IPCC Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in 30 The latest version of the reporting guidelines are included in the Annex to Decision 17/CP. 32 National communications Biennial update reports Frequency Every fours years Every two years (starting in December 2014) Format Hard copy Electronic Years covered 2nd NCs: 2000 2010 (or more recent years if information is available) for the 1st BUR.pdf#page=2. French and Spanish. To facilitate the usage of these guidelines. tables in annex 3A. http://unfccc. IPCC Guidelines Good Practice Guidance (2000 and LULUCF) is encouraged Documentation Encouraged to provide information on Encouraged to provide information on methods used methods used.pdf. additional or supporting information. For the full text of these guidelines. 1996). the UNFCCC secretariat produced a user Manual 31 and a resource guide.1: Summary of key UNFCCC reporting requirements for NCs and BURs for developing countries While developing countries are required to prepare their GHG inventory using the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines (IPCC. PFCs.pdf.pdf. and capacity-building activities. Guidelines for the preparation of NCs from developing countries were first adopted at COP 2 (Geneva. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. adaptation and mitigation measures to climate change.National communications National communications from developing countries provide information on: the ongoing and planned actions to address climate change. financial and technological transfers. http://unfccc. subsequent BURs to cover a calendar year that does not precede the submission date by more than four years. may be supplied in a technical annex Table 6. http://unfccc. both human and financial. 32 UNFCCC website: http://unfccc.8. http://unfccc. time series back to the years reported in previous NCs encouraged Gases NCs and BURs: CO2.

0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 130 . REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. 2000) and GPG-LULUCF is encouraged. Reporting estimates of GHG emissions and removals from all sectors is accomplished using a table included in the reporting guidelines (reproduced in Figure 6.1).National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (GPG 2000) (IPCC. Providing documentation on the methodologies used to prepare the NCs is also encouraged but not required.

Figure 6-1: Reproduction of the reporting table for national communications of developing countries (source: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/cop8/07a02.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 131 .pdf#page=2) REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.

CO2 emissions and removals from soils). For the preparation of subsequent NCs. and the cornerstone of such a system is a reliable 33 Additional flexibility is given to least developed countries and small island developing states. Reporting and Verification (MRV). Abandonment of managed lands. Biennial Update Reports As part of the 2010 Cancun Agreements (Decision 1/CP. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. This resulted in developing countries reporting forest- related activities in their initial NCs based on the four categories of the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines (Changes in forest and other wood biomass stocks. and subsequent BURs every two years (Decision 2/CP. sufficient. paragraph 6 of these guidelines states that. reported and verified domestically. This has facilitated the provision of more detailed information. the UNFCCC Secretariat is providing training that includes information on how to incorporate elements of the GPG-LULUCF in the inventory process. the progress of implementation and estimated emission reductions. • National GHG inventory. 2010]. reported and verified domestically and will also be subject to international Measurement.17).16 [UNFCCC. “Non-Annex I Parties are encouraged to include. 2011). As a result. the assumptions and methodologies used. NAMAs can be funded by external/international donors and/or through the use of domestic resources. All developing countries followed this structure in reporting emissions and removals in their initial communications. 2003). and their domestic arrangements for MRV. The first BURs are due by December 2014. as appropriate and to the extent that capacities permit. developing countries 33 are required to submit BURs containing information on GHG emissions and removals. before the finalization of the GPG-LULUCF (IPCC. 2010]). To be efficient. further elaborated by Decision 2/CP.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 132 . making it worthwhile for them to change their current behavior and use of resources. technology and capacity-building needs and support received. tables included in Annex 3A. needs. financial resources should provide appropriate incentives to the relevant actors at the right time. Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions Also as part of the Cancun Agreements (Decision 1/CP. the reduction goals and progress indicators. Specifically for LULUCF. in the inventory section of the biennial update report. • Mitigation actions and their effects: For each nationally-appropriate mitigation action (NAMA). developing countries are to take NAMAs to deviate their emissions relative to business-as-usual emissions in 2020 in the context of sustainable development. as well as information on mitigation actions. developing countries have started using the GPG-LULUCF. while domestically supported mitigation actions will be measured. Forest and grassland conversion. To do so.17 (UNFCCC. and • Finance.17 [UNFCCC. Access to this information will facilitate the assessment of results of the implemented mitigation actions.It should be noted that the revised UNFCCC reporting guidelines were adopted in 2002. REDD+ could be part of the overall NAMA strategy of a country.16 [UNFCCC.2 to the IPCC good practice guidance for LULUCF…” Developing countries are currently preparing their BURs. Internationally supported actions will be measured. and support received for the implementation of these actions. and predictable. Guidelines for the reporting of information were also adopted for the preparation of BURs. countries should provide information on the nature of the action. The reporting guidelines for BURs are contained in Annex III to Decision 2/CP. The purpose of NAMAs is to serve as a mitigation strategy for a developing country. These include providing information on: • National circumstances and institutional arrangements. 2011]). a system for MRV of emissions and removals related to implemented actions is very important.

Countries should ensure that their FREL/FRLs are consistent with their anthropogenic forest related GHG emissions by sources and removals by sinks as contained in their national GHG inventories. in accordance with the guidelines contained in the annex to decision 12/CP. new trends and any modification of scope and methodologies. methodologies and procedures used in the construction of a FREL/FRL. as result of implementation of REDD+ activities (Decision 14/CP.17 (see Box 6.2). a country may also note areas where technical improvement is needed and areas for capacity building on the construction of future FREL/FRLs. including details of national circumstances and. comparability.2 General guidance for reporting The Warsaw Framework on REDD+ established modalities for national forest monitoring systems in Decision 11/CP. completeness and accuracy). and  Provide data and information that are transparent. if adjusted. 6. reporting specifications for FREL/FRLs (Decision 12/CP.19. taking into account new knowledge. consistent with the guidance agreed under the UNFCCC. and on safeguards (Decisions 12/CP. In the submission.17 and any future decision taken by the UNFCCC. the GPG-LULUCF). As agreed by governments (Decision 13/CP.17. FREL/FRLs are benchmarks for assessing each country’s performance in implementing REDD+ activities.. consistency. while transitioning to a national FREL/FRL.19). and build upon existing systems while being flexible and allowing for improvement. consistent over time. Subnational FREL/FRLs (covering less than its entire national territory of forest area) may be elaborated as an interim measure. The submitted information must be transparent. The following sections discuss specific reporting requirements for REDD+. include details on how the national circumstances were considered. suitable for MRV. all submitted information will be subject to a technical assessment. and accurate for the purpose of allowing a technical assessment of the data. as adopted or encouraged by the COP (i. Reporting on FREL/FRLs is voluntary. However. complete. A country’s submissions must include information and rationale on the development of the FREL/FRLs. national forest monitoring systems should:  Be guided by the most recent IPCC guidance and guidelines.e. Reporting on FREL/FRLs According to Decision 12/CP. where countries decide to submit information on a FREL/FRL they must follow the provisions of the annex to Decision 12/CP.19). while the other information should be provided prior to a country receiving payment for its implemented REDD+ activities.2. The FREL/FRL-related information should be reported as soon as a country has collected all the required data.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 133 .17).national GHG inventory that is prepared following the IPCC principles (transparency. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.17 and 12/CP. They are expressed in tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2eq) per year and must be established using the GPG-LULUCF. According to the provision of this decision. FREL/FRLs can be updated periodically as appropriate. In particular.19) are provided.

(b) Transparent. a technical annex that contains the information listed in Box 6. Reporting on implementation of REDD+ activities The Warsaw Framework on REDD+ established reporting requirements for developing countries seeking to obtain and receive payments for results-based REDD+ actions in Decision 14/CP. descriptions of relevant policies and plans. The data and information used by developing countries in the estimation of anthropogenic forest-related emissions by sources and removals by sinks. and forest carbon stock and forest-area changes. and consistent over time and with the established FREL/FRLs. in a comprehensive and transparent way. should be transparent. approaches. used at the time of construction of FREL/FRLs.2: Guidelines for submissions of information on FREL/FRLs Information to be submitted includes: (a) Information that was used by Parties in constructing a FREL/FRL. an explanation of why and how the definition used in the construction of FREL/FRLs was chosen. noting that significant pools and/or activities should not be excluded. if applicable and assumptions used. 34 Additional flexibility given to the least developed countries and small island developing states. Specifically. consistent and accurate information. inter alia.19. (c) Pools and gases. in their BURs. including historical data. paragraph 70. and forest carbon stock and forest-area changes are to be consistent with the GPG-LULUCF and any guidance on the MRV of NAMAs by developing countries. if appropriate. in case there is a difference with the definition of forest used in the national greenhouse gas inventory or in reporting to other international organizations. Box 6.16. The results of the implementation of REDD+ activities should be measured against the FREL/FRLs and should be expressed in tonnes of CO2eq per year. a description of data sets. and activities listed in decision 1/CP. including methodological information. as appropriate. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.3. Anthropogenic forest-related emissions by sources and removals by sinks.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 134 . forest carbon stocks. which have been included in FREL/FRLs and the reasons for omitting a pool and/or activity from the construction of FREL/FRLs. complete. models. including. (d) The definition of forest used in the construction of FREL/FRLs and. methods. and descriptions of changes from previously submitted information. forest carbon stocks. countries 34 (on a voluntary basis) should provide.

16. (d) The date of the forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level submission and the date of the final technical assessment report. The summary of information should be provided periodically and be included in national communications. It was also agreed that developing countries undertaking REDD+ activities should provide a summary of information on how all of the safeguards are being addressed and respected throughout the implementation of the activities. which includes: (a) The assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level expressed in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (CO2 eq). are consistent with those used to establish the assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level.16 are being addressed and respected. appendix I. 4. A description of how the elements contained in decision 4/CP. paragraph 2. paragraph 70. or other communication channels agreed to by the COP.3 Guidelines for elements to be included in a technical annex to a BUR 1. included in the forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level. Demonstration that the methodologies used to produce the results referred to in decision 14/CP. (e) The period (in years) of the assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level. Summary information from the final report containing each corresponding assessed FREL/FRL. reporting and verifying the results. 6. paragraph 1. 3. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.16.  Provide transparent and consistent information that is accessible by all relevant stakeholders and updated on a regular basis. Box 6. 5.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 135 .  Be transparent and flexible to allow for improvements over time. (b) The activity or activities referred to in decision 1/CP. Necessary information that allows for the reconstruction of the results. (c) The territorial forest area covered. as appropriate. paragraph 1(c) and (d).  Provide information on how all of the safeguards referred to in appendix I to decision 1/CP.15. 2. consistent with the assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level. have been taken into account.17 provides guidance relating to the provision of information on how safeguards are addressed and respected (see Box 6. Reporting on safeguards Decision 12/CP. Results in tonnes of CO2 eq per year.4). it stipulates that systems for providing information on how the safeguards are addressed and respected should:  Be consistent with the guidance identified in decision 1/CP. A description of national forest monitoring systems and the institutional roles and responsibilities for measuring. and  Build upon existing systems. Specifically.  Be country-driven and implemented at the national level.19.

Actions are consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity. and non. Decision 12/CP. are not used for the conversion of natural forests.pdf REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.16.or. and noting that the United Nations General Assembly has adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. on a voluntary basis. Transparent and effective national forest governance structures.iges. they are supplemented with higher tier methods where appropriate. Box 6.3 Reporting provisions of the GPG-LULUCF According to the GPG-LULUCF. 35 Example worksheet: http://www.4 Safeguards that should be promoted and supported when REDD+ activities are implemented Actions complement or are consistent with the objectives of national forest programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements. via the web platform on the UNFCCC website. While the worksheets are largely based on Tier 1 methods. soils (further sub- grouped into mineral soils and organic soils).19 of the Warsaw Framework for REDD+ reiterates the above provisions and further stipulates that the summary of information referred to above could also be provided.2. in the actions referred to in Decision 1/CP. Each sub-module is further divided into four worksheet groups covering: living biomass. by taking into account relevant international obligations. The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders. national circumstances and laws.ipcc- nggip. paragraphs 70 and 72. ensuring that the actions referred to in decision 1/CP.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 136 . taking into account national legislation and sovereignty. Actions to reduce displacement of emissions. information should be reported in an inventory of emissions and removals that is typically divided into two parts: reporting tables and an inventory report. 6.CO2 GHG emissions. dead organic matter. Actions to address the risks of reversals. The GPG-LULUCF contains worksheets that can be used to perform the actual calculations of emissions and removals and could be included in the inventory to improve transparency.16. A module is divided into two sub-modules to distinguish between those lands that remain in the same land-use category and those lands converted to other land-use categories. paragraph 70. but are instead used to incentivize the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services. in particular indigenous peoples and local communities. Each module corresponds to a specific land-use category 35. and to enhance other social and environmental benefits. Worksheets The GPG-LULUCF worksheets are presented in different modules.jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf_files/Chp3/Anx_3A_2_Reporting_Tables. Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities.

In general. Areas of land. Though this Manual focuses on forest monitoring.2 of the GPG-LULUCF. Furthermore. An example of a compilation worksheet is shown in Figure 6.or. and use the notation key “NE” (Not Estimated) in the reporting tables. along with supporting documentation. subjected to gross deforestation. • Activity data. it is important to fill in information for all entries of the reporting tables. tree species. The first represents a matrix of the area of all land that was converted to another category and the associated emissions. For example. worksheets contain the following information: • Initial and final land-use category.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 137 . management system. if a country decides that a disproportionate amount of effort would be required to collect data for a pool from a specific category that is not a key category in terms of the overall level and trend in national emission. Obtained by multiplying each activity data by the relevant emission carbon stock change factor. 36 For illustration. national land classification or other factors. this table is provided as an example. in thousands of hectares.iges. soil type.pdf REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. and results from the first table because it reflects the resultant change in carbon stock due to activities. All reporting tables are included in Annex A3.g. 36 http://www. the summary reporting table is reproduced in Figure 6. Carbon-stock changes per unit area deforested or degraded or managed. degradation and management of forests.3 (two parts).. If actual emission and removal quantities have not been estimated or cannot otherwise be reported in the tables. Expressed in physical units (e. Reporting tables Two types of reporting tables are provided in the GPG-LULUCF. the inventory compiler should use qualitative “notation keys” provided by the IPCC Guidelines and GPG (see Table 6.jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf_files/Chp3/Anx_3A_2_Reporting_Tables. and • Total emissions.ipcc-nggip. ecological zones. the country should list all gases/pools excluded on these grounds.2). The second type of table is a subset of the first type. • Total change in carbon stock. It also reports the emissions and removals of CO2 and non-CO2 GHGs due to conversion of the six categories to any other land-use categories.2. which should be used to provide references to relevant sections of the inventory report if any additional information is needed. vegetation type. Additional stratification is encouraged (in a separate column for subdivisions) according to criteria such as climate zone. together with a justification for exclusion. To ensure the completeness of an inventory. • Emission factors. separated for each carbon pool. the reporting tables are generally complemented by a documentation. Gg) or in CO2eq.

explanations for why the IPCC-recommended tiers have not been applied. recalculations (with justification for providing new estimates).0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 138 . Inventory report The other part of a national inventory is an inventory report that contains comprehensive and transparent information. methods used and underlying assumptions). the completeness of the reporting and eventual re-calculations. and an indication of the level of complexity (IPCC tiers) applied. including information on the level of category disaggregation used and its rationale.2: Reproduction of a compilation worksheet for reporting emissions and removals Other tables that may also be incorporated in a report include: • Tables with emission trends. QA/QC procedures and archiving of data.. and if necessary. In the context of REDD+ reporting. data sources and rationale for their selection. the methodology used for identifying key categories. or uncertainty in emissions or removals. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. land area representation and land-use databases are likely to be required. the trend in emissions and removals.e. Typical sections of the inventory report are: • An overview of trends for aggregated GHG emissions/removals by gas and by category. • A description of the key categories. Whenever the term key category is used. it includes both source and sink categories.Figure 6. A key category is one that is prioritized within a national inventory system because its estimate has a significant influence on a country's total inventory of GHG in terms of the absolute level of emissions and removals. time-series consistency. and • Tables for illustrating the results of the key category analysis. the assumptions. • Information on uncertainties (i. including data from previous inventory years. • A description of the methodologies used in compiling the inventory. appropriate information on land-use definitions.

Notation key Explanation NE (Not estimated) Emissions and/or removals occur but have not been estimated or reported.ipcc-nggip.or. The category where these emissions and removals are included should be indicated (for example in the documentation box in the correspondent table). including all disaggregated emission factors. NO (Not Occurring) An activity or process does not occur within a country.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/1_volume1/V1_8_ch8_Reporting_Guidance.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 139 . activity data and documentation on how these factors and data were generated and aggregated for reporting.pdf REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.2: Notation keys for use in GHG-reporting tables 37 Furthermore. Such cells are normally shaded in the reporting tables. • A description of the institutional arrangements for inventory planning. and • Information on planned improvements. Table 6.iges. IE (Included Emissions and/or removals for this activity or category are estimated and included in elsewhere) the inventory but not presented separately for this category. This information should allow for reconstruction of the inventory by experts not involved in its preparation. NA (Not Applicable) The activity of category exists but relevant emissions and removals are considered never to occur. preparation and management. 37 www. C (Confidential Emissions and/or removals are aggregated and included elsewhere in the inventory information) because reporting at a disaggregated level could lead to disclosure of confidential information. all of the relevant inventory information should be compiled and archived.

3: Reproduction of summary reporting tables REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.Figure 6.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 140 .

and to help to improve scientific understanding. Determining mitigation potential requires an understanding of both current emission trends and the influence of alternative land use and management practices on future emissions. • Names of categories used in the column are not included in the calculation procedure of the worksheets and thus can be easily changed.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 141 .php 39 http://www. build confidence on estimates and trends. These goals can be achieved through: 38 http://unfccc. Verification can be performed at several levels: project. 38 where activity data (AD) and emission/removal factors data are used as input to obtain net annual carbon uptake/release. The software simplifies the process of conducting the inventory by dividing the inventory analysis into steps to facilitate the compilation of AD. 2003). the “purpose of verifying national GHG inventories is to establish their reliability and to check the accuracy of the reported numbers by independent means. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. Another software tool is the Agriculture and Land Use GHG Inventory Software40 which guides inventory compilers through the process of estimating GHG emissions and removals related to agricultural and forestry activities (ALU Software. 6.int/national_reports/non-annex_i_national_communications/non- annex_i_inventory_software/items/7627.colostate.nrel. • The UNFCCC software can be changed to nationally relevant categories (e. which is a limitation if a country has more than 18 categories. Many governments also have an interest in mitigating GHG emissions from agriculture and forestry. Acacia species can be changed to another species). 2006b).” The IPCC has also stipulated that the overall goals of verification are to provide inputs to improve GHG inventories.html 40 http://www.g. There are several key features or limitations in using the software. The IPCC task force on GHG Inventories has also released an Inventory Software tool 39 to help countries estimate and report GHG emissions and removals. or ii) merge smaller or homogeneous categories such that the total number of rows (or categories) is not larger than 18. and • Forest/plantation categories: option exists for 18 categories.iges. such as: • The names or type of forest/plantation category in a country may differ from the categories defined in the UNFCCC software. There are two options if the number of forest/plantation categories is more than provided: i) Insert additional rows only if the inventory expert has capacity to modify the “macros”. The software also has internal checks to ensure data integrity.edu/projects/ALUsoftware/index. assignment of emission factors and completion of the calculations. this software is compatible with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines (IPCC.3 VERIFICATION According to the GPG-LULUCF (IPCC.html.. national and international.or.ipcc-nggip.jp/software/index.Software for reporting The UNFCCC has developed an online software tool. 2013).

19. which are performed by other bodies not directly involved with the preparation of the GHG inventory (e.19 be designated as the Warsaw Framework for REDD+ (see paragraph 44 of the COP19 report. reporting and verifying. non-governmental organizations). Furthermore. the uniqueness of estimation methods required for forestry-related activities has led to the conclusion that verification “would be based on complete accounting of emissions and removals at the national scale. emission 41 http://www. and 5) Using models.g. and analysis). and is most relevant for REDD+ activities.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 142 .1 Approaches to project or national internal verification According to the GPG-LULUCF.” A complete verification process would require cross-checking of the results at different scales (sub-national and national).” The five main approaches to verification currently included in the GPG-LULUCF are: 1) Comparison to other information. private companies. 13/CP.19 and 15/CP.19 on modalities for measuring.19. measured by independent methods at different levels. transcription.iges.jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf_files/Chp5/Chp5_7_Verification. • Internal checks. the following may be included: peer and public review. 12/CP. rather than on a single year basis. text is quoted verbatim from the IPCC document. the IPCC has recognized that “such verification would be complex and resource intensive. November 2013.or.19.3. and • External checks.pdf 42 COP 19 agreed that decisions 9/CP. independent scientists. such as independent inventories and international programs and datasets.3. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.int/resource/docs/2013/cop19/eng/10. such as underlying data (collection. The resulting “Warsaw Framework for REDD+”42 includes two decisions relating to international-level verification. This information may facilitate verification activities at the project or national level. depending on a country’s national circumstances. Governments reached agreement regarding external verification requirements and procedures for REDD+ as part of the negotiations at COP19 in Warsaw.7 of the GPG-LULUCF 41. Specifically: • Decision 13/CP. in other instances changes have been made to reflect specific REDD+ aspects. and possibly complemented by top-down approaches based on atmospheric measurements. In addition to these five approaches. 4) Remote sensing. research consortiums.19. The provisions of these two decisions will be discussed below in section 6. agencies or individuals responsible for the compilation of the inventory. In relation to internal verification. At the same time. other government agencies.3. 10/CP. and possibly performed by research consortiums and/or programs”. 2) Application of higher tier methods. Poland. In some instances. 11/CP. which are performed by the organizations. examination of specific aspects of the inventory. and • Decision 14/CP. 6. cross-checking requires considerable time and it is likely to be implemented over multiple years. information is provided in section 5. 14/CP.ipcc-nggip.pdf). available at http://unfccc. 3) Direct measurement of emissions and removals of GHGs.19 on guidelines and procedures for the technical assessment of submissions from Parties on proposed forest reference emission levels and/or forest reference levels.19..

with reference to its applicability (e. 43 http://www. to assist in identifying the most suitable approaches for particular categories or inputs.or. Verification.7. AD assumptions. of the GPG-LULUCF 43 provides a technical description for each approach.g.4 below. The IPCC guidance also provides an information table. desired level of accuracy and precision. complexity of design and implementation of the verification approaches. types of data).pdf REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. including models). and the required level of expertise needed to verify..jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf_files/Chp5/Chp5_7_Verification.iges.factors.ipcc-nggip. rules used for the calculations (suitability and application of methods. The criteria for selecting verification approaches includes: scale of interest. verification should be conducted using data and methods that are independent from those used to prepare the inventory. Figure 6. Section 5.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 143 . for a particular category. No matter which verification approaches are used or what aspects of the inventory are verified. costs. and upscaling procedures.

0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 144 .Figure 6.4: Reproduction of the table for general applicability of verification approaches REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.

and ideally they should have been conducted as a part of QA/QC. • Verification results are reasonable and well-explained. and the accuracy. • Decide how the inventory elements will be verified.or. other criteria to be used for selecting a particular approach include: the type of data to be verified. and • Final calculations can be reasonably linked to underlying data and assumption. These checks and comparison are essential.ipcc-nggip. there are two key considerations for an inventory agency in its efforts to develop a verification plan: • Identify the criteria for selecting the inventory elements for verification. • Documentation of the verification is included in the inventory report. 44 http://www.pdf REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. precision and cost of the approach itself. non-key categories can also be selected for verification if they are of particular relevance to mitigation efforts. At the same time. rigorous and scientifically sound.LULUCF.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 145 . • Applied verification methods are transparent.6. In addition to the suitability/availability of a particular verification approach.” Some of the checks and comparisons that can be used for internal verification of the LULUCF sector are summarized in Box 5. For example. the quantity and quality of the data to be verified. the spatial scale of the inventory coverage.7. key source/sink categories should be given priority for verification. it should ensure that: • Sufficient independent expertise is available.iges. The GPG-LULUCF stipulates that “if a country undertakes internal verification of its inventory.3.jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf_files/Chp5/Chp5_7_Verification. or their uncertainty is high or they are expected to change significantly over the inventory reporting period. • Uncertainty estimates and QA/QC documentation is included in the report. • Other available national verification activities are described.2 General guidance for internal verification According to the GPG.3 44 of the GPG-LULUCF (reproduced below).

Approaches 1 and 2 can be easily implemented by an inventory agency with low to moderate resources.5: Box 5.3 of the GPG LULUCF Country-specific circumstances and availability of resources are key to selecting appropriate verification approaches. Remote sensing is the most suitable method for the verification of land areas. on a large scale. In general.Figure 6. 2 and 3 are feasible for verifying several components of the inventory. “Approaches 1. although this approach can be resource-intensive.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 146 .7. Direct measurements are relevant. costs may REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. and.

(c) The territorial forest area covered. (e) The period (in years) of the assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level. reporting and verifying.2. 5. The objectives of the technical assessment are: REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. and 2.be a constraint.16. Box 6. which includes: (a) The assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level expressed in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (CO2 eq). paragraph 1(c) and (d).19) In accordance with decision 12/CP. Models can be used as an alternative when direct measurements combined with remote sensing is not feasible.15. A description of national forest monitoring systems and the institutional roles and responsibilities for measuring. and forest carbon stock and forest-area changes after implementation of REDD+ activities has started (see Box 6. (d) The date of the forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level submission and the date of the final technical assessment report. paragraph 7 1. have been taken into account. Both data sets will be subject to a technical assessment or analysis. developing countries interested in implementing REDD+ activities for results-based payments are required to submit information to the UNFCCC secretariat on: 1.19. 3. Technical assessment of forest reference emission levels and/or forest reference levels (Decision 13/CP.5). A description of how the elements contained in decision 4/CP.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 147 . included in the forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level.” 6. Demonstration that the methodologies used to produce the results referred to in paragraph 2 above are consistent with those used to establish the assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level. reporting and verifying the results. Guidelines for elements to be included in the technical annex referred to in decision 14/CP.2. Their proposed FREL/FRL. Modalities for measuring. Results in tonnes of CO2 eq per year. one from a developed country and one from a developing country.3. consistent with the assessed forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level. 6. (b) The activity or activities referred to in decision 1/CP.5. developing countries may submit a proposed FREL/FRL that will be subject to a technical assessment. land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) experts selected from the UNFCCC roster of experts. 4. Summary information from the final report containing each corresponding assessed FREL &/or FRL.3 International verification-related provisions resulting from the Warsaw Framework for REDD+ As discussed above in section 6. Necessary information that allows for the reconstruction of the results. Data and information used in the estimation of anthropogenic forest-related emissions by sources and removals by sinks.17. forest carbon stocks. paragraph 70. Each submission will be assessed by two land use. 2.

• Pools and gases.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 148 . as appropriate. • To offer a facilitative. if it is different from the one used in the national GHG inventory or from the one reported to other international organizations. REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.17) for the construction of the FREL/FRL. non-intrusive. of their FRELs/FRLs subject to national capabilities and policy. • Whether a description of relevant policies and plans has been provided. and activities included in the FREL/FRL. • The extent to which the information provided was transparent. areas for technical improvement may be identified and these areas and capacity-building needs for the construction of future FRELs/FRLs may be noted by the country concerned. approaches. • Whether assumptions about future changes to domestic policies have been included in the construction of the FREL/FRL.6 for timeline) of the technical assessment. Given the facultative nature of the assessment. • How historical data have been taken into account in the establishment of the FREL/FRL. consistent and accurate. The technical assessment of the data. models (if applicable) assumptions used and whether the FRELs/FRLs are national or cover less than the entire national territory of forest area. • If applicable. methodologies. why and how the definition used was chosen. • Whether the definition of forest used in the construction of the FREL/FRL has been provided and. As part of the technical assessment process. • The extent to which the FREL/FRL value is consistent with the information and descriptions provided by the country. description of data sets. taking into account the stepwise approach. The decision also contains provisions relating to general procedures and the timing (see Figure 6. methods. the assessment team is to refrain from making any judgment on domestic policies taken into account in the construction of FRELs/FRLs. whether descriptions of changes to previously submitted FRELs/FRLs have been provided. and justification of why omitted pools and/or activities were not deemed significant. as appropriate. • To assess the degree to which the information provided is in accordance with the guidelines for submissions of information on FREL/FRL (annex to decision 12/CP. including methodological information. and procedures used in the construction of FREL/FRL will assess the following: • The extent to which the FREL/FRL maintains consistency with corresponding anthropogenic forest-related GHG emissions by sources and removals by sinks as contained in the national GHG inventories. complete. technical exchange of information on the construction of FRELs/FRLs with a view to supporting the capacity of developing countries for the construction and future improvements.

revised FREL/FRL (4 weeks) Prepare draft report Provide comments on draft report (12 weeks) Address country’s comments & Publish final Figure 6. if submitted.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 149 . Country Assessment Secretariat Team Submission Receipt of Submission Send submission to assessment team (2 weeks) Desk review (8 weeks) Technical Ask country for clarifications (1 week) Respond to clarification questions (8 weeks) Consider response &.6: Timeline for the technical assessment of FRELs/FRLs REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6.

REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. will be included among the members selected for the technical team of experts. The LULUCF experts will develop. (b) The data and information provided in the technical annex is transparent. in accordance with national circumstances and taking into account national capabilities. As part of the technical analysis referred to in decision 2/CP. comprehensiveness and the information provided between the assessed reference level and the results of the implementation of the activities referred to in decision 1/CP.19) Upon the request of the developing country seeking to obtain and receive payments for results-based actions. consistent. and (d) The results are accurate. as appropriate. The two LULUCF experts may seek clarifications on the technical annex and the country should provide clarifications to the extent possible. and (d) Any comments and/or responses by the developing country concerned. definitions. paragraph 70.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 150 . to the extent possible. two LULUCF experts from the UNFCCC roster of experts. paragraph 4.17. the technical team of experts shall analyse the extent to which: (a) There is consistency in methodologies.16. The developing country that submitted the technical annex has the possibility to interact with the technical team of experts during the analysis of its technical annex to provide clarifications and additional information to facilitate the analysis by the technical team of experts. one each from a developing country and a developed country. (c) The data and information provided in the technical annex is consistent with the relevant guidelines. containing: (a) The technical annex. (b) The analysis of the technical annex. under their collective responsibility. a technical report to be published by the secretariat via the web platform on the UNFCCC website.Technical analysis of data and information for results-based payments (Decision 14/CP. as appropriate. if noted by the country concerned. (c) Areas for technical improvement identified. including areas for further improvement and capacity-building needs. annex IV. complete and accurate.

http://www.or. http://unfccc. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its thirteenth session. http://www.ipcc- nggip.html IPCC. Japan. Published: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. Colorado State University.or. held in Durban from 28 November to 11 December 2011 Addendum Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its seventeenth session. Published: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. 2006b. Japan. Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory.ipcc-nggip. held in Warsaw from 11 to 23 November 2013 Addendum Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its nineteenth session.or.int/resource/docs/2013/cop19/eng/10a01. Japan. http://unfccc.ipcc-nggip. Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries.jp/software/ UNFCCC.jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf. 2011.16: Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention . held in Bali from 3 to 15 December 2007.6. Addendum Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its thirteenth session. 2007. UNFCCC. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its nineteenth session.C. http://www. Land-Use Change and Forestry. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its seventeenth session.html IPCC.jp/public/gl/invs1.html IPCC.or.iges. 2013.0 – REPORTING AND VERIFICATION: ELEMENTS AND GUIDANCE 151 .jp/public/2006gl/index. 2000.int/files/meetings/cop_16/application/pdf/cop16_lca.ipcc-nggip. Published: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies.html IPCC. 2013. FCCC/CP/2007/6/Add.pdf REDD+ MRV MANUAL: CHAPTER 6. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Published: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.nrel. IPCC Inventory Software http://www.pdf UNFCCC. Japan. http://www.jp/public/gp/english/index.ipcc-nggip.iges.pdf#page=4. http://www. Agriculture and Land Use National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Software.colostate. 2006. 1996. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.iges. Good Practice Guidance for Land Use.iges. 2010. IPCC. sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries. 2003. and the role of conservation. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a01.4 REFERENCES ALU Software.1 UNFCCC.edu/projects/ALUsoftware/.iges.or. UNFCCC Decision 1/CP.

gov . DC 20523 Tel: (202) 712-0000 Fax: (202) 216-3524 www. NW Washington. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue.S.U.usaid.