GCF Workshop: MRV Methods for Jurisdictional REDD+ Programs

GCF Workshop: MRV Methods for
Jurisdictional REDD+ Programs In Peru
Lima (June 2014)
The Governors’ Climate & Forests Task Force (GCF) is a unique platform for collaboration among states
that work to protect tropical forests and reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
(REDD+), creating strategies for a sustainable form of development. The GCF currently consists of 26
members from 7 countries, working together to establish jurisdictional REDD+ programs and systems that
reduce emissions from deforestation and connect to different forms of financing according to each state’s
strategy. More than 25% of the world’s tropical forests are in GCF states and provinces, including more
than 75% of Brazil’s, 75% of Peru’s, and more than half of Indonesia’s. The GCF includes states and
provinces that are leading the way in building comprehensive, jurisdiction-wide approaches to low emissions
development and REDD+.
The GCF Training Program, funded by Norad and implemented in partnership with CIAM, IDESAM,
Kemitraan, IPAM, Pronatura Sur, and other key civil society actors in REDD+ and low-emissions rural
development, trains subnational government and non-governmental actors and decision-makers in Brazil,
Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, and Peru (the GCF’s tropical states and provinces) on capacity-building, policy
development, technology, and implementation for jurisdictional or subnational efforts. At its core, the GCF
Training Program empowers subnational civil servants and their civil society partners to build robust
jurisdictional programs and embed these efforts into larger ongoing processes of low emissions rural
development and market transformation. It strives to fill the knowledge gaps impeding or undermining
efforts to establish jurisdictional programs at the subnational level, where most of the activity around lowemission rural development is taking place.
More about the GCF Training Program can be found at www.gcftaskforce.org/training_program
Supported by:
GCF Training Program
[Funded by Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI)]
Developed and Facilitated by:
GCF Task Force, in partnership with CIAM (Peru)
Questions? Contact
GCF Country Coordinator for Peru
Victor Galarreta (CIAM) vgalarreta@gmail.com
Daniel Coronel (CIAM) danielcoronel19@gmail.com
GCF Secretariat
Amelia Chizwala Peterson, J.D., LL.M, GCF Senior Research Associate
Amelia.peterson@colorado.edu
REPORT: GCF WORKSHOP ON MRV METHODS FOR
JURISDICTIONAL REDD+ PROGRAMS IN PERU
I.
Overview:
The GCF Training Program (Peru) conducted a workshop on MRV Methods for Jurisdictional REDD+
Programs in Lima from June 16-18, 2014. Trainees and participants included managers from the
regional environmental authorities from the five GCF regions in Peru: Amazonas, Loreto, San Martín,
Ucayali and Madre de Dios, as well as representatives of the Institute of Climate Change and Regulation
of Environmental Services (IMC) of the State of Acre (2014 GCF Chair) and the Peruvian Ministry of
the Environment (MINAM). This workshop was held conjunction with training conducted by The
Woods Hole Research Center, the Earth Innovation Institute and the Institute for Environmental
Research of Amazonia (IPAM).
II.
Objective:
To build MRV capacity in the Regional Governments for the development of forest carbon
mitigation policies.
III.
Results
1. Enhanced state-national alignment. MINAM committed to developing concrete efforts to
support each region beyond trainings—to the degree that resources are available.
2. Better communication and collaboration between ARAs and MINAM. An agreement
was reached that ARA managers (Natural Resource and Environment managers) from the
GCF regional governments will receive the deforestation maps developed by MINAM to be
reviewed and validated at the regional level. In addition, the workshop established a direct
communication protocol to improve the flow of information between the ARAs and
MINAM.
3. GCF Membership. The Government of Acre agreed to nominate the Amazonas Region for
membership in the GCF during the next GCF Annual Meeting to be held in Acre in August
2014. Further, a timeline was established to ensure that by July 18, the GCF
Governors/Regional Presidents are presented with the Rio Branco Declaration for signing.
More on the Rio Branco Declaration is available at GCF website.
4. Brazil-Peru collaboration. The workshop supported efforts to increase collaboration
between the Brazil and Peru on MRV. Brazil has already announced a proposal for
subsidizing baselines. The workshop yielded an invitation to MINAM to participate in a
GCF event to present the national strategy.
5. Enhanced state-national alignment. MINAM committed to developing concrete efforts to
support each region beyond trainings—to the degree that resources are available.
IV.
Background
Ø In the weeks before the workshop, the GCF Training Program facilitated a visit by the CIAM
work group to the Institute of Climate Change and Regulation of Environmental Services (IMC)
of the State of Acre, Brazil, with the goal of understanding the environmental payment system
for REDD+ (SISA). The report from this experiential study is available here.
Ø After the Acre visit, it was agreed that the State of Acre and the Regional Governments of
Amazonia would continue to collaborate closely on developing subnational programs for low
emissions development.
V.
Activities and work methods
1. Day 1: General information and Forest Carbon Map
Ø Victor Galarreta, technical secretary of CIAM and GCF Coordinator for Peru, Magaly
Medeiros, of the Government of Acre and Giovanna Orcotoma, of the National Program for
Forest Conservation (PNCB) of the Ministry of the Environment (MINAM), welcomed the
participants and explained the workshop's objectives.
Ø Emphasis was made on the need for MINAM and the Regional Governments to be in constant
contact so that regional mechanisms can be structured in a way that will complement national
mechanisms.
Ø Working from a jurisdictional perspective to allow the Amazon to be conserved holistically is
important.
Ø The COP20 being held in Peru is an opportunity to be seized to advance policies related to
sustainable development.
Forest Carbon Map
Alessandro Baccini (Woods Hole Research Centre) spoke about how to estimate CO2 emissions
levels based on two types of information: level of forest biomass (tC/ha) and deforested area (ha).
The following are the highlights of his presentation:
Ø To obtain this information there are a number of requirements to be taken into account, as well as
a number of difficulties for each possible type of estimate (forest inventories, SM, CA, EM and
DR approximation).
Ø Making carbon inventories is useful for understanding how much carbon a country has. However
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
because this is done with a statistical method, it does not provide information on where exactly
the carbon is located.
To calculate gross carbon emissions, the forest area lost is multiplied by the carbon density of
that forest.
Combining satellite images (that show the forest without gaps in a continuous image) together
with information from forest inventories allows for a unique methodology that is universally
applicable because it combines two types of data.
The problem with direct approximation is that it requires information from many points in the
forest in order to arrive at a statistical idea that is representative.
LIDAR projects many tiny rays that intersect in different ways with matter, depending on its
density. In this way, in the forest, a model of forest height can be made.
Questions and Recommendations:
o Should an equation for a specific calculation for each region be made? This is not
necessary, using the information that is collected in the field to calibrate the relationship that
is obtained through images obtained via satellite works well. If the region has a forest with
very little variability (same size, same density) then few control points will be needed. But
if the region has a lot of variability then many more points of control will be required to be
able to collect information that is representative and calibrates the relationship with satellite
images. Forest zones can be stratified, and for every stratum X number of necessary control
points can be established.
o What can we use and what would be the best to use given Peru's reality? Several building
blocks are required, for example: GHG inventory, forest inventory, etc. Several satellites are
required to accomplish this. An alternative to the satellites is aerial LIDAR, which is an
airplane that flies over Amazon but does not have a global view.
Context of the Monitoring System of Peru and the process for establishing a reference
framework
A presentation by the REDD+ Project and MINAM's National Program for Forest Conservation was
given, about the context in which the Peruvian Monitoring System is being developed and how this
to a large degree determines its scope. The following are the key lessons from the presentation:
Ø The establishment of reference levels for forest cover is a challenge, given the available
technology and the special characteristics of the Peruvian territory, which is usually covered with
clouds that impede obtaining useful graphic images from the satellite (Landsat7 ETM+) that is
being used.
Ø It was explained how this problem with the clouds was resolved, through a multi-temporal
evaluation (2000-2011) that generated bits of information each year in which it was possible to
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
capture images without clouds, so that in this way the map could be pieced together. The results
obtained through this method have a 97% level of accuracy with 30m/pixel images and these
show a loss of 106,604 hectares during the years studied (2000-2011), which is equivalent to
0.15% of Amazon Rain Forests.
Currently a 2012-2013 forest and non-forest map is being developed, and is soon to be released.
On the other hand, there was a presentation on the work being done on the National Forest
Inventory. According to what was presented, there are estimates of the diameter and the heights
of trees as well as the species, facts that are fed into an allometric equation in order to make an
approximation of the volume and the biomass of the trees. However it was noted that in order to
make higher-resolution maps than those that have already been made, it will be necessary to
obtain information on the density of the wood.
Audience participation: it was noted that a shared operating definition of "forest" and "nonforest" is necessary, since the Central Government (through MINAM) is making studies and each
region is working on its own at a more detailed level, and not using the same operational
definitions will make it difficult to compare the information that is generated.
In summary, the REDD+ products that we have in Peru are: forest and non-forest (2000-2011)
and the country is close to launching forest and non-forest (2012-2013).
VCS Program and Regional Implementation of the Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+
Framework (JNR)
Paula Tassara presented the work done by the VCS Association as a framework for the voluntary
carbon market. Highlights:
Ø The jurisdictional and nested REDD+ framework allowed for a number of benefits for the
jurisdictions, one of which was access to various financing sources like voluntary and domestic
markets, and the FCPF Carbon Fund.
Ø Further, the JNR framework and the World Bank methodological framework are 85%
compatible.
2. Day 2: How the Territorial System (TPS) Functions
World Context for REDD+ and lessons from Brazil on low-emissions rural development
Ø Most of the increase in food and fiber production over the next 20 years will take place in
tropical and subtropical regions, led by Latin America. This can be seen as a threat, but also as
an opportunity, since there is still time to influence this growth in agriculture so that its negative
impacts are minimized and its benefits are maximized.
Ø In this context, although REDD+ is defined as a unified global mechanism, the possibility of a
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
global climate treaty with "teeth" and financing is low.
o The United Nations Framework Convention's binding commitments on Climate Change
have been postponed until 2020.
o REDD+ has progressed since its inception but it still lacks a financing mechanism. (REDD+
is seen as a mechanism that is complicated to finance.)
REDD+ as an isolated intervention has flaws when it is developed at scale.
There is public financing available in Norway, Germany, World Bank and other sources.
Finding new possible markets for REDD+ is critical.
The REDD+ Offset Working Group (ROW) looked at priority issues in the development of
international sector-based offsets. Among the topics that came up were legal and institutional
mechanisms, key considerations for the performance level and the evaluation criteria that should
be used in each state.
Key principles for ROW are harmonizing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) and national REDD+ strategies, focusing on a state or jurisdictional level,
seeking the greatest simplicity possible, and developing GCF's own standards for emissions
reduction units.
Among the benefits offered by a jurisdictional REDD+ program in comparison to isolated
REDD+ projects are results on a large scale, governmental commitment and policy alignment,
greater permanence in terms of time and less deforestation leakage, lower transactional costs,
room for flexible and egalitarian distribution of resources, etc.
General ROW recommendations:
o Focus on the most important flows (biomass on the ground), using averages of the last ten
years as reference levels, generated with the best data available.
o Pathway to certification and nested certification: Emissions credits are evaluated at a
jurisdictional level, while California establishes requirements and recognizes credits
issued by jurisdictions or by third-party programs approved by jurisdictions (nested).
o Accounting and leakage: Jurisdictions design and establish their own carbon accounting
and registry systems, but in compliance with the criteria established by California. In
addition, they establish systems to manage and mitigate the displacement of deforestation
and degradation (jurisdictional REDD+ has a smaller risk of leakage). Brazil has shown
that it is possible to minimize leakage even as agricultural and livestock production
grows.
o Safeguards: Jurisdictions should review the safeguard guide that was developed under the
UNFCCC Cancun Agreement and other best practices standards like the REDD+ Social
and Environmental Standards (SES). Jurisdictions should define their own reference
points and performance indicators when they implement the SESs.
Ø It is much easier to manage jurisdictional REDD+ than isolated REDD+ projects.
Ø A combination of policies and private sector interventions enhances chances for success.
Ø Recommendation. Peru should focus on three identified priorities: (1) reaching consensus on the
reference level and the monitoring system to be used; (2) connecting the agenda for lowemissions rural development with investment that improves livelihoods in the regions; (3) seeing
the progress in the United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change as an opportunity
for financing.
Carbon Calculator (CCal)
CCal (carbon calculator) is a platform based on explicit land use and carbon data that seeks to
facilitate carbon stock recuperation for government personnel, investors and land owners. There is a
need to have an integrated and transparent monitoring system for the variations in carbon stock that
uses the best scientific data possible.
Ø Among the advantages of CCal are:
Evaluation of the impacts and monitoring of REDD+/PSE-related projects and programs
Greater speed in the analysis of environmental information necessary to evaluate projects
and programs;
o Standardization of measurement;
o On-line availability and ease of use.
Ø In terms of input, CCal uses information on land coverage, degradation, regrowth, rainfall,
temperatures, regrowth time, biomass levels, opportunity costs, risk of fire and drought; all of
this is processed by algorithms. Information outputs are personalized through filters and specific
consultations, and can be: carbon reports, regrowth potential, avoided deforestation, and others.
Ø CCal has a function that allows for obtaining information for existing territorial areas (polygons
according to official land tenure records), another that allows for the creation of a polygon on the
map to generate a report, and another for territorial deforestation.
o
o
The Territorial Performance System (TPS) approach and the monitoring platform
Oswaldo Carvalho of the Earth Innovation Institute (EII) highlighted the following:
Ø The Territorial Performance System is an integrated evaluation to measure and follow up on the
social, economic and environmental performance of a region. It seeks to align policies and
markets to promote a large-scale transition to sustainability.
Ø In Brazil this approach has been efficient in curbing deforestation, however the progress could be
reversed if farmers do not receive appropriate incentives.
Ø The great number of processes designed to curb deforestation could offer incentives, but different
metrics are used and everyone works in an isolated way.
Ø A TPS requires:
o Intersectorial and intergovernmental consensus on the means to reduce deforestation;
o Incentives;
o An on-line platform that allows for the viewing of indicators, integrating them territorially,
which will allow for monitoring policies' success (existing monitoring systems should be
used); and
o Pilot trials that allow for refining the system.
Ø A TPS allows for overcoming the current fragmentation of the definition of what success means,
ties market power with state power, and allows for the sustainability of agricultural and forest
products within an integrated framework.
Ø Developing a similar system in Peru first requires determining what data are needed and what
indicators are used to measure them, then determining how it would work. For this, consensus
should be reached between various relevant representatives of the different levels of government
(national, regional and local) and sectors (environment, agriculture, mining, transportation, etc.),
market (for example wood industry, palm, Brazil nut, coffee, cacao, livestock, petroleum,
mining, etc.) and civil society.
Ø Some suggested indicators for Peru are: deforestation, quantity of reforested and restored
hectares, water quantity and quality, growth of population and migration, poverty index, PEA
index (population that is economically active), illegal activity level, number and size of
Conservation Areas (Regional: ACR, Private: ACP), etc.
3. Day 3: Jurisdictional Approaches and Progress toward a Forest Carbon Market in the
South American context
Presentation of the Governors’ Climate & Forests Task Force (GCF) and the 2020 GCF
strategic plan
Jorge Torres (National Program for Forest Conservation (PNBC) of MINAM) and GCF Country
Coordinator for Peru presented on the mission of the GCF Task Force to advance the design of
jurisdictional programs that promote low-emissions rural development and reduce emissions from
deforestation and degradation for greenhouse gas compliance regimes and other pay-forperformance opportunities.
The GCF is a unique collaboration of 26 early-mover subnational states and provinces working
together to reduce deforestation through jurisdictional programs for low emissions development, link
these programs to market and other pay-for-performance opportunities, and improve livelihoods.
More information on the GCF is available at www.gcftaskforce.org
Peru's Early Idea presented to the World Bank's Carbon Fund
Ø In Peru there are two national baselines (one on land use plans 2000-2009 and the other on
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
Ø
deforestation 2000-2011) and three regional baselines (San Martin, Madre de Dios and Cuzco).
In these baselines it can be seen that historically, GHG emissions have been increasing.
Although there is still much to be done to be able to make projections, there has been progress
such as Planning for Climate Change (the CC Plan for Cuzco), which shows that emissions will
continue to increase exponentially under a business as usual scenario.
According to data from the abatement curve, of all the actions that can be undertaken to reduce
emissions, the least expensive method to reduce a ton of CO2 is forest conservation. This fact is
of great importance given that in Peru, deforestation due to land use, change in land use and
forestry (acronym for these is USCUSS) makes up 40.7% of total emissions.
Of the total of expected emissions for the future, the National Forests and Climate Change
Strategy (ENBCC) seeks to attack USCUSS sector emissions while the National Climate Change
Strategy is more general and includes all sectors (USCUSS, agriculture, energy, transportation,
waste and industry).
The USCUSS sector emissions are from productive activities, and so it is easy to see that making
forest conservation more profitable than other activities is key.
Demand for emissions reductions comes from Multilateral Funds, Private companies, and others,
but this demand has not been adequately quantified. One of the possible sources of the demand is
the World Bank (WB) and there are various other entities offering emissions reductions. In order
for Peru to distinguish itself from the others, the country need to establish a competitive product
that convinces those from the WB that they should buy emissions reductions from us.
The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), which the WB funds, has two types of funds
which Peru could access:
o The Readiness Fund that gives assistance to developing countries to prepare large-scale
incentive systems for REDD+, including the adoption of national REDD+ strategies, the
development of emissions reference levels, MRV design and establishing management
mechanisms for REDD+ including environmental and social safeguards.
o The Carbon Fund for pilot projects in payment for verified emissions reductions in
countries that have made significant progress with REDD+.
The WB Carbon Fund compensates verifiable emissions reductions at a large scale. It seeks to
promote experiments with incentive mechanisms, channeling payments as incentives to key
actors.
Readiness
Fund
and
Carbon
Fund
(refer
to
presentation
materials
at
http://www.gcftaskforce.org/training_program.).
Ø Within this framework, Peru is currently continuing the R-PP and FIP process. They are basing
their work on the progress made in previous phases, and are reorganizing previous information to
be able to fit it into the Carbon Fund form. There are still many details to iron out, but this is
expected to be done during the FIP and ENBCC design process.
Ø For the implementation of the Fund, we are considering a structure which has a financial
operator (which could be Agrobanco) and a technical operator (which would be the PNCBMCC).
The Fund would function as a fiduciary entity that would guarantee that the money is channeled
to projects that yield emissions reductions.
Ø Required information to be able to access the Carbon Fund includes: political will, the state of
readiness, participation and consultation processes, analysis of causes of and solutions for
deforestation, compliance with REDD+ requirements, institutional and stakeholder
arrangements, the program's management structure and a financing plan.
Ø Still to be determined are some points such as: the structure for sustained participation, the MRV
system, the SESA plan and co-beneficiaries, the plan for local forest monitoring, safeguards and
co-benefits, benefit-sharing mechanisms and a description of the management structure.
Subsidies for the construction of a state REDD+ system for the State of Amazonas
Pedro Gandolfo Soares of the Institute for Conservation and Sustainable Development of
Amazonas (IDESAM) highlighted the following through this lecture:
Ø The current state of REDD+ in Brazil is that REDD+ is unfolding at multiple levels. Different
states have various municipal and local projects. However it is important to ask which scale is
the most efficient one for forest management.
Ø Why regulate REDD+? Because it promotes good pilot initiatives at the state, municipal and
project scales. Regulation allows for control of the proliferation of projects that do not respect
social, environmental and methodological safeguards. In addition, regulation allows for the
integration of state projects with national ones, respecting the national baseline, avoiding double
counting and recognizing the role of each of the States.
Ø How should REDD+ be distributed in Brazil's Amazonia? There are various aspects to consider:
o The Amazonian region together has different policies, land rights, stakeholders, drivers and
agents of deforestation.
o Amazonian states have autonomy and each is progressing in its development of REDD+
programs.
o It is important to avoid double counting between jurisdictional and national programs.
It is necessary to maximize financing opportunities (national and international, public and
private, market, funds, etc.).
Ø The GCF states of the Brazilian Amazon (Acre, Amapá, Amazonas, Mato Groso, Pará and
Tocantins) have proposed an integrated approach which takes as a baseline that of the National
Climate Change Plan (PNMC).
o The proposed approach creates U-REDD+s (REDD+ Units), 80% of which are divided
among the States and 20% for the Federal Government.
o A National REDD+ Commission should define the allotment of U-REDD+s for each state,
the percentage of U-REDD+s for markets and the percentage of minority U-REDD+s for
domestic payments and payments based on performance.
o The Federal Government will be in charge of monitoring and accounting, sustainable
activities, improving agricultural efficiency, sustainable forest management, and through the
Amazon Fund, the execution of projects.
o The determination of U-REDD+s (percentage of emission reductions due to deforestation
and degradation for each State) is made averaging the carbon stocks of each State (in km2),
their percentage (with respect to the total km2) and the reduction of deforestation (in km2)
as a percentage of the total annual deforestation (in km2). U-REDD+s are a mechanism that
combines stock-flow (50%/50%).
o
Lessons learned from developing a domestic mitigation market (SCX)
Ø The current state of world climate change negotiations shows that it is very difficult to establish a
single agreement that is binding for more than 200 countries. Currently there is fragmentation in
unilateral and bilateral efforts.
Ø What can be done outside of government action? The solution for this problem must involve
governments, but the private sector can also act. In the case of Great Britain, for example, it is
businesses that are more in touch with citizens as clients, and who lead the effort against climate
change.
Ø This topic began to be visible in Chile in 2007, when various retail chains started to request that
Chilean exporters provide information on the carbon footprint of their products. This was seen
by the private sector as as a threat to Chilean exports, but it was also an opportunity for Chile to
gain an advantage on competing countries.
Ø This perception is strengthened if we look at the number of grams of CO2 emitted per kilometer
that a ton of goods is transported; countries like Peru or Chile have an advantage in comparison
with countries like the U.S. since air transport emits about 560 grams while boats emit about 8
grams. In other words, the carbon footprint of Peru is an opportunity that can be seized.
Ø Another important aspect to note is how, according to the abatement cost curve, there are many
solutions to the emissions problem (see the Global GHG Abatement Cost Curve v2.0), but there
is no market for emissions reductions.
Ø In addition, Latin America is a natural continent for reduction in CO2 emissions: The only world
commodity at a similar scale as fossil fuels, in terms of its level of transactions, is wood.
Ø In this context of opportunities, the Santiago Climate Exchange (SCX) has emerged. Its
objective is to develop the market for the reduction of CO2 emissions through a three-pronged
effort: developing certification standards, designing and implementing programs and
internationalization.
o Certification can benefit Peru when it competes with other countries. For example, in
Mexico, an enormous area of native forests has been destroyed to make way for avocado
plantations--this makes its footprint high, while in the case of Peru or Chile there are
products that can be grown with minimal quantities of water and that are carbon neutral.
o Given that there are different types of emission reductions certifications SCX had to
harmonize different standards, making the information they provide comparable, and
increase the potential of the operations.
Ø As they design and implement SCX, they are discovering the following relevant information and
arriving at certain conclusions:
o Businesses have different motivations for addressing sustainability topics. According to the
organizational maturity of the business (going from least to most mature) these motivations
can be legal/regulatory (following laws is always a central concern); based on social
entrepreneurship and accountability; or based on minimizing risks in the supply chain
and sustainability (in the long term). Including sustainability in a business allows it to
maximize its profits in the long term, through generating confidence and commitment in its
brand within civil society.
o To make an impact, it is not so much capital that is necessary but rather that companies
contribute as partners in convincing business to see climate change as both a threat and an
opportunity.
o Green markets in the United States show that 74% of adult consumers recognize to some
extent that the topic of the environment is a concern, and this is a global trend. In Chile a
study was conducted on the population's attitudes toward the environment, and it was shown
that the population perceived climate change and global warming, automobile emissions, air
pollution and the loss of animal and plant species, as more serious problems than the scarcity
of water (which is a more immediate problem in Chile).
o A study by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) for the Sustainable Brands Conference
found that:
§
§
§
The majority of the persons surveyed consider that companies should be responsible for
fixing the problem, while 55% of the companies surveyed consider that being green is
too costly; 51% don't know what else to do.
Certification seals or labels on products are the most reliable information source for
consumers (more than advertising).
Company or NGO brands can generate equal levels of confidence in people.
VI.
Appendices
GCF WORKSHOP ON MRV METHODS FOR PERUVIAN JURISDICTIONAL REDD+
PROGRAMS
Date: June 16-18, 2014
Location: Hotel San Agustín Colonial, Avenida Comandante Espinar 310 Miraflores, Lima
Participants: Managers and Regional Environmental Authorities from the four GCF regional
government members of the GCF (Loreto, Ucayali, Madre de Dio and San Martin) and
Amazonas,* and experts in forest management, monitoring systems, climate change and from the
environmental sector.
Objective: To build MRV capacity within GCF Regional Governments for the development of
Forest Carbon Mitigation Policies.
*Amazonas is an observer of the GCF, and will be applying for GCF membership in August
2014.
Agenda
1st day: General information and Forest Carbon Map
9-9:15 am:
Welcome and information on the workshop objectives,
Galarreta
9:15-9:30 am:
Coffee break
9:30-12 noon:
Carbon Forest Map, Ale Baccini
•
•
Víctor
The science of the Aerial Forest Carbon Map
How to use the Forest Carbon map for MRV in REDD+ Regional
Programs
12-1 pm:
Lunch
1-3 pm:
Carbon Forest Map, Ale Baccini
•
Discussion session: how to personalize and improve maps of the
Peruvian regions, including the incorporation of local data
3-3:15 pm:
Coffee break
3:15-4 pm:
The context of the monitoring system of Peru and the process for
establishing a reference level, Brian Zutta, REDD Project, MINAM
4-5 pm:
Jurisdictional and nested REDD+ framework, VCS, Paula Tassara, VCS
2nd day: How the Territorial System (TPS) Functions
9-10 am:
World context for REDD+ and lessons from Brazil, Briana Swette, Earth
Innovation Institute
•
Discussion on the 70% reduction of deforestation in Brazil and lessons
learned, REDD in California and next steps for COP20
10-10:15 am:
Coffee break
10 am-12 noon:
The tool for calculating carbon (CCal), Anne Alencar, IPAM
•
What is CCal?
•
Discussion on the availability of data
12-1 pm:
Lunch
1-3 pm:
The tool for calculating carbon (CCal), Anne Alencar, IPAM
•
How to use CCal, an operational tool for the Peruvian regions to use
for REDD+ jurisdictional programs
•
Discussion session: how to personalize CCal for regional needs in Peru
3-3:15 pm:
Coffee break
3:15-4:15 pm:
The TPS approach and the monitoring platform, Oswaldo Carvalho, Earth
Innovation Institute
•
A tool for integrated evaluation to measure and provide follow-up on
social, economic and environmental performance in a pilot region of
Brazil.
4:15-5 pm:
Discussion about a Peruvian TPS platform: What data and indicators?
How would it work?, Oswaldo Carvalho, Earth Innovation Institute
3rd day: Third day: Jurisdictional Approaches (in collaboration with Winrock and VCS)
and Progress toward a Forest Carbon Market in the South American context
9-10 am:
GCF and 2020 Strategic Plan Presentation, Jorge Torres,
National Program for Forest Conservation (PNCB, Peru)
10-10:30 am:
Early Idea of Peru presented to the Carbon Fund of the World
Bank, Gustavo Solano, PNCB Consultant, First Phase of the
Strategic Process
10:30-10:45 am:
Coffee break
10:45-11:20 am:
Proposal for a distribution of benefits among regions and at the
central level, Pedro Gandolfo Soares, IDESAM (Brazil)
11:30 am -12 noon:
Advances in the process to create a carbon fund, Jorge Torres,
National Program for Forest Conservation (PNCB), Peru
12-1 pm:
Workshop: Contributions to the development of a proposal for
forest financing of the CIAM regions, Javier Guzmán, GIZ
Consultant
1-2:30 pm:
Lunch
2:30-3:30 pm:
Lessons learned from promoting an internal carbon market,
Aldo Cerda, Santiago Climate Exchange (Chile)
3:30-5 pm:
Next steps and Agreements
Participants
Workshop in Photos
Victor Galarreta (GCF Coordinator (Peru) and technical secretary of CIAM) giving the welcome
remarks
Alessandro Baccini making his presentation
Brian Zutta (Ministry of the Environment) explaining Peru's progress in developing forest maps
Paula Tassara (VCS) making her presentation