MRV System in Indonesia:Credibility, governance and benefit sharing

Daniel Murdiyarso

Outline

• Long history of forest governance system

• REDD+: a steep learning curve• MRV system: maintaining

credibility• Financing instrument• (Costs and) benefits sharing• Concluding remarks

Centralized, legally guided by national Law over resources, permitting and licensing procedures

Goods oriented rather than services – climate change was never in the agenda

Decentralized authorities with limited capacities Leaving huge gaps in a lot of fronts

Long history of forest governance

IFCA/WB-FCPF

Underlying causes of DDConsultation processes Institutional capacity building KFCP/UN-REDD

Demonstration ActivitiesREL/RL (technical)Safeguards

NICFI

A steep learning curve

National REDD+ StrategyPilot ProvinceREDD+ AgencyMRV and Financial Instrument

| | |2007 2008 2009 2013 and beyond

|

REDD+ strategy: a landscape approach

• Lombok/KOICA-MoFo/NTB• TN Meru Betiri/ITTO-MoFo/Jatim

• Merang/GiZ/Sumsel• Berbak/ZSL/Jambi• SFCP/AusAID-MoFo/Jambi• Kampar Ring/APRIL/Riau• Tesso Nilo/WWF/Riau• Siberut/Global Green/Sumbar• Leuser/YLI/Aceh• Ulu Masen/Aceh Green/Aceh

• Ketapang/FFI/Kalbar• Kapuas Hulu /FORCLIME/Kalbar • Kapuas Hulu/FFI/Kalbar• Sentarum/FFI/Kalbar• Lamandau/YAYORIN-RARE/Kalteng• Rimba Raya/RRC-Infinite Earth/Kalteng• Katingan/RMU-Starling Resources/Kalteng• Sebangau/WWF/Kalteng• KFCP/AusAID-MoFo/Kalteng• Heart of Borneo/WWF/Kalteng• Kutai Barat/WWF/Kaltim• Kutai-Malinau/Global Green/Kaltim• RHOI/BOS/Kaltim• Malinau/GER/Kaltim• Malinau/FORCLIME/Kaltim• Berau Forest Carbon/TNC/Kaltim• Berau/FORCLIME/Kaltim

• Mamuju/Inhutani/SulBar• TN Lore Lindu/UNREDD-MoFo/Sulteng• SM Nantu/YANI/Gorontalo• Poigar/ONF/Sulut

Biak-Rumfor/Emerald Planet Mamberamo/New Forest

Merauke-Mappi-Asmat/WWF Jayapura/WWF

• TEBE Project/YTM-AusAID/NTB

PotentialREDD+ projects

MRV system: maintaining credibilityM IPCC – Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF activities

• Publish data (area, biomass data, carbon density) • Describe methodologies (measurements in 5 pools, use model• Include all greenhouse gases (CO2, N2O, CH4)• Document QA/QC procedures

R IPCC Reporting Principle – managed uncertainties•Consistency • Transparency•Comparability•Completeness•Accuracy

V Validation Project development phase•Estimation of future GHG emissions reductions to be achieved•Use models (historical trend, numeric, economic)

Verification Project monitoring phase•Confirmation of actual GHG emission reductions achieved

during crediting period•Compare between estimations and observations

Developing higher Tier EFs is possible

FREDDI: financing instrument

• Modalities: grant making, trust fund

• Funding: Broad array of opportunities/initiatives

• Guiding principles: performance-based and safeguards

• Governance: GoI-led design and management, Board of Trustee

(Costs and) benefits sharing

M • National REDD entity• Sub-national entities• Project proponents/implementers• High costs

R • National REDD entity• Sub-national entities• Project proponents/implementers• Potentially high costs

V Validation • In-house validation processes•During development phase•Potentially low costs

Verification •Third party - independent verifiers•During monitoring phase•High costs

Project Project Project

Province

National

Benefit sharing• Technical• Administrative• Financial

Market or fund

Stream of fundVerified reports

Reporting• Carbon• Social• Biodiversity

MRV

MRV

MRVMRVMRV

Aggregate

Aggregate

Nesting sub national projects

CO2-eq

What kind of nested approach?

Indonesia has good practice MRV for emission hotspots in place

Linking GHG emissions and removals with IPCC Guidelines will ensure credibility

Nested-approach for MRV-payment may be viable; need further thoughts

Key messages