This presentation by Daniel Murdiyarso shows the history of forest governance in Indonesia, how the REDD+ strategy can be understood as a landscape approach, where potential REDD+ projects could be located in Indonesia, how the MRV system can still maintain credibility, what FREDDI is and what kind of nested approach we need for MRV payment.

1. MRV System in Indonesia:
Credibility, governance and benefit sharing
Daniel Murdiyarso

2. Outline
• Long history of forest
governance system
• REDD+: a steep learning curve
• MRV system: maintaining
credibility
• Financing instrument
• (Costs and) benefits sharing
• Concluding remarks

3. Long history of forest governance
 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

4. A steep learning curve
National REDD+
Strategy
Pilot Province
REDD+ Agency
MRV and Financial
Instrument
Demonstration
Activities
REL/RL (technical)
Safeguards
Underlying causes
of DD
Consultation
processes
Institutional
capacity building
NICFI
KFCP/UN-REDD
IFCA/WB-FCPF
|
|
|
|
2007
2008
2009
2013 and beyond

5. REDD+ strategy: a landscape approach

6. •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Potential
REDD+ projects














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








• 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


• Lombok/KOICA-MoFo/NTB
• TN Meru Betiri/ITTO-MoFo/Jatim
Biak-Rumfor/Emerald Planet
Mamberamo/New Forest
Merauke-Mappi-Asmat/WWF
Jayapura/WWF
• TEBE Project/YTM-AusAID/NTB

7. MRV system: maintaining credibility
M
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

8. Developing higher Tier EFs is possible

9. 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

10. (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

11. Nesting sub national projects
Market or fund
CO2-eq Verified reports
Stream of fund
National
Reporting
• Carbon
• Social
• Biodiversity
MRV
Aggregate
Province
Benefit sharing
• Technical
• Administrative
• Financial
MRV
Aggregate
Project
Project
Project
MRV
MRV
MRV

12. What kind of nested approach?

13. Key messages
 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