Indonesia NAMA concept:I d i NAMAs tLand-based Sector Yuliana C. Wulan, Philippe Guizol, Heiner von Luepke ICRAF NAMA Half Day Seminar, 25 February 2011
Outline Indonesian NAMAs Development Land-based NAMAs: scope and cross cutting issues – linking to National REDD+ Baseline (BAU) and target line MRV Prioritizing mitigation actions Next Steps
Indonesia sIndonesia’s NAMAs Development Indonesian NAMAs - RAN GRK (Draft Perpres) Unilateral: self-financing (26% from the National Baseline – Letter to UNFCCC, 30 Jan 2010). Supported NAMAs ( p to 41% with International pp (up support - G20 Meeting in Pittsburgh 2009). RAN/GRK NAMAs: sectoral basis (forestry, / ( y, and peatland; agriculture; energy, transport and industry; and waste).
General NAMAs Concept inIndonesia Scope and rationale, Baseline (BAU) and sectoral target: nationally integrated, i t t d Mitigation scenarios, Potential costs and benefits benefits, Priority mitigation actions, Policies measures and instruments Policies, instruments, MRV
General NAMAs Concept in Indonesia WU1Source: Situmeang, 2011
Slide 5WU1 proposed slide title: General NAMAs concept in Indonesia The source will be an issue? I am bringing this up, as the paper is by no means approved or accepted by bappenas...informally we are working with it already in a lot of ways, but let us consult with Idai, if this can be already presented officially (just to be in the safe side) Windows User, 2/22/2011
Land Based NAMAs: starting from the land WU2 Indonesia lands in million ha Indonesia lands in million ha Forest lands Total Total APL. Non Limited Permanent Convertion Total forest Forest land Conservation Protection Production Production Forest Forest land (Agriculture…) TotalForest cover 15,2 23,0 18,8 22,1 79,1 11,0 90,1 8,3 98,5Non‐Forest cover 3,8 38 5,9 59 5,5 55 13,1 13 1 28,3 28 3 11,0 11 0 39,3 39 3 46,5 46 5 85,8 85 8Data deficiency 0,7 0,9 0,5 0,5 2,6 0,3 3,0 0,6 3,6Total 19,7 , 29,9 , 24,8 , 35,7 , 110,0 , 22,4 , 132,4 , 55,4 , 187,8 ,% of Total 10% 16% 13% 19% 59% 12% 71% 29% 100%Source: Forest Statistics, MoFor 2009 About 67 % of emissions are land based (SNC 2010) (SNC,
Slide 6WU2 to explain: actual forest stocks versus official land use type? And: can we use another term for "data deficiency"? something like "error range"? Windows User, 2/22/2011
Scope of land based NAMA The scope of the Land based NAMAs includes forests, forest and agri- plantations, plantations agroforestry and other h6 agriculture lands. Land based NAMAs scope includes REDD+ scope. h7 To be noticed: No explanations about p articulations between land based NAMA & REDD in Cancun
Slide 7h6 i thought peatlands can be found under any kind of land use type? Hence it is more a soil class and not strictly used for a particular land use type...so for scope setting we can say: all of the scopes can include as a special type "xxx land use type on peat" heiner, 2/22/2011h7 can we say somewhere, why we are after all concerned about the issue of drawing the scope of REDD+ and other land based NAMAs? In my view because: - a clear scope will allow to establish BAU scenario/reference levels - the remaining NAMA/REDD+ elements can be established only if we know the respective scopes we assume however, that design elements of NAMA and REDD in accordance with the indonesian concept are rather similar and hence must be made compatible heiner, 2/22/2011
Land based NAMAs andREDD+: why setting the scope We W need an integrated landscape approach: full carbon d i t t dl d h f ll b accounting needed, avoiding that some activities not included in REDD+ are left unconsidered and vice versa A clear scope will allow to establish BAU scenario/reference levels l ill ll bli h i / f l l The remaining NAMA/REDD+ elements (mitigation scenarios, policies measures, instruments, mitigation actions, MRV) can be established only if we know the respective scopes We assume however that design elements of NAMA and REDD in accordance with the Indonesian concepts are rather similar and hence must be made compatible
Land based NAMA: including National REDD+ REDD+ scope: not clearly defined (territorial and h8 t l l d fi d (t it i l d activities) – STRANAS REDD+, Cancun agreement REDD+ modalities are more advanced compared to NAMAs (i NAMA (inc. international finance support, guiding i i l fi idi principle, etc.) h9 h10 REDD+ Task Force (UKP4): establishing national REDD+ institutions, formulating REDD+ national strategy, designing financing instrument for all REDD+ activities in Indonesia, setting up framework and independent MRV institution NAMAs will cover the broadest land use sector classifications and link to baseline/mitigation actions from all sectors
Slide 9h8 according to which source? stranas REDD+? heiner, 2/22/2011h9 to add: "Gives the opportunity to learn for the formulation of remaining NAMAs" heiner, 2/22/2011h10 when we speak about links...what is the implication of this bullet point? heiner, 2/22/2011
Scope of land based NAMA LAND‐BASED NAMAS LAND BASED NAMAS LAND USE TYPE REDD+ SCOPE SCOPE PRIMARY FOREST (ON PERMANENT/ INCLUDE INCLUDE CONVERTIBLE FOREST AREA) SECONDARY FOREST (ON PERMANENT/ SECONDARY FOREST (ON PERMANENT/ INCLUDE INCLUDE CONVERTIBLE FOREST AREA) LOGGED OVER FOREST ON PRODUCTION INCLUDE INCLUDE AND PEATLAND FOREST AREA (HPH/IUPHHK) TIMBER PLANTATION ON FOREST ZONE NOT CLEAR YET* INCLUDE (HTI/HTR) PRIVATE TIMBER PLANTATION (HUTAN NOT CLEAR YET* O C INCLUDE CU DRY LAND A RAKYAT) ON APL RAKYAT) ON APL CROP PLANTATION (EG., RUBBER, NOT CLEAR YET* INCLUDE COFFEE, COCOA) AGROFOREST NOT CLEAR YET* NOT CLEAR YET* INCLUDE OIL PALM EXCLUDE INCLUDE OPEN FIELD FOOD CROPS EXCLUDE INCLUDE RICE FIELD EXCLUDE INCLUDE SETTLEMENTS/ROAD EXCLUDE INCLUDE h11*GOI should clarify whether this should be include/exclude under national REDD+ scope
Slide 10h11 did you advance yet with your arguments for your expert judgment/recommendation? heiner, 2/22/2011
Baseline (BAU) and target line h12M t of CO2 Land based BAU Unilateral Target line = BAU‐ X% Supported Historical baseline Market Actual future trajectory? Years Past Emissions Commitment period
Slide 11h12 does this refer to the accumulated or point in time difference in the year 2020? (it is implied in the term target line that it is accumulated, but i wanted to be sure...) heiner, 2/22/2011h14 as mentioned: please make sure that supported and market are two distinct ranges...here it sounds as if they are one and the same heiner, 2/22/2011
MRV (Decision_/CP.16) Internationally Supported Mitigation Actions will be Measured, Reported and Verified (MRV) domestically and will b subject t I t ill be bj t to International M ti l Measurement, R t Reporting ti and Verification in accordance with Guidelines to be developed under the Convention. p Domestically Supported Mitigation Actions will be Measured, Reported and Verified (MRV) Domestically in , p ( ) y accordance with General Guidelines to be developed under the Convention.
MRV Priorities for Land-basedNAMAs h161.1 Defining credible Land based BAU and target line (Clear assumptions…)2. Derive MRV indicators: only possible after setting the scope of REDD+/LB NAMAs f / h153. Making MRV Institutions right (transparent, one National MRV institution – so that MRV institution for REDD+ should be inline with national MRV)4. Advance Indonesia capacity for improving satellite imageries analysis emissions factors, data on land analysis, factors management as well as for improving human resources though training5. An information system on safeguards5 A i f ti t f d
Slide 13h15 but you have one for REDD+ already...so you will have more than one eventually..or do you want to say that the UKP4 institution should do all MRV in all sectors? (fair enough, but that is not the plan, i think) heiner, 2/22/2011h16 how would MRV differ according to REDD+ and remaining land based NAMAs? MRV according to international standards and conducted by UKP4 new instittion for REDD+, whereas it would be up to the sectors and national framework to decide how to do the MRV for remaining land based NAMAs? Another point to be mentioned: MRV indicators of REDD+ and land based NAMAs should be different, becuase they will be derived by the particular mitigation actions... heiner, 2/22/2011
Prioritizing Land basedmitigation actions1. Pre-requisite1 Pre requisite and enabling conditions2. Mitigation actions priorities should take into account: 1. Other Indonesian government policies, which affect land use decisions (economic development, poverty reduction co-benefits) reduction, co benefits). 2. Action effectiveness and practicality 3. Cost-efficiency, which includes transaction costs, investment costs and opportunity costs. 4. Fairness (local community rights, social safeguards) g )
Further Steps for Developing h17Indonesia NAMAs: R i Review and establish common national policy f d t bli h ti l li framework k and legal systems related to lands Set up baseline for land-based sector that linked to national BAU sectoral t ti l BAU, t l target line, and mitigation t li d iti ti scenarios Set up MRV system (institutional and technical concept) Review potential abatement costs (inc. opportunity cost, transaction and adm.cost) and benefits (inc. co-benefits and social safeguards) Prioritize mitigation actions Formulating financing schemes and benefit-cost sharing mechanisms
Slide 15h17 will this also be valid for the land based NAMAs including REDD+? heiner, 2/22/2011
National Centre for NAMAs Development Office Wisma Bakrie II 6th Floor Jl. Jl HR Rasuna Said Kav B-2 Kav. B 2 Jakarta 12920 T +62-21-57945739 F +62-21-57945739
A particular slide catching your eye?
Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.