A presentation by Xuehong Wang on LDC's experiences of reporting on their experiences implementing the Paris Agreement. Xuehong Wang is the team lead of the International Consultation and Analysis Support Unit at the Transparency Division of the UNFCCC Secretariat. She has 10 years’ work experience on reporting and review under the UNFCCC process, including coordinating technical reviews of various national reports submitted by Parties. The presentation was delivered on Tuesday, 4 August 2020 during the webinar hosted by IIED `What does the Paris Agreement’s transparency framework mean for LDCs?´. More details: https://www.iied.org/what-does-paris-agreements-transparency-framework-mean-for-ldcs

1. TRANSITION TO THE ENHANCED
TRANSPARENCY FRAMEWORK (ETF)
UNDER THE PARIS AGREEMENT
Paris Agreement Transparency Framework and LDCs
IIED Webinar, 4 August 2020
Xuehong Wang, Team Lead, Transparency Division, UNFCCC Secretariat

2. Existing MRV arrangements for developing country Parties
under the Convention

3. Key Elements of the Paris Agreement
3
ETF

4. Enhanced transparency framework – implementation

5. BUR ETF
Guidelines Use of 1996 IPCC Guidelines → Use of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines
Gases Shall report CO2, CH4 and N2O (using
SAR values); encouraged to report other
gases
→ Shall report basket of 7 gases (with
flexibility)
Inventory year Cover inventory year T-4 → Cover year T-2 (T-3 with flexibility)
Update Activity data should be updated → Recalculations of previous data required
Key category Key category analysis should be done → Key category analysis required (with
flexibility)
Uncertainty Should quantitively estimate
uncertainty
→ Shall quantitatively estimate uncertainty
(with flexibility)
Institutional
arrangements
Limited reporting on institutional
arrangements
→ Reporting on institutional arrangements
required
QA/QC No specific requirements on QA/QC → Shall develop a QA/QC plan (with
flexibility*)
Key changes: GHG inventory

6. BUR ETF
Mitigation
actions
General requirements for reporting on mitigation actions remain similar
(including, description of the action, sectors/gases covered, progress indicators,
estimated and achieved to the extent possible (with flexibility), methodologies, and
steps taken to achieve action)
International
market
mechanism
Information on international market
mechanisms required
→ Information on international market
mechanisms required, rules under
negotiation
Domestic MRV Parties should describe domestic MRV
system
→ Shall provide more detailed information
on legal, institutional, administrative
and procedural arrangements for
domestic MRV
Projections Projections not included in scope of
reporting
→ GHG projections required on sector and
gas basis with and without LULUCF.
“With measures” required, may report
“with additional” or “without
measures”. Methodologies to be
described. (All with flexibility*)
Key changes: mitigation actions

7. Cancun Adaptation Framework Paris Agreement
Planning and
implementation
National Adaptation Plans National Adaptation Plans (Article 7, para. 9)
Provision of
information
National communications
(differentiated guidelines)
Ex ante communication through
adaptation communications
(Article 7, paras. 10 and 11)
Reporting through biennial
transparency reports (Article 13,
para. 8)
Types of
information
Annex I:
Impacts and
vulnerabilities;
plans and policies;
progress;
monitoring and
evaluation
Non annex I:
National
circumstances, impacts
and vulnerabilities;
plans and policies;
progress; monitoring
and evaluation
National circumstances, impacts and
vulnerabilities; priorities and barriers;
plans and policies; support; progress;
monitoring and evaluation; cooperation
and good practices; economic
diversification and co-benefits; links with
other international frameworks; gender;
traditional and indigenous knowledge
National circumstances, impacts and
vulnerabilities; priorities and barriers; plans
and policies; support; progress; monitoring
and evaluation; information related to loss
and damage; cooperation and good
practices; economic diversification and co-
benefits; gender; traditional and indigenous
knowledge
Follow-up Compilation and synthesis of national
communications
Information synthesized for global stocktake (Article 7, para. 14)
Specific linkages - Adaptation communication can be submitted i.a. as component of
NDCs, NAPs, national communications, or BTRs - when doing so,
consider relevant guidelines for those instruments
- BTRs can cross-reference previously reported information and/or focus
on updating such information
Key changes: adaptation arrangements

8. BUR ETF
Format Technical analyses conducted in a
centralized manner
→ Under certain conditions, review is held
in-country
Timing/
interaction
Party may provide technical
clarifications; not mandated
→ Party responds to preliminary questions
in 2 weeks (with flexibility)
Party has three months to comment on
a draft report
→ Party has one month to provide
comment (with flexibility)
TTE, with the Party, finalizes report in 3
months.
→ Expert team, in consultation with Party,
finalizes report in one month
Technical analysis process up to 9
months after review week
→ Review process 4 months after review
week (with flexibility)
Mandate Identify extent information is reported
in BUR, technical analysis of
information, and identify CBN
→ Report includes recommendations
(“shall”) and encouragements (non
“shall”) (with flexibility to include CBN)
Multilateral
consideration
FSV does not require any Q&A session
prior to the session or action after the
session
→ Party responds to questions 1-2 months
before session. Party may provide
further information 30 days after
Key changes: review and multilateral consideration

9. • In order to build mutual trust and confidence
and to promote effective implementation, an
ETF for action and support, with built-in
flexibility which takes into account Parties’
different capacities and builds upon collective
experience is hereby established (Article 13.1)
• Self determined, by those developing
countries that need it in the light of their
capacities
• The MPGs specify the flexibility that is
available
• LDCs and SIDS may submit BTR at their
discretion
Improved reporting and
.transparency over time
2024
Parties operate
under same
standards
2024 + X years
Stateofcountries’
inventories
Time
ETF and flexibility

10. LDCs: Challenges and Experience with existing MRV
➢ Lack of sustainable institutional arrangements for reporting
• Could increase the workload to collect and analyze relevant data each time
when reporting has to be done.
• In many cases, reporting arrangements are set up on a project basis for the
specific reports, and once reports are completed the arrangements are
disbanded.
➢ Need to improve understanding of different reporting requirements and possible
linkages;
• The secretariat is making constant efforts to assist Parties, including by
developing and rolling out relevant tools, publications and training
programmes
• Need to facilitate continuous improvements based on CBN identified in the ICA
process, to apply the experience and lessons learned to the ETF

11. • The concrete data and information generated through this process provides a solid
basis for Parties and other key stakeholders, to make informed decisions on further
actions and targeted support;
• NCs, BURs and NAPs can provide solid evidence/reference for specific gaps and
needs of the countries – technical, financial, or capacity-building, and to inform
ongoing work and enhance national capacity;
• Regarding adaptation, the NAP is the main reference for accessing support (esp.
funding for implementation from the GCF) - once submitted, posted on NAP Central;
• To inform the SBI assessment of progress in NAPs/NCs and BURs, to facilitate
appropriate actions and to address bottlenecks that impede progress of LDCs;
• To share experience, good practices and lessons, that can inform work in LDCS and
ensure consistency under related work of other constituted bodies such as the CGE;
• To inform the Global Stocktake under the Paris Agreement.
LDCs: Benefits of the reporting process

12. A glimpse of reporting under the ICA process
International Consultation and Analysis (ICA)
https://unfccc.int/ICA
76
38
9
31
Non-Annex I Parties (excluding LDCs and SIDS)
Least developed countries (LDCs)
Parties that are both LDC and SIDS
Small island developing States (SIDS)
Parties not included in
Annex I to the Convention
45
31
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Not submitted
Submitted
12
66
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Not submitted
Submitted
NAI Parties that are
not LDCs or SIDS
LDCs and/or SIDS
(as of 25 July 2020)

13. Transition to the ETF
International Consultation and Analysis (ICA)
https://unfccc.int/ICA
➢ The ETF builds on the existing transparency arrangements under the Convention
(including the ICA).
➢ Recognising that the ICA process is regarded as a testing ground for the
implementation of transparency, developing country Parties are encouraged to
submit their BURs and participate in at least one round of the ICA process, before
the ETF becomes fully operational
➢ The ICA process (existing MRV arrangements) provides an essential learning
opportunity for Parties and stakeholders to better prepare for the ETF, including:
• The extent and clarity of information reported enables Parties to be better
prepared for enhancing the transparency of information reported in their BTR;
• Identification of capacity-building needs and areas for improvement
• Facilitates mutual learning among Parties, by sharing best practices and
innovative approaches, and help Parties to build confidence and trust for
continued efforts on climate change.

14. New Publication (launched in July 2020)
For more information, please visit
https://unfccc.int/ica2020
or use the QR code below

15. For more information, please visit:
• https://unfccc.int/ICA
• https://unfccc.int/enhanced-transparency-framework
• https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-
resilience/workstreams/adaptation-communications
• https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-
resilience/workstreams/national-adaptation-plans