The document reviews the context, framework, and progress of the REDD+ MRV system in Ethiopia up to 2018, highlighting the historical background of deforestation, institutional arrangements, and community participation challenges. It discusses crucial milestones, challenges faced in implementation, and future opportunities for enhancing the system's sustainability. Key elements include monitoring and reporting functions, spatial data utilization, and the importance of local community engagement.

1. REDD+ MRV in
Ethiopia
Review of the context, framework and
progress
Manuel Boissière, Solomon Zewdie, Melaku Bekele, Stibniati
Atmadja
Nexus Hotel, Addis Ababa, 5 April 2019

2. What is this
presentation about?
• REDD+ MRV context,
framework and
progresses until 2018
• Summarize results of
Occasional Paper:
https://www.cifor.org/li
brary/7153
• Based on interviews,
literature review and a
workshop
2/20

3. Outline
• Context
o History
o Forest definition
o Functions of MRV
o Spatial data
• Framework
o Institutional arrangements
o Social aspects
• Progress:
o Current implementation
o Challenges and
opportunities
3/20

4. CONTEXT
4/20

5. History (1)
Pre-REDD+ (1970s – 2010)
• High deforestation and land degradation
• Reforestation and afforestation promoted
• Farmers encouraged to plant trees
• PFM to increase community engagement
Post REDD+ (2010 – present)
• GTP and CRGE
• MEFCC established (became EFCCC in 2018)
• Start of REDD+, including REDD+ MRV
5/20

6. History (2)
• 2013 - 2018: REDD+ readiness with financial support from
Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, Norway, UK
• 2013: ToR for developing capacities for national MRV
system
• 2014: NFI launched
• 2015: New forest definition
• 2016: MRV unit established in the ministry
• 2017: institutional framework is developed for REDD+
MRV implementation; Final FRL submission to UNFCCC
MRV Milestones (2010 – present)
6/20

7. Forest definition
Ethiopia’s FRL FAO’s Forest Resource
Assessment
Land spanning at least 0.5 ha,
covered by trees (incl bamboo)
attaining a height of at least 2m
and a canopy cover of at least
20% or trees with the potential to
reach these thresholds in situ in
due course
Land spanning more than 0.5
hectares with trees higher than 5
meters and a canopy cover of
more than 10 percent, or trees
able to reach these thresholds in
situ. It does not include land that
is predominantly under
agricultural or urban land use.
7/20

8. MRV Functions
Monitoring
• Impact of REDD+ policies and
measures
• The collection, storage, analysis
and dissemination of data
Measurement
• forest area and forest
change by satellite land
monitoring system
• changes in forest carbon
stock per unit area by NFI
• GHG inventory data.
Reporting
• Standardized, consistent
national reporting
Verification
• Verify performance,
reporting results,
adjusting reports on
REDD+
8/20
Source: FDRE 2017

9. Spatial data and ground survey
5 interelated spatial datasets
1. LULC change map (2013)
2. Forest/non forest map
o Forest: high forest, riverine forest, dense woodland, plantation, bamboo
o Non-forest: agriculture, shrubland, grassland, builtup, bare land, water, no
data
3. Forest area change (AD): average of annual forest loss and gain in
hectares, 2000 and 2013
4. Carbon stock assessment (EFs)
o 3 carbon pools: above, below ground and deadwood
o 4 biomes: moist Afromontane forest, dry Afromontane forest, Combretum-
Terminalia dry forest, Acacia-Commiphora dry forest
5. Forest Reference Level (2000-2013), based on 3 components: extent
of forest area, AD, EF
9/20

10. FRAMEWORK
10/20

11. General framework
• Decentralized management of REDD+ MRV
• Defined roles and responsibilities at federal,
regional and local levels
• MRV unit’s responsibilities
o produce, verify and disseminate forest statistics (AD, EF)
o oversee overall REDD+ MRV activities
• Permanent MRV entities at federal and regional
levels
• National REDD+ secretariat and regional
counterparts are project-based
11/20

12. Institutional arrangement
EFCCC
(Commission)
Forest sector
Deputy Commissioner
Environmental sector
Deputy Commissioner
Reference: MEFCC 2017
12/20

13. Participation of local communities (1)
• Need to explore and test participatory
monitoring approaches for MRV – highlighted
in R-PP.
• Necessary to sustain forest monitoring
activities, reduce cost, and empower local
communities
• Still no engagement of local communities in
REDD+ MRV; initiatives on forest monitoring in
Participatory Forest Management (PFM).
13/20

14. Participation of local communities (2)
3 issues:
• Social safeguards: SIS prepared but not yet
implemented
• Benefit sharing: different initiatives for Result
Based Payments (OFLP, Bale Ecoregion) but
need for a harmonised approach
• Sustaining participation: need good
motivation and incentive to participate
14/20

15. PROGRESS
15/20
Based on the discussions during the MRV workshop, October 6th, 2017, Addis Ababa

16. Current implementation
• Crucial MRV deliverables:
o LULC map
o NFI completed
o carbon stock data (EF) generated
o national forest cover change (AD) analysed using Landsat
imagery
o national SIS being developed
• National REDD+ MRV institutional arrangements have been
established
• Policies, guidelines for NFI and NFMS have been developed
• Human capacity and MRV facilities are being built, in
collaboration with FAO (in country MRV capacity building)
and WGCF, through training
16/20

17. Challenges (1)Sectoral
• Weak inter-sectoral coordination
• Ministry (2013)  commission (2018) = possible implications on the
coordination role of the commission for CRGE MRV activities
Technical
• Limited capacity for MRV of forest degradation
• Limited incentives to maintain trained staff and avoid turnover
• Insufficient in-country technical capacity to run the system
Buy-in from local and national stakeholders
• Little tangible action to enhance local people participation and to
integrate participatory MRV into the national MRV system framework
• Sustainable financing through direct national support is still needed to
ensure national ownership
17/20

18. Challenges (2)
Safeguards
• Operationalizing SIS is still needed
• Information sharing on SIS needs to be done at the local level for
better engagement
• Need better recognition of local communities’ rights on forests
• Need to enforce implementation of environmental safeguards
Benefit sharing
• BSM activities still in a pilot stage, need to be developed at
national level
• Risk of raising expectations
• Local people need to be better engaged in the BSM development
18/20

19. Opportunities
• Government’s endorsement of an institutional framework for
REDD+ MRV: important to ensure government’s ownership and
sustainability of the MRV system
• The recognition of the forestry sector’s vital role in the CRGE
should allow a stronger political buy-in of Ethiopia’s REDD+ MRV
• Ethiopia’s REDD+ MRV system development
o Brings financial support to national capacity building on forest
observation
o Generates robust data about the sector
o Helps modernize the forestry sector development and planning
o Improves data transparency (MRV web portal)
• National MRV capacity building (WGCF-NR) = opportunity to build
local spatial data infrastructure and human capacity -> ensure
sustainability
19/20

20. cifor.org
forestsnews.cifor.org
ForestsTreesAgroforestry.org
THANK YOU / አመሰግናለሁ
CONTACT: M.BOISSIERE@CGIAR.ORG