CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Monitoring, reporting and verification for national REDD + programmes: two proposals

Export citation

Different options have been suggested by Parties to the UNFCCC (United Framework Convention on Climate Change) for inclusion in national approaches to REDD and REDD + (reduced deforestation, reduced degradation, enhancement of forest carbon stocks, sustainable management of forest, and conservation of forest carbon stocks). This paper proposes that from the practical and technical points of view of designing action for REDD and REDD + at local and sub-national level, as well as from the point of view of the necessary MRV (monitoring, reporting and verification), these should be grouped into three categories: conservation, which is rewarded on the basis of no changes in forest stock, reduced deforestation, in which lowered rates of forest area loss are rewarded, and positive impacts on carbon stock changes in forests remaining forest, which includes reduced degradation, sustainable management of forest of various kinds, and forest enhancement. Thus we have moved degradation, which conventionally is grouped with deforestation, into the forest management group reported as areas remaining forest land, with which it has, in reality, and particularly as regards MRV, much more in common. Secondly, in the context of the fact that REDD/REDD + is to take the form of a national or near-national approach, we argue that while systematic national monitoring is important, it may not be necessary for REDD/REDD + activities, or for national MRV, to be started at equal levels of intensity all over the country. Rather, areas where interventions seem easiest to start may be targeted, and here data measurements may be more rigorous (Tier 3), for example based on stakeholder self-monitoring with independent verification, while in other, untreated areas, a lower level of monitoring may be pursued, at least in the first instance. Treated areas may be targeted for any of the three groups of activities (conservation, reduced deforestation, and positive impact on carbon stock increases in forest remaining forest).
Download:

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/1/014002
Altmetric score:
Dimensions Citation Count:

    Publication year

    2011

    Authors

    Herold, M.; Skutsch, M.

    Language

    English

    Keywords

    monitoring, reporting, Verification

Related publications