Forest Carbon Partnership Facility 4a. Introduction of ad hoc - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

forest carbon partnership facility
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility 4a. Introduction of ad hoc - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility 4a. Introduction of ad hoc Technical Advisory Panels for PC14 R-PPs Fourteenth Meeting of the Participants Committee (PC14) Washington, DC March 19-21 R-PP Review Process Continuing the established


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

  • 4a. Introduction of

ad hoc Technical Advisory Panels for PC14 R-PPs

Fourteenth Meeting of the Participants Committee (PC14) Washington, DC March 19-21

slide-2
SLIDE 2
  • Continuing the established procedure:

1) Countries submit R-PP to FCPF/FMT 2) TAP Team reviews draft and revised R-PP

  • A TAP team of 5 to 8 individual experts having cross-disciplinary &

regional expertise on forest policy and MRV

  • 2-3 in-country experts, including indigenous peoples expert
  • 2 co-leads who have experience reviewing other R-PPs

3) PC members volunteer to review revised R-PP

R-PP Review Process

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

TAP and PC Timing and Process

R-PP Review synthesis Final R-PP Presentation to PC R-PP synthesis review discussion with country Conference calls among TAP members Final TAP country review synthesis, and final R-PPs posted on FCPF web PC REVIEW PRESENTATION TAP PRESENTATION TAP Individual reviews, using standard template and guidelines for both TAP and PC reviewers COUNTRY PARTICIPANTS COMMITTEE WB COMMENTS PRESENTATION Review continues (Focusing on all 12 standards) Revised R-PP

TAP Consul tants hired

PC members review R-PP R-PP Submission

slide-4
SLIDE 4

For PC 14

  • 6 country R-PPs reviewed
  • 5 to 8 TAP reviews per country = 35 reviews:
  • 15 from REDD country experts
  • FMT hired about 30 TAP experts in July-August for PC 13 and PC14
  • TAP held about 12 conference calls
  • Be objective, consistent and fair.
  • Provide constructive recommendations to increase the R-PPs quality, and

expert and independent advice on REDD.

  • Serve in individual capacity, not representing an organization.
  • Our thanks to the TAP members.

TAP process

Charge to TAP Members

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5

R-PP Quality

Honduras TAP Review

  • 6. Program Monitoring & Evaluation Framework
  • 5. Schedule and Budget
  • 4b. Multiple Benefits, Impacts and Governance
  • 4a. Monitoring – Emissions and Removals
  • 3. Reference Level
  • 2d. Social & Envir Impacts during Prep and Impl
  • 2c. Implementation Framework
  • 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options
  • 2a. Land Use, Forest Law, Policy and Governance
  • 1c. Consultation and Participation Process
  • 1b. Information Sharing and Stakeholder Dialogue
  • 1a. National Readiness Management

Arrangements STANDARDS

Five reviews since January 25, 2012

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

R-PP Quality

PNG TAP Review

  • 6. Program Monitoring & Evaluation Framework
  • 5. Schedule and Budget
  • 4b. Multiple Benefits, Impacts and Governance
  • 4a. Monitoring – Emissions and Removals
  • 3. Reference Level
  • 2d. Social & Envir Impacts during Prep and Impl
  • 2c. Implementation Framework
  • 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options
  • 2a. Land Use, Forest Law, Policy and

Governance

  • 1c. Consultation and Participation Process

Four reviews since August 2012

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

R-PP Quality

Surinam TAP Review

  • 6. Program Monitoring & Evaluation Framework
  • 5. Schedule and Budget
  • 4b. Multiple Benefits, Impacts and Governance
  • 4a. Monitoring – Emissions and Removals
  • 3. Reference Level
  • 2d. Social & Envir Impacts during Prep and Impl
  • 2c. Implementation Framework
  • 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options
  • 2a. Land Use, Forest Law, Policy and Governance
  • 1c. Consultation and Participation Process

Two reviews since December 19, 2012

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5 6

R-PP Quality Thailand TAP Review

  • 6. Program Monitoring & Evaluation

Framework

  • 5. Schedule and Budget
  • 4b. Multiple Benefits, Impacts and Governance
  • 4a. Monitoring – Emissions and Removals
  • 3. Reference Level
  • 2d. Social & Envir Impacts during Prep and Impl
  • 2c. Implementation Framework
  • 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options
  • 2a. Land Use, Forest Law, Policy and

Governance

  • 1c. Consultation and Participation Process

Two reviews since January 13, 2013; a record shorter review period

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

R-PP Quality

Vanuatu TAP Review

  • 6. Program Monitoring & Evaluation Framework
  • 5. Schedule and Budget
  • 4b. Multiple Benefits, Impacts and Governance
  • 4a. Monitoring – Emissions and Removals
  • 3. Reference Level
  • 2d. Social & Envir Impacts during Prep and Impl
  • 2c. Implementation Framework
  • 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options
  • 2a. Land Use, Forest Law, Policy and

Governance

  • 1c. Consultation and Participation Process
  • 1b. Information Sharing and Stakeholder

Dialogue

Three reviews since September, 2012

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

10 20 30 40 50 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

R-PP Quality

Chile R-PP TAP Review

  • 6. Program Monitoring & Evaluation

Framework

  • 5. Schedule and Budget
  • 4b. Multiple Benefits, Impacts and Governance
  • 4a. Monitoring – Emissions and Removals
  • 3. Reference Level
  • 2d. Social & Envir Impacts during Prep and Impl
  • 2c. Implementation Framework
  • 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options
  • 2a. Land Use, Forest Law, Policy and

Governance

  • 1c. Consultation and Participation Process

Three reviews since October, 2012

slide-11
SLIDE 11
  • Stephen Cobb (Lead, Vanuatu R-PPs)

– Conservation and development consultant (UK)

  • Jayant Sathaye (co-lead, Thailand and PNG R-PPs)

– Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (US and India)

  • D. James Baker (co-lead, Suriname R-PP)

Global Carbon Measurement Program, Clinton Climate Initiative William J. Clinton Foundation (US)

  • Tomas Schlichter (co-lead, Chile and Honduras R-PPs)

– Forest policy and economics expert (Argentina)

TAP review leaders at this meeting

slide-12
SLIDE 12
  • Since PC10, PC only reviews the revised R-PP.
  • For PC14 R-PPs, 10 PC members reviewed 6 Country R-PPs (2 to 3

reviewers per R-PP; 1 to 3 R-PPs per member)

  • Many thanks to PC reviewers and lead reviewers

PC Review of R-PPs

Country Lead Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2 Reviewer 3

PNG

Australia Germany

  • Vanuatu

Suriname USA

  • Thailand

Switzerland Denmark Indonesia

Suriname

USA Colombia Indonesia

Honduras

European Commission Germany Canada

Chile

Colombia Switzerland USA

slide-13
SLIDE 13

R-PP Draft Received by FMT Revised R-PP, and Final TAP Reviews

  • n Website

PC Meeting: Tentative Dates

April 15, 2013 (New submission) April 25, 2013 (Resubmission) Mid- June 2013 June 29 – July 2 PC 15, Indonesia

Schedule for R-PP Submission. Tentative R-PPs TBD, depending on outcomes of PC14 discussions

–FMT Strongly urges countries yet to submit R-PPs to use R-PP Template version 6 (April 20, 2012). The Template and Annexes in English, French and Spanish are available on FCPF website.

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

THANK YOU! www.forestcarbonpartnership.org