The International Consultation and Analysis (ICA) Process: foundation for the enhanced transparency framework - Lead Reviewers Meetings Bonn, 2021 ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
The International Consultation and Analysis
(ICA) Process: foundation for the enhanced
transparency framework
Lead Reviewers Meetings
Bonn, 2021
Xuehong Wang, Team Lead, BUR and FSV unit, Transparency Division
UNFCCC secretariatOutline of Presentation
ICA implementation process update
Key trends and observations in reporting &
capacity building needs
ICA experience and way forwardInternational Consultation and Analysis (ICA)
➢ Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) arrangements for developing country
Parties (Decision 2/CP.17 & Decision 20/CP.19)
➢ Launched in December 2014, following the submission of the first biennial update
reports (BURs)
• Elements of BURs: GHG inventory; Mitigation actions; FTC needs and support
received; REDD plus activities for some Parties
➢ Two steps:
• technical analysis of BUR
❖ Identification of capacity building needs
• Facilitative sharing of views under SBI
➢ The ICA process will be superseded by the Enhanced Transparency Framework under
the Paris Agreement, with the submission of the last BURs no later than December
2024Overview of BUR submissions
(as of Jan 2021)
NAI Parties that are
not LDCs or SIDS LDCs and/or SIDS
100% 100%
38
80% 30 80%
60% 60% 61
76 Parties not included in
Annex I to the Convention 9
40% 40%
46
20% 31 20%
17
0% 0%
Not submitted Non-Annex I Parties (excluding LDCs and SIDS) Not submitted
Least developed countries (LDCs)
Submitted at Parties that are both LDC and SIDS Submitted at
least one BUR Small island developing States (SIDS) least one BUR
International Consultation and Analysis (ICA)
https://unfccc.int/ICABUR submission trend
(as of Jan 2021)
30
BUR1 BUR2 BUR3 BUR4
25
20
15
10
5
0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
International Consultation and Analysis (ICA)
https://unfccc.int/ICASubmission trend of BUR, NIR and REDD+ Technical annexes
25
BUR NIR TA
20
15
10
5
0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020Update on BUR technical analysis (May 2015 to March 2021)
❖17 rounds of technical
Round 18: 8 - 12 March
analyses coordinated 2021
❖100 BURs (59, 31 and 10 first,
second and third BURs • 7 BURs (Cuba, Guinea-Bissau,
respectively) Honduras, Malaysia, Singapore
(Fourth BUR), Thailand and Zambia)
❖15 REDD technical annexes
(24 experts) • 3 teams of technical experts
❖38 Teams (Arabic, English, • Experts: 30 experts
French and Spanish)
• Languages: English, Spanish
❖179* experts (including 44**
CGE)
❖90 Published summary
reports Round 19: June 2021
* 285 expert times • 2 BURs (Brazil and Chile) and other
** 76 CGE member expert times
BURs to be submittedKey observations – capacity building needs
18.3% 1%
26.7%
26.6%
Thematic areas of 40.8% Types of reported
challenges and needs capacity building
reported needs
36.7%
8.1%
31.5%
10.3%
GHG inventory Mitigation
Adaptation Support Institutional arrangements Data and information
Cross-cutting Methodology and tools Not specified
Source: NCs and BURs submitted by Parties, and TASRs as of July 2020
International Consultation and Analysis (ICA)
https://unfccc.int/ICAKey observations – reporting in BURs
➢ Continuous improvements over time in subsequent BURs with quantitative
data
➢ Gaps have been identified by team of technical experts mostly for the
following reporting provisions
• Comparable information included in tables included in annex 3A.2 to the IPCC good
practice guidance for LULUCF
• Estimation from F-gases and precursors
• Information on the level of uncertainty associated with inventory data, underlying
assumptions and methodologies
• Information on quantitative goals, progress indicators, methodologies and
assumptions for mitigation actions
• Nationally determined technology needs and technology support receivedKey observations – challenges encountered by Parties
➢ Lack of sustainable institutional arrangements for reporting
• 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
• Lack of consolidated MRV system, in particular MRV for mitigation actions and FTC
support
• Lack of domestic coordination leads to data inconsistency in various reports
➢ Lack of capacity in applying methodologies and tools, e.g. on estimating effects of
mitigation actions and support
➢ Inadequate data collection and management system
➢ 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 ETFWay forward – ICA as foundation for ETF
➢ 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;
• Facilitate Parties’ understanding of the new reporting requirements under ETF;
• 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.
International Consultation and Analysis (ICA)
https://unfccc.int/ICAWay forward - qualified experts needed
➢ Total eligible experts for ICA: 452 (75% non-CGE; 25% CGE members)
• Limited experts with another UN language
• A need to increase the pool of REDD+ experts
• Limited participation by experts from Annex I Parties
➢ Overview of experts that participated in BUR analysis as of February 2021Way forward – declination of participation by experts
➢ Rising trend of the declination rate in recent rounds of TA
• Outstanding number of experts declined regarding TA18 scheduled in March.
➢ In most cases, the reason of declination is unclear (i.e. Busy or N/A), but 21% of
the declination is due to commitment for review or FREL, or lack of funding.
Number of experts declined Rate of declination Reason of Declination
60% 45
40
50%
35
29%
40% 30 Busy
37%
25 Review/FREL
30%
20 Lack of funding
20% 15 Other reasons
10 N/A
10%
5 13%
* *
0% 0 13%
TA1 TA2 TA3 TA4 TA5 TA6 TA7 TA8 TA9 TA10TA11TA12TA13TA14TA15TA16TA17TA18 8%How to become an eligible expert
➢ Enrol in the TTE training programme
• On-line training, twice a year
• 13th round, from January – March 2021
• 14th round: August – October 2021
http://unfccc.int/national_reports/expert_training/training_for_the_technical_analysis_
of_burs/items/9279.php
➢ Participate in future rounds of BUR analysisFor more information, please visit
https://unfccc.int/ica2020
or use the QR code below
Published in July 2020Thank you XWang@unfccc.int https://unfccc.int/ICA
You can also read
