Transcript Slide 1
Forest Carbon Partnership Facility Financing Sources for Readiness outside the FCPF Participants Committee Meeting (FCPF PC3) Montreux, Switzerland June 16-18, 2009 Readiness Definition of the FCPF FCPF Readiness Organize and Consult REDD Strategy designed Reference Scenario developed Monitoring and Carbon Stock assessment/Inventories: different tiers and accuracy Using default factors/existing inventory data Finance additional inventories, permanent plots Full assessment for forest degradation Beyond Readiness Implementation of Demonstration Projects Legislative and Institutional reforms Investment phases Readiness Costs – estimates and proposals Readiness Components • jj Average Cost estimate RPIN* Chatham House est. (average) REDD Management 525 REDD Strategy 459 Consultations 365 Env. Social Assessment R-Plan Indonesia R-Plan Guyana R-Plan Panama 240 200 500 600 2,200 656 955 1,200 600 457 2,500 2,300 63 500 50 Implementation Framework 316 1,200 600 460 400 REL 516 2,500 6,153 833 300 6,475 1,191 10,000 18,568 3,860 15,155 Monitoring 1,008 TOTAL 3,232 5,500 *Assessment of RPins, external and WB internal assessment of funding needs of REDD countries, as of November 2008 (not including larger countries) Financing Gap? • Main differences between early estimates and the estimates in the current R-Plans are cost of MRV (cover more functions that the preparation for carbon stock change detection and reporting) • We also saw a much higher need for consultation and communication expenditures • Outside reviews (UNFCCC technical paper) and internal analysis suggest however that the FCPF contribution can enable an average country to reach readiness, but – Expectations have to be realistic, – There is a need for regional and global support programs • • • Pre processing images (available to the public), Regional cooperation/approaches, Lessons learned from early experiences – Coordination of external finance needs improvements Committed and pledged funds (incomplete list) Organizations/donors Estimates (mil$) 2012* Areas of funding Focus on Readiness Australian Int. Forest Carbon Init. 200 MRV, Dem Projects, mainly Congo Basin Fund 150 Forest Management, partly Congo Basin Forest Partnership 230 REDD capacity building, studies mainly FAO National Forest Program 160 Capacity and Information sharing partly Finland 150 MRV, inventory mainly Small scale, capacity building, research, mainly Found. (Moore, Packard, Rockefeller) 32 GEF 109 Biodiversity. Climate change, degrad. partly Germany 788 Biodiversity, forest protection partly SFM, capacity building partly Demo project, Readiness support mainly Investments, capacity building, studies partly ITTO Norwegian CF Initiative Regional Development Banks 50 2500 580 TNC 38 Dem project, capacity building mainly UNREDD 50 Readiness, dem. projects mainly Others – not complete:bilateral donors (AFD, Denmark, Intercoop., The Netherlands, Japan, USA, UK, etc.), NGOs (WWF, CI, RFF, etc.), research institutes (Woods Hole, IPAM, etc.) private sector (Macquarie,..) *Values from Assessment Report (Norway), Meridian Institute and WB own research Characteristics of Funding • Most Funding is going into demonstration project preparation, less into preparing the country to become ready for REDD management at a national level • Identified funding gap in RPlans could theoretically be funded by other donors and supporters, but – Funding activities are not made sufficiently transparent – Unequal distribution of funding between countries – National coordination mechanism is not yet in place to communicate priorities to donors • Uncertainty as of how much funding is dedicated towards Readiness Preparation What could be the role of the FCPF? 1. Create an Information Platform for funding opportunities: Work with donors, REDD countries and existing coordination mechanisms (Meridian Institute and others) to create a platform to gather following information: Type of Grant available organized by donor and country Technical background information (funding request & reports) Implementing partners Implementation period Organize Platform as a funding and learning instrument Request to donors/organizations and countries to respond to questionnaire to be sent out by FCPF over the summer What could be the role of the FCPF? 2. Use Readiness Preparation Proposal (former RPlan) as a funding coordination mechanism: First RPlans have not yet used the document for grant coordination Main Activity REDD Working Group Consultations Reference Scenario, etc. FUNDING SOURCES Domestic Government FCPF UN-REDD Programme (if Table 1a: Summary of National REDD Activities and Budget Estimated Cost Sub-Activity 2010 2011 2012 $ 500,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 500,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 600,000 $ $ $ $ $ Total $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1.1 million $ $ applicable) Other Development Partner 1 Other Development Partner 2 Other Development Partner 3 2013 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Total $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ What could be the role of the FCPF? 3. Adequate Sequencing of activities at a REDD country level: Use the R-PP as a planning instrument for sequenced action (so far not adequately used as such) Concentrate on most important activities first, eg. • Feasibility studies and gap analysis • remote sensing capacity • consultation and REDD awareness • Institutional arrangements, etc. What are the main issues that need to be solved to create the confidence for early action?