Search

Although developing countries have compiled greenhouse gas inventories (GHGI) for over 20 years, improving national GHGI capacity remains a priority under the Paris Agreement. However, a global assessment of GHGI capacity status and change over time has not yet been conducted. By developing a quantifiable GHGI capacity and quality indices based on a synthesis review of 369 submitted GHGIs, our assessment shows that while roughly half of 133 developing countries have improved their GHGI capacity and quality from 1997 to 2019, the remaining countries have not. This is especially evident regarding the GHGI quality principles of promptness, accuracy, and consistency. Future capacity-building approaches should make it clear how GHGIs can support countries pursuing their domestic climate goals, including climate resiliency and low greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions development pathways, while exploring the use of other information sources to replace GHGIs where they are missing. Global assessments of capacity building can largely be improved with increased data availability, which can be addressed collectively under the Paris Agreement. Globally, from 1997 to 2019, half of developing countries have advanced GHGI capacity, while the other half have not improved their GHGI capacity. The quality of GHGIs of countries with higher capacity is better in terms of promptness, accuracy, and consistency. Future capacity-building approaches should make it clear how GHGIs can support countries pursuing their domestic climate goals, including climate resiliency and low GHG emissions development pathways. Global assessments of capacity building can largely be improved with improved data availability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transitioning to the Enhanced Transparency Framework (ETF) under the Paris Agreement (PA) from the current measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) arrangements under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) requires developing countries to enhance their national reporting systems in a sustainable way. There are various challenges that developing countries face in preparing national reporting under the existing MRV framework. The objective of this paper is to identify practical solutions as good practices in the short and long term to address the common challenges facing many developing countries as they prepare their national climate reporting. We collected information on practical solutions implemented by developing countries to overcome common challenges during preparation of their national reporting. There were some limitations regarding data collection using a country survey since we received responses from only six countries and two organizations, resulting in a small sample. Good practices for addressing common challenges include developing a national legal framework for transparency-related work, assigning a main coordinating institution, collaborating with domestic institutions for methodology development on emission reduction, and establishing university curricula on transparency. Replicating these solutions as good practices on how to deal with the challenges would be one way for developing countries to enhance their respective reporting systems in a sustainable manner. Furthermore, the paper highlights three underlying factors (efficiency, accountability, and sustainability) behind those practical solutions. These underlying factors should be considered important as guiding principles for building sustainable reporting systems in order to be able to successfully implement the ETF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Data availability in developing countries is known to be extremely varied and is one of the constraints for setting the national reference levels (RLs) for the REDD-plus (i.e. 'Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries') under the UNFCCC. Taking Thailand as a case study country, this paper compares three types of RLs, which require different levels of datasets, including a simple historic RL, a projected forest-trend RL, and a business-as-usual (BAU) RL. Results Other than the finding that different RLs yielded different estimations on future deforestation areas, the analysis also identified the characteristics of each RL. The historical RL demanded simple data, but can be varied in accordance with a reference year or period. The forest-trend RL can be more reliable than the historical RL, if the country's deforestation trend curve is formed smoothly. The complicated BAU RL is useful as it can demonstrate the additionality of REDD-plus activities and distinguish the country's unintentional efforts. Conclusions With the REDD-plus that involves widespread participation, there should be steps from which countries choose the appropriate RL; ranging from simpler to more complex measures, in accordance with data availability in each country. Once registered with REDD-plus, the countries with weak capacity and capability should be supported to enhance the data collection system in that country.