Agriculture, Forest and Other Land Uses (AFOLU) in the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions

(INDCs)

Janie Rioux and Alexandre Meybeck Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO-UN)

Workshop on INDCs in Africa Entebbe, 24 September 2015

AFOLU contributes 24% of global GHG emissions

• AFOLU is the 2nd largest sector of GHG emissions, after energy

• 10-12% is from agriculture

(Source: FAO infographic 2014)

In Africa, GHG emissions from AFOLU increased by 243% in the last 50 years

Average 1961-2011, in Million tonnes of CO2 eq (Source: FAO infographic 2014)

• Increase mainly from deforestation and from crop-livestock

• Will further increase to feed growing population

Why AFOLU should be included in INDCs?

• For its magnitude, as ¼ of global emissions

• 1st sector of emissions in many countries

• Projected to increase because of population growth and diet change

• Potential sink can compensate other emissions and is fundamental to achieve a net zero or negative balance of anthropogenic emissions by 2100

• Because of linkages (and leakages) with mitigation measures in other sector e.g. wood energy

Why AFOLU should be included in INDCs?

• Opportunities exist to decrease emissions intensity while increasing productivity and efficiency

• Synergies with adaptation (90% of priority measures of NAPAs)

• To valorize ongoing or planned environmental actions e.g. forest conservation

• To tap into financing opportunities (REDD+, CCAC, GCF, NF, GEF, IKI, etc.)

Country examples integrating AFOLU in INDCs

• Mexico aiming to achieve zero-deforestation by 2030.

• China setting explicit targets for area afforested and increase in forest stock volume.

• Ethiopia and Japan report explicit contributions of emission reductions in agriculture and forestry based on improved crop/livestock production and reforestation and afforestation and forest conservation.

• Morocco, China, Ethiopia and Singapore mention agriculture explicitly as part of their climate change adaptation strategies.

Country examples integrating AFOLU in INDCs

• Kenya also cites afforestation targets, as well as highlighting adaptation and mitigation co-benefits to be achieved through climate-smart agriculture.

• Russia, Morocco, Benin and Djibouti further emphasize the role of forests as well as sustainable land management in achieving their reduction targets.

• New Zealand puts a clear focus on investment in GHG research and the reduction of biological methane emissions from agriculture.

AFOLU, LULUCF or Land sector?

• No contribution uses the word AFOLU.

• The majority includes agriculture (and livestock), and consider it as the other sectors. Only few exclude it explicitely because of its poor share in the total GHG emissions, or its lack of specific data and analysis.

• LULUCF is generally included, except Marshall Islands, Andorra (unclear), Monaco, Macedonia, Djibouti (but actions), Trinidad and Tobago (but parallel programme), Singapore (in study) Korea (to see later), Norway (but add it to its target).

• Most countries treated it differently, except Canada and USA.

Types of sink and source categories associated with land uses

• Change of land uses (deforestation, afforestation)

• Forest management

• Protection of wetlands (China, Iceland)

• Pasture and rangeland management (China)

• Cropland management (Japan)

• Revegetation (Japan)

Challenges

• Data, in particular:

– Land use changes

– C stock changes

• Importance of data about the forest:

– Reference level

– Projections

• Importance of the method for estimating:

– GHG emissions/removals

– Projections

• Natural disturbances e.g. Canada

Methods used

• Global target conditioned by the LULUCF accounting method (Russia, NZ)

• Method to be determined (EU, Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, Korea, Singapore)

• Ref to accounting methods from Kyoto Protocol (Japon) or net/net

• Projections (Gabon, Benin,…)

• Global levels: 0 deforestation in 2030 (Mexico), towards 10% of forest (Kenya)

• Specific actions: China, Djibouti, …

Conclusions- AFOLU in INDCs

• The question is how to treat agriculture and LULUCF

• Diversity of approaches and methods

• The choice of method depends on available data- but a correct method should allow accounting of actual mitigation achieved including C02 removals (Net GHG emissions instead of GHG emissions only)

• Important to ensure the coherence of the INDC with national development goals, and with information communicated within NC and BUR, as well as with the 2 degree Celsius global goal

FAO’s support for INDCs development and implementation in regard to AFOLU

• Supporting NAMAs and NAPs readiness and preparation

• Building capacity for National GHG inventories, and National Forest Inventories

• Setting emission baselines, emission intensity, and identifying mitigation options

• Harmonizing climate change policies and plans and facilitating inter-sectoral and ministerial coordination

Example: FAO has worked with MoA in Uruguay to define and quantify the mitigation contribution of the livestock sector in their INDC.

Available Tools e.g.

• Online Learning Tool on NAMAs in the AFOLU • Global Livestock Environmental Assessment

Model (GLEAM) • FAOSTAT Emissions Database and Analysis Tools

GLEAM FAOSTAT Emissions database NAMA tool

Thank you for your attention

Janie.Rioux@fao.org

Questions for discussion

1. How have you involved land sector stakeholders in the INDC process?

2. If agreement in Paris, what are your needs to refine your NDCs? And implement? In regard to the land sector