Institutional Arrangements and Processes for MRV for NAMAs

James Vener, PE UNDP Bureau of Development Policy

PMR LAC Regional Workshop 6-8 March 2014, Mexico City

1. UNDP’s Low Emission Capacity Building (LECB) Programme

2. Key Considerations for MRV Institutional Arrangements

3. Latin America and Caribbean Context

Presentation Overview

• Low-carbon trajectories for development and sustainable mitigation actions in 25 partner countries

• 2011-16

• €32M (EC, BMU, Australia)

• Identify policy and financing options, mobilize the private sector, and implement on 5 country-driven work streams:

o NAMAs, LEDS, MRV

o GHG inventory systems, private sector mitigation

• Capacity building, technical backstopping, stakeholder outreach, ensuring cross-sectional CC policy integration

LECB Programme: Overview

Phase Africa Asia LAC Arab States Europe/CIS

Phase 1 DRC Philippines Argentina Egypt

Kenya China Chile Morocco

Uganda Colombia

Zambia Ecuador

Mexico

Peru

Phase 2 Ghana Bhutan Costa Rica Lebanon Moldova

Tanzania Indonesia Trinidad & Tobago

Malaysia

Thailand

Vietnam

Total # 6 7 8 3 1

LECB Programme: Knowledge Sharing

• MRV systems design for prioritized NAMAs and national systems for LEDS in 17 countries

• Address institutional, technical, and capacity gaps

• What is MRV’d? Who? How? When?

• MRV readiness testing:

o data flow / infrastructure / governance

o QA/QC, verification procedures

o indicator selection, reporting schemes

o recordkeeping, archiving

LECB and MRV

1. UNDP’s Low Emission Capacity Building Programme

2. Key Considerations for MRV Institutional Arrangements

3. Latin America and Caribbean Context

Presentation Overview

Stakeholder Engagement

Investors PPP

Voluntary Targets Inst. Coordination

Policies

National Registry DNA

MRV

… Other Pieces to the Puzzle to Consider for NAMA Design

NAMA Governance can be Centralized or Sector-Specific

NAMA Activity in Sector B

NAMA Activity in Sector A

NAMA Activity in Sector C

NAMA Activity in Sector B

NAMA Activity in Sector A

NAMA Activity in Sector C

Implementation & Monitoring

External Service

Provider (Outsourcing)

Verification Auditor

Donors, Financiers,

NAMA Registry

Centralized NAMA Office / Authority (e.g., DNA, MoE, EEPA)

Government

Sector A Specific Entity

(e.g., MoE)

Specific NAMA Office

Sector B

Specific NAMA Office

Sector A

Specific NAMA Office

Sector C

Reporting

Implementation & Monitoring

Reporting

Sector B Specific Entity

(e.g., MoE)

Sector C Specific Entity

(e.g., MoE)

• A tool for transparency and comparing NAMAs:

o GHG emissions, NAMA impacts, flow of support

• Accountability for financial commitments, attract finance

• Open data access for investors and beneficiaries

• Sectoral participation / input from the start

• No UNFCCC methodologies on MRV

• Pre-existing guidelines:

o IPCC inventory guidelines

o NC, BUR, EUETS, and GHG Protocol Initiative corporate guidelines

o Methodologies from CDM and Gold Standard

Key Institutional Factors related to MRV

• Build from existing foundations (DNA, GHG reporting)

• Establish a legal basis with clear roles and responsibilities

• Attract investment, buy-in, commercial interests:

o Selection of MRV indicators (jobs, income, health)

o Target priority sectors and ministries

• Simplify data collection not across sectors

• Minimize loss of institutional capacity / memory

• Ongoing self-improvement

• Central domestic coordinating entity

o Inter-ministerial body / steering committee

o Sectoral working groups, technical coordinator

Institutional Arrangement System Design

General Tasks of a NAMA Office

Source: Perspectives, 2013 adapted from BAPPENAS, GIZ (2012)

General guidance to the NAMA development

process

Ensure the alignment of NAMAs with

national development

priorities

Facilitate mainstreaming of mitigation into all stages of policy

making

Collect and aggregate

information on mitigation actions

Reflection on progress and

adjustment to new circumstances

Administer NAMA registry

NAMA Office / Authority / Institution

MRV system design and implementation

Example: Colombia and Indonesia

4 Sectoral Sub-Committees

Low Carbon Development Strategies (Mitigation + Adaption)

Financial Committee oversight (Subcommission Secretaries)

Tech Secretary: DNP

Climate Change Executive Commission

Chair: Nat’l Planning Dept. (DNP) Exec. Secretary

Advisory group

Consultative groups

Line Ministry Review

Local and Regional Action Plans

GHG data to Min. Env’t: coordinates

inventories

Min. Planning (BAPPENAS): coordinates

Min. activities

BAPPENAS reports to Min.

Economy

Nat’l Council on Climate Change

1. UNDP’s Low Emission Capacity Building Programme

2. Key Considerations for MRV Institutional Arrangements

3. LAC Region Context (LECB survey)

• 17 responses (52% response rate)

• 6 Caribbean, 11 Latin American

Presentation Overview

Ministry of Environment (or equivalent) hosts the NAMA focal point in majority of cases 62.5%

25.0%

12.5%

Yes

No

In process of identifying

Have Countries in LAC Identified a NAMA Focal Point? (n=16)

In majority of cases, countries are using existing national inter-ministerial committees on climate change (or mitigation). In some cases, private sector, academia, NGOs, and local government included in these committees

41.2%

47.1%

11.8%

Yes

No

In process of identifying

Have Countries Established a National NAMA Committee? (n=17)

Can CDM structure be applied to NAMAs?

(n=17)

(n=10)

53% 35%

12%

Yes

No

Unsure

50%

40%

10%

Very relevant

Relevant

Not relevant

Is there a Successful Institutional Structure for Implementing CDM?

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Lack of institutional capacities/information forelaborating robust NAMAs

No clear mandates/roles for institutions to lead onNAMAs

Low political/stakeholder engagement and/orawareness

Inadequate regulatory/policy framework forencouraging NAMA development

Lack of incentives for institutional coordination &information sharing

5

5

2

2

1

Institutional barriers

No. of countries

Lack of capacity also identified by four countries as 2nd biggest barrier

(n=15)

What is the Biggest Barrier for Establishing a Strong Institutional Framework for NAMAs?

Thank you!

James Vener, PE UNDP Bureau for Development Policy

Environment & Energy Group

www.lowemissiondevelopment.org james.vener@undp.org

+1-212-906-6028