Can't measure? Doesn't count! Why national MRV fails to capture agroforestry's full contribution: the case of Peru.

Abstract

Agroforestry mitigation potential was recognized by Peru in its NDC; nevertheless the country has not yet advanced in an appropriate MRV system allowing agroforestry contribution to be incorporated in the emission reductions to fulfil the national pledge to UNFCCC. We highlight main gaps and barriers as a first assessment to impulse focused and precise actions to change the state of the art of agroforestry MRV.

*Errata corrige: -30% of 2030 instead of -30% of 2012

Full text

www.worldagroforestry.org
Can’t measure? Doesn’t count! Why national MRV fails to
capture agroforestry’s full contribution: the case of Peru
Suber Marta (ICRAF) (m.suber@cgiar.org), Rueda Carlos (MINAGRI), Woo Natalia (ONU-REDD), Robiglio Valentina (ICRAF)
Peru, just like 40% of the other developing countries, strategically included Agroforestry in its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) pledges. To comply, a national Measuring/Monitoring Reporting
and Verication (MRV) systems readiness is compulsory. Yet, incorporation of Agroforestry presents a struggle, jeopardizing the attractiveness of these sets of practices. The study presents results based
on review of relevant material used for MRV and expert interviews involving the Ministry of Environment (MINAM), Ministry of Agriculture (MINAGRI) and the National Forestry Service (SERFOR).
The current challenge is the struggle to include trans-sectoral measures as Agroforestry,
stretched over forest and agricultural sectors, that LULUCF is not capable of accounting for.
State of the current MRV system
LULUCF
Agriculture AFOLU
1996 IPCC guidelines 2006 IPCC guidelines
In use Due by 2024Migration planned for 2019
AFOLU = Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use;
IPCC = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
GTM-NDC 2018. Informe Final del Grupo de Trabajo Multisectorial de naturaleza temporal encargado de generar información técnica para orientar la implementación de las CND(GTM-NDC). Lima,
Perú. 929 p.
MINAM. 2016. Tercera Comunicación Nacional del Perú a la CMNUCC. Ministerio del Ambiente; Viceministerio de Desarrollo Estratégico de los Recursos Naturales; Dirección General de Cambio
Climático, Deserticación y Recursos Hídricos. Primera edición, abril de 2016. Lima, Perú. 326 p
The transition to an AFOLU MRV architecture represents a unique opportunity to agree on a
common vision for Agroforestry, and obtain clarity on the roles of the different public instances.
This transition will require:
1. A joint view on trans-sectoral practices as Agroforestry, clarication of duties and strong
coordination among institutions.
2. A consistent framework to assess and integrate information from different sources can be
generated, potentially triggering improvement of the national emissions reports by capturing
the whole Agroforestry emission reduction potential.
3. Agree on a new, broader, more inclusive and joint Agroforestry concept adopted by AFOLU.
To overcome the main limitations and prove the attractiveness of Agroforestry mitigation
potential, forthright dialogue among scientists, practitioners, policy makers and governmental
technical teams is required; key building blocks of an MRV roadmap for Agroforestry inclusion
must be dened; and improvements must be prioritized to respond to Agroforestry MRV
challenges as inputs for the migration to MRV structure of 2006 guidelines.
Way forward
Forestry Regulatory Provision (Art. 7 Peru´s Forest Law N° 29763, MINAGRI 2015)
“Agroforestry systems: a class of land use systems that consists of the associated
management of forest and agricultural species in the same parcel in space and time. They
include practices of integration, preservation and management of perennial woody species in
annual or perennial agricultural production systems”.
2030projection
LULUCF
51%
Agriculture
15%
Others
34%
173GgCO2eLULUCF
53%
Agriculture
11%
Others
36%
298GgCO2e
-30%of2012
(-89.4GgCO2e)
2012
NDC62mitigationmeasures
Emissions
Figure1(left).Nationalemissionsbysector(2012and2013)andNDCpledgetarget(MINAM
2016). LULUCF=LandUse,Land-Use ChangeandForestry.
Figure2.(right)NDCAgroforestry measures andtheiremission reductionpotential(GTM-NDC
2018).
Agroforestrysystems
3.3%oftheLULUCF pledge(-1.4GgCO2e)
Sustainablemanagementofpermanentcrops
(coffeeandcocoa)
18.5%oftheAgriculturepledge(-0.3GgCO2e)
Pasture managementthroughsilvopastoralsystems
4.6%oftheAgriculturepledge(-1.2GgCO2e)
3.2%ofthe
totalpledge
(-2.9GgCO2e)
The shift to 2006 IPCC guidelines represents a unique opportunity to assess the feasibility of
integrating an MRV for Agroforestry into the general MRV scheme. Current MRV framework is
analysed based on three key building blocks crucial for operationalization of the Agroforestry
MRV.
A single-sector Agroforestry denition limits its use in
the MRV
The only legal denition of Agroforestry is included in the
forest law. It proposes a limited and exclusive vision of
Agroforestry, based on the presence of forestry species
only. The lack of a broader vision of Agroforestry in terms of
the tree component of the practice (e.g., include fruit trees)
generates a gap in MRV of trees. Under the 2006 guidelines,
the MRV architecture will include any tree under a single
sector (AFOLU) regardless of its nature or purpose.
Challenges in deriving activity data (AD) and emission
factors (EF)
• Insufcient data to distinguish among sub-classes of
coverage within the production system (i.e., generic perennial
crop) -> ad hoc nationally valid EF are not generated ->
Agroforestry mitigation potential accountability decreases.
• Lack of technical capacity to separate Agroforestry from
forest or secondary vegetation hinders AD estimation, and
the National Forest Inventory does not include trees outside
forests -> Tier 1 AD and aggregated values for commodities
are used.
• Lack of reference to the tree component associated with
perennial crops in agricultural statistics (main data source) ->
no DA available.
• Uncertain accuracy of agricultural statistics, when not
outdated -> low quality of basic data.
An infrastructure that lacks clarity and capacities
• Lack of agreement on the Agroforestry concept leads to
unclear denition of responsibilities on Agroforestry MRV
among institutions, inhibiting any effort of coordination among
MRV initiatives.
• Institutions lack capacity to measure/monitor timber
(SERFOR) or non-timber trees (MINAGRI) in Agroforestry.
SERFOR made an initial effort to construct a monitoring
platform for Agroforestry plots, but it was limited to timber
trees.
Figure 3. MRV methodologies reporting sectors relevant to Agroforestry
Definition of
Agroforestry
alignment of
definitions across
institutions
capacity to capture
existing practices
1
Activity data and
emission factors
data availability and
format
spatial and thematic
coverage
potential sources of
quantitative
information
suitability for MRV
2
Infrastructure
in place
technical
legal
institutional
.
3
2030projection
LULUCF
51%
Agriculture
15%
Others
34%
173GgCO2e
LULUCF
53%
Agriculture
11%
Others
36%
298GgCO2e
-30%of2012
(-89.4GgCO2e)
2012
NDC62mitigationmeasures
Emissions
Figure1(left).Nationalemissionsbysector(2012and2013)andNDCpledgetarget(MINAM
2016). LULUCF=LandUse,Land-Use ChangeandForestry.
Figure2.(right)NDCAgroforestry measures andtheiremission reductionpotential(GTM-NDC
2018).
Agroforestrysystems
3.3%oftheLULUCF pledge(-1.4GgCO2e)
Sustainablemanagementofpermanentcrops
(coffeeandcocoa)
18.5%oftheAgriculturepledge(-0.3GgCO2e)
Pasture managementthroughsilvopastoralsystems
4.6%oftheAgriculturepledge(-1.2GgCO2e)
3.2%ofthe
totalpledge
(-2.9GgCO2e)
Figure 1 (left). National emissions by sector (2012 and 2013) and NDC pledge target (MINAM 2016). LULUCF =
Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry.
Figure 2. (right) NDC Agroforestry measures and their emission reduction potential (GTM-NDC 2018).
Peru NDC
Agroforestry
measures
Effectiveness of implementation of these measures can only be claimed if the
MRV system allows for inclusion of Agroforestry specicities.
1
2
3
Key elements: Agroforestry in NDC