This module discusses measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation monitoring and evaluation. It provides an overview of UNFCCC requirements for MRV of emissions and actions, and examines existing guidance for evaluating adaptation efforts. Case studies demonstrate how countries can establish MRV systems for agriculture by developing tier 2 emissions calculations that reflect national circumstances and track impacts of interventions over time. The module also explores challenges in evaluating progress on adaptation due to its multi-dimensional nature and lack of standardized metrics, and presents resources that provide guidance on adaptation indicators and monitoring systems.

1. Module 6:
Measurement, Reporting and Verification
(MRV) and Adaptation M&E
Organized by
With support from

2. • Explore how NDCs fit into existing climate change policies and actions
• Review current UNFCCC requirements for MRV of GHG emissions and mitigation
actions
• Discuss the existing guidance for M&E of adaptation efforts
• Examine case studies and examples
Objectives

3. • Many NDCs build upon previous NAMA experiences
• Ministries of agriculture also have other sectoral plans and strategies
that have M&E frameworks
• Therefore, the building blocks for MRV systems and adaptation M&E
are present
• Countries are at different stages in creating and implementing the
MRV systems; this module gives an overview but processes may
differ according to a country’s progress
NDCs and MRV system establishment

4. • NAMAs can support countries in meeting their NDC commitments by:
• More concrete measures to achieve targets
• Serving as the implementation vehicle for NDCs
• NAMAs require MRV systems
• NAMAs promote shifts in investment behavior
• Private sector a target but often public sector leadership
• Should be aligned with national long term development plans
Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs)

5. • The Paris Agreement requires countries to formulate and
communicate their LTS by 2020
• A country’s LTS should:
• establish a visionary agenda for bold, concrete actions to inform near- and
long-term investments for enhanced low emissions and climate-resilient
development while helping to limit global warming
• provide key guidance and pathways for countries in formulation and
updating of their respective NDCs
• foster coherence and coordination across the entire economy
• define choices and trade-offs necessary
Long-term low emissions, climate resilient development strategies
(LTS)

6. • NDCs, LTSs, NAMAs and other country policies all set out a path for
reducing GHGs
• MRV systems are needed to set baselines for GHG data and report
GHG emissions and emissions reductions
Landscape of guiding documents

7. MRV stands for:
• Measurement (or estimation)
• Reporting
• Verification
Text in this section is taken from:
Wilkes A, Reisinger A, Wollenberg E, van Dijk S. 2017. Measurement, reporting and verification of livestock GHG
emissions by developing countries in the UNFCCC: current practices and opportunities for improvement. CCAFS Report
No. 17. Wageningen, the Netherlands: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security
(CCAFS) and Global Research Alliance for Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (GRA).
What is MRV?

8. Measurement applies both to efforts to address climate change and to the impacts
of these efforts.
 National level: GHG emissions, mitigation actions and their effects, and the
support needed and received
This module will focus on the measurement aspect of MRV
UNFCCC guidance on MRV

9.  Reporting: through the National Communications and Biennial Update Reports
(BURs)
 Verification: at the international level, through International Consultation and
Analysis (ICA) of BURs
Reporting and Verification are not the focus of this module
UNFCCC guidance on MRV

10. from FCCC/SBSTA/2006/9
Transparency
• Assumptions and methodologies clearly explained
Accuracy
• Estimates should be neither under- nor over-estimates of true emissions and
removals; uncertainties should be reduced as far as practicable
Consistency
• Same methodologies are used for base and subsequent years; consistent data
sets used
Comparability
• Estimates of emissions and removals should be comparable among countries
Completeness
• Covers all sources, sinks, and gases; full geographic coverage
Principles for credible MRV under the UNFCCC

11. Key messages:
• UNFCCC guidance for MRV of emissions is well established
• MRV of mitigation actions (such as NAMAs) is a flexible, country-
driven process, with currently limited methodological guidance
• Many African countries are in the process of establishing MRV
systems for agriculture and subsectors (e.g., dairy)
• UNFCCC guidance on adaptation M&E is still a work in progress
Guidance on MRV and adaptation M&E

12. Domestically
supported
NAMAs
Internationally
supported
NAMAs
Private
sector
actions
Development
projects with
mitigation co-
benefits
Adaptation
actions with
mitigation
co-benefits
NDC targets
Measurement system
for National
Communications and
BURs (GHG inventory)
Provides a basis for:

13. • Usually countries establish an emissions trajectory in relation to business
as usual (BAU) or the “baseline”
• Limited guidance and more work is needed to set comparability of values
• For NAMAs baselines include other benefits beyond only GHG emissions
• NDCs only focus on GHG emissions
• Main challenge for baselines is availability of data
• Best if choose priority sectors and improve data over time
• Should align with national GHG inventory
• Emissions must be estimated with transparent assumptions
Source: Guidance for NAMA Design, UNEP DTU Partnership
Calculating base year or baseline emissions

14. • IPCC established methods for estimating GHG inventories
• Tier 1 is the “default” method
• E.g. for the livestock sector, this only requires population data by
animal category and climate region, combined with IPCC default
emission factors.
Tier 1 versus Tier 2 emissions calculations

15. • Tier 2 requires data specific to national
circumstances
• E.g. for the livestock sector need
information on animal characteristics,
feed baskets and manure
management to develop country
specific emissions factors.
• Need to use Tier 2 to track the impact of
sectoral interventions (capture changes
in emissions over time)
• Next slides present info from Livestock
development and climate change
booklet (GRA and CCAFS 2016)
Tier 1 versus Tier 2 emissions calculations

16. • Reflect particular
country context
• Allow reporting of
emissions intensity
trends in addition to
absolute emissions
• Capture emission
intensity reductions
resulting from improved
practices
• Use data from multiple
sources that can also
support other work (e.g.
ag development plans)
Benefits of moving to Tier 2 emissions calculations

17. Tier 1 vs Tier 2
Tier 1
Tier 2

18. Hypothetical Tier 2 inventory for national beef herd in an Asian
country

19. Getting the right numbers
• Researchers collect data from
farmers’ fields and on-station
research trials to establish
emissions factors appropriate
to specific systems
• Country databases can provide
the basis for numbers of
animals, acres under particular
crops, baseline yields, etc. Visitors to ILRI’s Mazingira Centre participate in weighing
feeds. The lab is working to establish emissions factors for
several livestock systems in East Africa. (Photo: ILRI/Sarah
Kasyoka)

20. Reduction in emissions intensity from increasing productivity in
a beef system

21. Example for livestock in Ethiopia
• Calculate 2015 emissions (enteric
fermentation and manure management)
• For Tier 2 used animal characteristics
and feed basket plus management
system
• Estimate 2030 emissions under BAU
• Estimate 2030 emissions with key
interventions
• E.g. greater offtake of ruminants,
increase in poultry, change in feed
quality for key systems
• Can estimate changes in total emissions
and emissions intensities

22. Kenya Dairy NAMA
• GCF proposal developed
• Accredited entity is IFAD
• Required several rounds of stakeholder
engagement
• Line ministries
• Private sector
• Detailed analysis of
• GHG emissions reductions
• Economic/ livelihood benefits
• Financial and other feasibility

23. Discussion on MRV progress for mitigation
Share examples of:
• Alignment of agriculture development goals and low emissions (GHG)
targets
• Coordination between units: Climate Change Directorate, GHG
inventory, line ministries
• Data collection and management for MRV
• Established MRV systems for agriculture or related subsectors
• Capacity to report on NAMA progress, NDC contributions

24. Adaptation M&E

25. Global Goal on Adaptation
• The Paris Agreement reinforced the international framework for
adaptation action by establishing a Global Adaptation Goal of
enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing
vulnerability to climate change, with a view to contributing to
sustainable development and ensuring an adequate adaptation
response in the context of the temperature goal referred to in Article 2.

26. Why is adaptation M&E important?
• Countries should be able to know their progress and be held
accountable by their citizens
• Adaptation M&E can also help with reporting on SDGs
• Investors require tracking of progress
• Investors/ donors including climate smart “lens” to agricultural development
projects
• All require detailed theories of change and results management frameworks,
with indicators of impact, e.g. on resilience or adaptive capacity

27. Adaptation in the NDCs
• Like for mitigation, National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) can facilitate
implementation of NDC goals
• Streamline efforts
• Establish coherent governance structures
• Access to finance
• Identify adaptation- mitigation co-benefits
• NDCs are linked to the Enhanced Transparency Framework which
requires enhanced reporting on support received for climate action
• Global stock take (GST) covers adaptation and mitigation

28. Country examples: what systems are currently in place for tracking agricultural
adaptation?
• Nature of climate adaptation (e.g. long timescales for impacts and outcomes)
• Multi-dimensional (economic, financial, social) nature of resilience
• Multi-scale: need for aggregating information horizontally across climate-
sensitive sectors, and vertically across different levels of government
• Lack of an “off the shelf” methodology and single metric to assess related
outcomes
• Difficult to identify, combine and interpret the types and relevant indicators
Challenges of adaptation M&E

29. • Proliferation of initiatives
and frameworks
• Multiples tools, indicators
and reporting requirement
that need to be aligned!
How to track progress towards adaptation?

30. Resources are out there, though not always agriculture-specific
Check resources available at
https://www.adaptationcommunity.net/
monitoring-evaluation/
• No off-the-shelf frameworks
• Country context needs to be
taken into account
• Example: Comparative
analysis of 10 adaptation
M&E systems at the national
level

31. Resilience/adaptation indicators specific to agriculture
• Strong connection between adaptation and
development actions and goals
• Post Paris Agreement: Framework and
methodology for Tracking Adaptation in
Agricultural Sectors & list of Indicators (FAO
2017)
• Takes account of ongoing national efforts for
reporting to major international mechanisms
(including the UN’s SDGs and Sendai Framework
for Disaster Risk Reduction)

32. Resilience/adaptation indicators specific to agriculture
• The NAP-Ag program is also providing assistance
to specific countries to develop M&E systems for
adaptation in agriculture
• Online learning resource here
• Additional M&E training package available here
• Establishing an adaptation M&E system is a
lengthy process and needs to involve the right
stakeholders
FAO and UNDP 2019: Link to report

33. Key messages
MRV for NDCs must encompass a wide range of actions from across
sectors; therefore it must be well-coordinated within a country.
Shifting from Tier 1 to Tier 2 measurement systems for crop and
livestock emissions can help give a more accurate quantification.
Adaptation M&E is increasingly recognized by the UNFCCC as an
important step of the process of adapting to climate change
Parties lack a common indicator framework to track progress towards the
Paris Agreement Global Goal on Adaptation

34. Thank you for your attention
Questions?