report ncsp lessons learned workshop 18 12 - un-gsp.org · introduction of workshop participants...

i

United Nations Environment Programme

Global Environment Facility

National Communications Support Programme (NCSP)

NCSP Workshop

Lessons Learned from the National Communications

16-18 October 2012

Istanbul, Turkey

Workshop Report

ii

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms .................................................................................................................................... iii

Day 1: Tuesday, 16 October 2012 ........................................................................................................... 1

Opening Session................................................................................................................................... 1

Session: Institutional Arrangements and the Role of the NC ................................................................. 2

Session: The NC as a Tool for Integrating Climate Change into National and Sectorial Planning ............ 4

Working Groups: Institutional Arrangements and Integrating Climate Change through NCs ................. 6

Day 2: Wednesday, 17 October 2012 ...................................................................................................... 9

Session: Technical Considerations for GHG Inventories, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and

Recommendations for Further Improvement ....................................................................................... 9

Session: Technical Considerations for Mitigation Analyses, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and

Recommendations for Further Improvement ..................................................................................... 11

Session: Technical Considerations for V&A Assessments, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and

Recommendations for Further Improvement ..................................................................................... 13

Working Groups: Technical Considerations ........................................................................................ 15

Day 3: Thursday, 18 October 2012 ........................................................................................................ 17

Session: Biennial Update Reports (BURs) ............................................................................................ 17

Session: Mobilising Financing through the NC .................................................................................... 18

Session: Capacity Building, Raising Public Awareness and the Sustainablility of the NC Process .......... 19

Session: Next steps: Plenary Discussion on Priorities and Recommendations for a Future Support

Programme for NCs and BURs ............................................................................................................ 23

Closing Session ................................................................................................................................... 23

Workshop Agenda ................................................................................................................................ 25

Workshop Participant List ..................................................................................................................... 30

iii

List of Acronyms

ADB Asian Development Bank

ADP Ad-Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action

AfDB African Development Bank

AWG-KP Ad-Hoc Working Group Kyoto Protocol

AWG-LCA Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention

BAU Business as Usual

BUR Biennial Update Report

CDKN Climate and Development Knowledge Network

CDM Clean Development Mechanism

CGE Consultative Group of Experts

COP Conference of the Parties

CSO Civil Society Organisation

DRM Disaster Risk Management

EE Energy efficiency

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EU European Union

FNC Fourth National Communication

GCM Global Climate Model

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GEF Global Environment Facility

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GIZ German International Cooperation

IADB Inter-American Development Bank

ICA International Consultation and Analysis

INC Initial National Communication

IPCC Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change

JI Joint Implementation

KP Kyoto Protocol

LDCs Least Developed Countries

LEAP Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning System

LECRD Low-Emission Climate-Resilient Development

LECRDS Low-Emission Climate-Resilient Development Strategy

LED Low-Emission Development

LEDS Low-Emission Development Strategy

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MARKAL Energy Technology Systems Analysis Program

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

MRV Monitoring, Reporting and Verification

MtCO2eq Million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

NAMA Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action

NAPA National Adaptation Plans of Action

NAS National Adaptation Strategy

NC National Communication

NCSP National Communication Support Programme

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

NIR National Inventory Report

iv

PCA Project Cooperation Agreement

PPP Public Private Partnership

PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper

QA Quality Assurance

QC Quality Control

RCM Regional Climate Model

RE Renewable Energy

SBI Subsidiary Body for Implementation

SBSTA Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice

SEI Stockholm Environment Institute

SIDS Small Islands Developing States

SLR Sea-level Rise

SNC Second National Communication

SRES Special Report on Emissions Scenarios

STAR System for Transparent Allocation of Resources

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses/Limitations, Opportunities and Threats

TNA Technology Needs Assessment

TNC Third National Communication

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

USAID United States Agency for International Development

V&A Vulnerability and Adaptation

WB World Bank

1

Day 1: Tuesday, 16 October 2012

Opening Session

Facilitator: Oznur Oguz Kuntasal (Turkey)

9:00 - 10:30 Opening Remarks and Introduction

Opening Remarks by Mr Rawleston Moore, Senior Climate-Change Specialist, GEF

A next funding phase for the NCSP has been secured, and its design—based in part on lessons learned in

the earlier phase—is underway. The focus will be how best to support countries in the preparation of

their NC reports, making these documents as useful as possible in terms of providing strategies and

options for integration into national development policies and plans. GEF will continue to work with

countries on the preparation of NCs and BURs.

Opening Remarks by Mr Geordie Colville, Senior Programme Officer, UNEP

This workshop is perfectly timed, since UNFCCC negotiations mention closer monitoring of current

emissions. The recently introduced BURs create challenges and opportunities for generating information

for GHG inventories. More evident than ever is the connection between GHG inventories and their

resulting mitigation or adaptation strategies, and funding. More and more countries are moving towards

Low Emission Development Strategies (LEDS). USD6.5 million have been secured to further support

countries. The fact that the first BURs are due in 2014 is another reason why this workshop is timely: it

will help us determine what we need to do in the next round of work.

Welcome Remarks by Mr Shahid Najam, UNDP Resident Representative

The Ministry of Environment of Turkey plays a major role in the NC process, and this has an important

effect on many socio-economic factors in the country. NCs have provided a robust set of

recommendations that are relevant not only at the national level, but the international as well. Turkey is

currently preparing its SNC, and the report has already contributed to building the capacities of national

institutions and raising awareness. A comprehensive GHG Inventory and V&A assessment are not only

important tools for addressing climate and environmental challenges; they are the cornerstone of the

Post-2015 development agenda. Combining environmentally sustainable development with economic

growth, this agenda encompasses not only environmental issues but social ones as well.

Welcome Remarks by Mr Sedat Kadıoğlu, Deputy Undersecretary Ministry of Environment and

Urbanisation, Turkey

Two main components of NCs are data generation and availability and engaging a broad range of

stakeholders. Universities and research agencies, students, NGOs and other actors have been involved in

NC preparation in Turkey. Each country has its own distinct responsibilities, and each must assume its

place within the global community. The challenges that climate change poses on a global scale must be

addressed at the national and local levels. When we do this, different areas of importance become

evident. We hope that the upcoming negotiations in Doha will provide us with new mechanisms and

agreements for dealing with these, so we can continue moving forward on the issue of climate change.

Introduction of Workshop Participants and Background by Yamil Bonduki, UNDP

This workshop will offer an opportunity to learn about and from each other. The beginning of a new

phase of the NCSP also makes this workshop particularly relevant, for it will help us learn how countries

can be best supported as they prepare their NCs and BURs. It will also foster a healthy south-south

2

exchange, with more experienced countries providing important lessons to other less experienced ones.

One of the main challenges to meet is the building of capacities necessary for managing a wide variety

of sectors, many stakeholders and large volumes of data. The workshop agenda is organised into main

topics relevant to NC preparation. Today we will begin with the topic of institutional arrangements and

questions on how to integrate climate-change issues into national planning. Tomorrow will explore the

more technical aspects of GHG inventories, mitigation analyses and V&A assessments, focusing on

experiences, lessons learned and best practices. Day 3 will include discussions on BURs, on mobilising

financing through NCs, on further issues of capacity building and on ways of ensuring a sustainable NC

process. Each day will feature working groups that delve into these areas in more detail, providing

concrete national-level examples from a great variety of countries.

Session: Institutional Arrangements and the Role of the NC

Facilitators: Thinley Namgyel (Bhutan) and Geordie Colville (UNEP)

Note on the context of the workshop: prior to it, presenters had been asked to organise their

presentations in a way that focused on key outcomes, approaches and recommendations, lessons

learned, and follow-up activities. Presentation notes can be found at:

http://ncsp.undp.org/browsedocs/all/all/all/2447?doctitle=Presentations&pid=2447

11:00 – 12:15 Country Presentations

Presentation Turkey: Kadir Demirbolat

Turkey’s Experience with the Second National Communication

First was provided a historical overview of Turkey’s institutional arrangements related to the issue of

climate change, the most notable being the creation of a Coordination Board on Climate Change. This

was followed by an outline of Turkey’s most important lessons learned from INC and SNC preparation

procedures, which include the following:

• The NC process raises the awareness of key stakeholders with respect to climate change;

• Increased awareness translates to specific action plans and strategies;

• Such specific plans and strategies include Turkey’s National Climate Change Strategy and

National Climate Change Action Plan, among other things; and

• The process builds necessary capacities.

Turkey’s specific outcomes from the SNC process

include:

• a climate-change awareness survey;

• an online NC Preparation Guide; and

• an online NC Preparation Tool.

Turkey has faced challenges with respect to

institutional reorganization in terms of climate change.

Before 2010, the issue was only dealt with in the

Ministry of Environment. Since then, it has been

mainstreamed into the agendas of all ministries.

3

Presentation Cook Islands: Mii Matamaki

Institutional Arrangements in the Cook Islands for the National Communications

The Cook Islands has included the issue of climate change in their second National Development Plan

and in late 2011 created a climate-change coordinating office. The SNC preparation process increased

participation beyond government to include stakeholders from NGOs and other entities, including

community organisations. This has caused the SNC to become a public rather than a government

document. Grassroots organisations in communities have become involved in the NC process through a

partnership with the Red Cross, resulting in a stronger V&A assessment, better access to these

communities in terms of their needs and a general streamlining of communication with them.

Prominent among the challenges faced by the Cook Islands is the notion of making climate change

everyone’s business.

Presentation Vietnam: Nguyen Van Anh

Institutional Arrangements Regarding National Communications in Vietnam

A National Steering Committee for the implementation of UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol

recommendations has been established in Vietnam. It is chaired by the Vice-Minister of the Ministry of

Natural Resources and the Environment (MONRE). The institutional structure for the SNC preparation

process was described, and many outcomes of the process were outlined.

12:15 – 13:00 Discussion

This discussion session began on the topic of best ways to combine the institutional structuring

established under the Bali Road Map with those now required under the Durban Agreement. Turkey is

dealing with this by redefining the technical groups involved (now within their new Coordination Board)

so that they align with NC chapters as well as Bali Road Map structuring. The Bali Road Map ends in

2012, and countries generally see the new Durban Agreement platform—in which tasks are divided

among work groups, each with links to appropriate institutions—as a good starting point for organising

operations and technical teams

Overall, the discussion focused on involving high-level policy makers in the NC process and making the

detailed work of technical experts more pertinent and accessible to them, so they can better

mainstream climate change into national development strategies. For this, new and adapted legal

structures and tasks across all ministries are needed. Specific difficulties mentioned in this area were:

• the logistics of bringing people together to discuss climate change concerns;

• the problem of interpreting technical details effectively for policy makers;

• technical problems that hinder information sharing;

• coordinating various types of technical data;

• the difficulty of coordinating a number of different working groups; and

• achieving the necessary political support to change the institutional status quo.

Montenegro is attempting to deal with this through an Inter-ministerial Council on Climate Change,

while Kyrgyzstan has formed a Multi-stakeholder Board.

Vietnam has moved their NC management team up to a high-level committee of the climate-change

department.

Afghanistan pointed out that input from academic institutions helps motivate political decision makers,

since academicians often have both the relevant data and the ability to express results in layman’s

4

terms. Climate-change effects need to be well-expressed on a sectorial basis in order to make policy

makers sensitive to them.

Algeria mentioned that approaches to raising the awareness of the public must differ from those used to

reach policy makers; the latter must be contacted personally by knowledgeable experts such as

academicians or well-known media professionals.

Bhutan suggested that including a cost-benefit analysis in the V&A assessment would help politicians

acknowledge the urgency of climate change, since it would make clear the cost of inaction.

Other points mentioned in the discussion were:

• There is a need to better coordinate efforts related to NCs, NAMAs and LEDS;

• Turkey’s online NC Preparation Guide and online NC Preparation Tool sparked much interest

from all parties. The Guide focuses on administrative rules and procedures rather than the

technical realm. Given the high turnover of staff involved in NC preparation, these online tools

will play an important role;

• The Cook Islands’ community outreach partnership with the International Red Cross was

elaborated upon. Due to its participatory approach, the Red Cross’s Vulnerability Assessment

Tool has been helpful to the NC process and furthering the country’s disaster risk and reduction

policy. It has helped communities express needs and concerns related especially to water issues

and propose adaption options based on local circumstances. Information on the partnership is

included in the V&A chapter of the Cook Islands NC;

• Vietnam elaborated on how to involve the private sector effectively with regards to LEDS by

reaching out to the unions of certain industries. Another entry point for the private sector,

related to NAMAs, is renewable energy, both its generation and the resulting changes in

consumption patterns;

• The problem of scarce resources leads to difficulties in sustaining institutional arrangements;

and

• Kyrgyzstan described their multi-stakeholder board, which involves ministries, NGOs and other

entities in the implementation of UNFCCC recommendations and the outcomes of their National

Adaptation Plan and National Action Plan on Climate Change. An inter-ministerial committee on

climate change is also foreseen, chaired by the First Prime Minister.

Session: The NC as a Tool for Integrating Climate Change into National and Sectorial Planning

Facilitators: Menouer Boughedaoui (Algeria) and Geordie Colville (UNEP)

14:00 - 15:15 Country Presentations

Presentation Afghanistan: Hamidullah Akbary

The National Communication Process as a Tool to Integrate Climate Change into National Planning:

Institutional Arrangements and Capacity-Building Experiences of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan

Lessons learned from the NC experience in Afghanistan include:

• Thanks to several consultation activities, there is now a general awareness that adaptation

strategies and mitigation options must be included in national and sectorial planning;

• Involvement of key officials and institutions in NC project management and implementation is

essential in order to instil a sense of ownership of the process at high levels and to obtain

reliable follow-up on NC outcomes; and

5

• It is also important to involve all levels, national, regional and local, in consultations and

preparation of the NC.

Challenges confronted included acquiring adequate training of technical teams and managing data.

Presentation Gambia: Lamin Mai Touray

Mainstreaming Climate Change into The Gambia’s Programme for Accelerated Growth and

Employment (PAGE) Document

The Gambia has a long term development programme

called Vision 2020, which builds on previous

development plans and is climate-change sensitive.

Officials realise that involving the issue of climate

change in planning benefits development and reduces

poverty. A UNEP model was used to help mainstream

climate change into national planning. Important

lessons The Gambia learned from the NC process are:

• For effective mainstreaming, solid knowledge

of existing national policies is essential;

• Possible effects of climate change must be

considered on a sectorial basis; and

• Language used in the NC and supporting

reports must be tailored for quick and easy

understanding on the part of policy makers.

Major climate-change challenges for The Gambia include obtaining and/or developing well-trained

experts, obtaining reliable data and raising the awareness of the public.

Presentation Uzbekistan: Aleksandr Merkushkin

The NC as a Tool for Integrating Climate Change into National and Sectorial Planning

The NC process helps establish a forum among specialists and policy makers. This makes for a better

understanding of problems and solutions related to integrating climate-change issues into national and

sectorial planning. All stakeholders including the public must be made fully aware of climate-change

risks, and this requires more educational campaigns and information sharing.


This discussion centred on two main themes: concrete ways to achieve commitment (including financial

contributions) to the NC process from policy makers, and how countries use the NC process to

mainstream the issue of climate change into development planning. The following comments were

made on the first theme:

• Although direct financing of the NC process by government is not required, support is often

provided indirectly, such as through eased access to reliable data, government backing of

statistical organisations, the provision of services of government experts for the creation of GHG

inventories or other non-monetary government contributions;

• Such indirect government contributions to the NC process should be clearly acknowledged in NC

reports. This helps maintain government involvement;

• Some think that direct financing for NC preparation is not the issue, given that governments

already contribute sufficiently by providing data and information. Rather, the great challenge is

6

obtaining government cooperation in the implementation of NC; and recommendations, since

this requires firm commitment to action on climate-change issues;

• Rather than hard financing, Afghanistan’s government contributed manpower in the form of

input into studies and information on feasible entry points for mainstreaming climate change

into planning.

The presentations on mainstreaming climate change into development planning triggered a lively

discussion on this second theme, which included these points:

• Although NCs are potential mainstreaming tools, realistically, at this point in time, they are more

often vehicles for raising climate-change awareness, which is still poor;

• An important consideration is how to determine entry points at which NC results can be

incorporated into national planning;

• The Gambia’s response to this was to hold a national workshop for government officials.

External funding also helped identify specific mainstreaming opportunities;

• Uzbekistan’s response was to hold mini-trainings involving government officials and national

climate-change experts. These trainings included a process for identifying entry points;

• The overall slow pace of international climate-change negotiations adds to countries’ difficulties

in making it a priority issue on national agendas; and

• Several countries mentioned their successes in integrating NC results. The Gambia has

incorporated results on extreme weather events and fisheries into agricultural planning and

strategies for adapting to the loss of fish species. Uzbekistan has used many NC results to set up

CDM projects. Afghanistan used results to help plan flood and drought strategies.

Aside from the above two themes, other points were made in the discussion, including:

• The use of outside consultants for the NC process can make it more difficult to integrate results

into national planning; and

• For future reports, it would be helpful to have an international compilation that reveals which

results were incorporated into which national plans or strategies.

Working Groups 16:30 – 18:00

Institutional Arrangements and Integrating Climate Change through NCs

Group 1

What were key success factors in mobilising and engaging a broad range of relevant stakeholders in

the National Communication preparation?

• Inform and involve stakeholders from the beginning of the process—the initial self-assessment

and other meetings that determine the flow of the NC process;

• Make the process transparent and make sure all stakeholders are familiar with it;

• Specify roles for key actors and core groups. Align the NC agenda as much as possible around

theirs;

• Solidify international support and identify key partnerships in order to form strategic alliances

with partners who are really committed to work; and

• Establish alliances with local and regional authorities.

What are the key challenges to ensuring active/continuous facilitation of the stakeholders?

7

• Coordination of agendas is difficult when ministers or other high-level officials are involved, both

in terms of scheduling meetings that they attend and in making them aware of other high-

priority climate-change activities that are taking place;

• Inter-ministerial coordination is crucial; and

• High-level officials must be regularly updated with tangible results of the process.

What recommendations can the group provide to address these challenges?

• Ensure NCSP support and the continuity of NC teams;

• Convince stakeholders that NCs are valuable tools that can lead to resource mobilisation and

other projects such as CDMs;

• Publicise cost-benefit analyses and other documents that make it clear to policy makers that the

cost of inaction is higher than that of action;

• Communicate the practical outcomes of the NC and identify opportunities to implement them;

and

• Address the specific concerns of the various stakeholders.

Group 2

What were key success factors in integrating recommendations from National Communications into

national policies?

• Provide policy makers with a sense of ownership in the process by involving them from the very

beginning;

• The NC process turned out to be a very successful tool for integrating climate change into

planning and policy when it offered or at least attempted to offer concrete solutions to specific

questions from sectorial planners and decision makers;

• NC recommendations need to be as aligned as possible with national priorities, and so national

policies have to be clearly understood at the outset of the process; and

• Sustainability of the process is a critical factor. This can be achieved by establishing climate-

change contact people in all ministries. Provide these people with online support.

What are the key challenges countries face when integrating climate change into planning processes?

• Resources and capacities are often limited;

• More knowledge is needed on how to set up an effective legal framework for climate change;

• Sometimes it can be difficult to apply climate-change implications and necessary measures to

the national context;

• Policy makers, especially in countries in which staff is limited, are often overburdened with the

broad array of climate agreements, protocols, conventions, requirements, etc.;

• Some countries have legal barriers that hinder climate-change action;

• Funding from a number of sources can be difficult to manage; and

• Lack of technology can cause bottlenecks.

What recommendations can the group provide to address these challenges?

• It is crucial to share best practices and replicate them as much as possible among countries,

although we know there is no such thing as a “one-size-fits-all” solution;

• Technology transfer is crucial;

• Raise public awareness;

• Clarify roles and responsibilities among the various sectors. For example, water resources are

often managed by more than one ministry. This can be an opportunity rather than a problem;

8

• Cost-benefit analyses are important for prioritising climate-change actions for policy makers;

• Consider framing the NC outcomes into a LEDS;

• Improve coordination among ministries, and the sharing of information considered sensitive;

• Coherent data collection and management is very important;

• Incorporate climate-change issues into the education system;

• Develop national guidelines on how to report NC results effectively to policy makers;

• It is necessary to identify and solicit available funds in order to ensure implementation of NC

results. Governments should consider creating a national climate-change fund;

• Establish a board for coordinating the climate-change-related efforts of ministries, NGOs,

universities, sectorial stakeholders and the public; and

• The issue of climate change is broad, so begin with most cost-effective and profitable solutions

and progress gradually towards longer-term, more costly options. Pick the lower fruit first.

Group 3

What types of capacities are needed to establish effective institutional arrangements for National

Communication preparations?

• Provide necessary capacity building for policy makers;

• Capacity building on the generation and management of needed data and information is key,

and it is important to distinguish between hard and soft capacities. One important soft capacity

is that of communicating clearly and effectively with both government and non-government

people;

• Improve the communication skills of both technical experts and decision makers in order to

facilitate the necessary dialogue between them; and

• Provide policy makers with regular updates on the NC process. Include facts and figures.

What types of capacities are needed to effectively integrate climate change through National

Communications?

• National Teams must be able to use coherent, articulated databases that provide reliable

information; and

• Capacities are often lacking for adequate monitoring and evaluation of NC outcomes.

What kind of support is needed for setting up

institutional arrangements that support both

effective National Communication preparation and

integration of climate change?

• Capacities for adequate monitoring and

verification procedures for NCs are needed;

• Provide climate-change capacity building for

ministries, especially those of finance and

planning;

• Build the capacity to assess gaps and

constraints within institutional arrangements;

• Establish regular sharing of experiences and

best practices related to institutional

arrangements; and

• Provide training packages and funding for

participation in them.

9

Day 2: Wednesday, 17 October 2012

Session: Technical Considerations for GHG Inventories, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and

Recommendations for Further Improvement

Facilitators: Malehloa Jockey (Lesotho) and Yamil Bonduki (UNDP)


Presentation Macedonia: Pavlina Zdraveva

GHG inventories: Technical Considerations, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and Recommendations

for Further Improvement

Key outcomes and challenges faced regarding the entire NC process were briefly outlined first. The

presentation then focused on Macedonia’s GHG inventory and provided an example of the country’s

GHG inventory management structure, which turned out to be a good example of one that can remain

in place after the NC process is completed. This notion of a well-defined sustainable GHG inventory

management structure that outlives the NC process became a crucial lesson learned for this session.

The following points were made with regards to Macedonia’s GHG inventory management structure:

• The inventory team was created within an existing ministry, that of Environment and Physical

Planning, thus ensuring sustainability of the GHG inventory process;

• There is a data enterer and data checkers for each sector;

• Technical support is provided by an expert from the National Academy;

• Supervision and management is done by the National Academy of Sciences and Art;

• In line with UNFCCC recommendations, capacity-building efforts targeted the staff of ministries

rather than NC preparation staff, since the latter are usually not retained after the NC process;

• The National Climate Change Committee (Inter-ministerial) was re-defined after the positions of

many members shifted as a result of changing legislation; and

• A permanent unit was set up that coordinates with other projects in areas pertinent to the GHG

inventory. This allows for consistent results and lends weight to NC recommendations.

Another recommendation was to solicit the help of a local UNDP project in governance in order to

introduce the issue of climate change at all levels in the country.

Presentation Ghana: Joseph Baffoe

GHG Inventories: Technical Considerations, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and Recommendations

The creation and maintenance of Ghana’s GHG Inventory is divided into different stages that progress

from training to QA/QC. The most important recommendation was to establish well-defined roles and

responsibilities for all parties involved in creating and maintaining the inventory.

Ghana’s challenges centred on the following:

• sustainability in terms of maintaining the GHG inventory, especially in the areas of continued

data collection and processing;

• problems caused by institutional arrangements that hinder data collection, sharing and

archiving; and

• the lack of capacities necessary for data collection; many stakeholders are unable to provide

production data that are fundamental to the inventory.

10

The challenge of dealing with institutional arrangements is the greatest. It involves developing technical

capacities, but also hinges on a conducive legal structure and cooperation from all stakeholders.

Presentation Suriname: Nancy del Prado

GHG Inventories: Data Considerations, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and Recommendations for

Further Improvement

Suriname recommends the following with regards to GHG inventories:

• Build capacities within one institution only in order to enhance sustainability and avoid

duplication of effort;

• Provide training in emissions for the private sector. This should be accomplished through

established training centres; and

• Rather than the inventory team attempting to work directly with industry, delegate this kind of

communication to a party with established, trusting relationships with companies involved.

Suriname’s challenges mainly concern data availability and consistency. Specific among these are:

• the lack of necessary technical capacities for data collection, processing and archiving;

• resistance on the part of some stakeholders to share data that they are not required to share by

law; and

• the fact that some strategic stakeholders were not involved in the process. The probable reason

for this is that the data collection process was not sufficiently transparent.

It was also noted that as long as climate change is not a government priority, NC results will not be

implemented.


The main topic was GHG inventory data reliability and availability: the challenge this poses and the ways

in which some countries have dealt with these challenges. Here are some of the points made:

• Data reliability depends on their source. In Macedonia and Suriname, most GHG inventory data

come from national departments of statistics, backed up by further research and processing by

outside consultants;

• Based on their own experiences, Uruguay and Mexico suggested that sector ministries should be

responsible for data collection related to their own sectors, since each ministry is the best

informed body on that sector and since doing things this way distributes the burden of data

collection;

• In Ghana, most data are collected from government institutions;

• Since GHG inventory data and their collection depend so much on circumstances particular to

each country, the question arose as to how external support, such as that supplied by the NCSP,

can most effectively help. A number of countries responded that experience-sharing and

lessons-learned workshops are very useful, as are technical training sessions;

• Also debated were approaches to the creation of national emission factors and the main

categories involved here, and the lack of technical capacities came up again. The point was also

made of the difficulty of building capacities in countries in conflict;

• It was generally agreed that data on emissions-creating activities are the most unreliable, even

more so than national emission factors, since the former come from such a large variety of

sources in both the public and private sectors. This, therefore, is a primary area in which

improvement is needed. Well-designed emission factors and sound QA/QC methods were

mentioned as ways to achieve such improvement;

11

• Here is where the importance of NCs as awareness raisers becomes evident. Instilling a sense of

ownership in the NC process in organisations and businesses that are important sources of data

will go a long way toward improving the sharing and general quality of data;

• Despite the long period of time between most countries’ INCs and SNCs, data constraints often

remained unchanged. Legislation on data generation and sharing is one possible solution to this

lingering problem. Another is the establishment of MoUs between data providers and the

government, assuring the providers that the data they supply will only be used for GHG

inventory purposes; and

• Many countries have very little historical emission information. A baseline year of 1990 was

suggested as a data starting point.

Other related topics arose in the discussion. They include:

• Uncertainties in GHG inventories need further investigation. Are problems limited to the

reliability of activity data and emission factors, or are there deeper knowledge gaps regarding

emissions? In some countries there are: emission sources remain unidentified.

• Macedonia pointed out that in terms of the GHG inventory, they face MRV and QA challenges.

When using the Tier 1 method, uncertainties were not an issue, but since they have begun using

Tier 2, uncertainties have increased.

Session: Technical Considerations for Mitigation Analyses, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and



These presentations made it clear that mitigation work in the preparation of the NC needs to be

embedded within a wider, national emission-reduction framework. Non-Annex I Parties have no targets

under the UNFCCC, but many, including Mexico and Egypt, have voluntarily developed their own.

Barriers were mentioned, including the technical one of the lack of availability of reliable modelling data,

as well as the more general one of a lack of inter-sectorial cooperation and hence poor data-sharing.

The main lesson learned was that such barriers can be overcome more easily if those involved in NC

mitigation work support the mitigation efforts and initiatives of ministries.

Presentation Montenegro: Snezana Marstijepovic

The NC, a Step towards a Low-emission, Resource-efficient Economy

In Montenegro, the INC was a true milestone in terms

of bringing together over forty stakeholders and

institutes for work on the cross-cutting issue of

climate change. Major problems arose, however,

including data loss due to a lack of inter-ministerial

coordination and a general lack of climate-change-

related capacities in national institutions.

With time, though, the NC process is proving its value.

Montenegro’s SNC will indeed be a strategic

document designed for sustainable development.

As for the mitigation analysis, the NC team worked

closely with ministries for data collection and the

identification of targets. The team responded to

specific questions from ministries. For example, they

12

provided help in the completion of the SE4ALL questionnaire for the UN Secretary General.

A number of lessons learned were outlined, one being the importance now of institutionalising NC

preparation in-country in order to move away from outsourcing.

Presentation Mexico: Julia Martinez

NCs and Policy Making

Mexico is a frontrunner among Non-Annex I parties, already preparing its sixth NC. The presentation

provided an outline of institutional arrangements, in particular the enactment of the General Law of

Climate Change, which operates at the state and municipal levels.

Also described was Mexico’s Special Climate-Change Programme (PECC) and its emission reduction

achievements. In order to further enhance the involvement of policy makers in future NC work, cost

curve and cost-benefit analyses are planned, translating the recommended actions into costs and

savings, thus going beyond a comparison with BAU in terms of saved emissions. The issue of climate-

change laws was also mentioned.

Presentation Egypt: Elsayed Sabry Mansour

Technical Considerations of Mitigation Analysis: Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and


The link between NC work with Egypt’s many CDM projects was made clear. Future NC work will focus

on capacity building with regards to NAMAs and LEDS. Egypt intends to better mainstream the issue of

climate change into the National Development Plan by identifying entry points at which climate-change-

relevant legislation can be drafted and enforced.

The Importance was stressed of strengthening coordination among relevant stakeholders at all levels in

order to ensure the implementation of relevant policies and measures from the ministries. In terms of

mitigation analysis, challenges remaining from Egypt’s INC experience include:

• unreliable data;

• questionable methods and assumptions;

• inconsistent and/or inappropriate interpretation of results; and

• the problem that complex models remain difficult to interpret for non-technical people,

including policy makers.


This discussion focused on technical issues related to emission reduction. Points raised included:

• Mexico’s strategy of involving organisations at the regional and local levels in emission-

reduction plans raised interest. Although such plans are not legally binding, they are indeed

aligned with Mexican law. In the beginning, such targets were externally financed, but in recent

years, the Mexican government has also been funding them. Local adaptation and mitigation

actions are coordinated by the Ministry of Energy;

• In Montenegro, the national Environmental Protection Agency does the technical work for both

the GHG inventory and the mitigation analysis; and

• Egypt includes nuclear energy as a mitigation option, but this is only one option considered in

order to meet increasing energy demands. Renewable energy options are also present, namely

wind power for the short term and solar power for the long term. Switching to natural gas is also

seen as a practical emission-reducing option.

Other topics discussed include:

13

• The mitigation analysis is useful in terms of the capacities it builds for further NC preparation

and national planning processes; and

• It is necessary to determine the best ways of coordinating simultaneous preparation of NCs,

NAMAs, LED, CDM and BURs in order to maximise the impact of these documents at the

national level.

Session: Technical Considerations for V&A Assessments, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and


Facilitators: Kema Kasturiarachchi (Sri Lanka) and Yamil Bonduki (UNDP)


Presentation Bangladesh: Sheik Moazzem

Experiences of V&A Assessments in Bangladesh

The presence of experts in the SNC team who had already worked on the INC V&A team proved to be

helpful. They provided peer reviews of drafts. Such stability on NC teams is vital for preserving

institutional memory. Other lessons learned in Bangladesh include:

• Priority must be given to building V&A-related capacities in national public institutions, as

opposed to contracting the work to outside agencies;

• In general, it is important to link climate change, DRM and development. Doing so is essential for

the formulation of long term adaptation and mitigation measures and strategies; and

• Besides reliable, sector-specific data, indigenous knowledge about climate vulnerability and

adaptation is of great value.

Presentation Cuba: Eduardo Planos

The Cuban Experience in the Assessment of Vulnerability to Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation

Strategy

Those in Cuba have learned that for successful action in terms of adapting to climate change, political

interest and will from the government are needed. It

is also important to have a body of permanent staff

working on NCs and to maintain the important

relationships with pertinent UN bodies. Countries

must be able count on an active regional and global

collaboration, both north-south and south-south, for

their climate adaptation work. Other lessons learned

include:

• Effective adaptation measures can come only

from validated studies; and

• To achieve successful adaptation measures, all

pertinent stakeholders must be consulted.

Some challenges for Cuba include:

• the need to further build operational

capacities; and

• the need for legislation and an institutional framework conducive to continued work on

adaptation to climate change.

14

Presentation Eritrea: Seid Salih

Lessons from the V&A Assessment in Eritrea

Those in Eritrea have learned that V&A work goes beyond the things immediately related to the

assessment itself: a carefully selected methodological framework, tools, data availability, time and

necessary resources. The involvement of stakeholders and the policy relevance of the work done are

also critical. A number of technical barriers were outlined, as well as ways in which the team responded

constructively to them. Some models were illustrated and their performance in the Eritrean context was

discussed.

Presentation Nepal: Lava Gaunle

Experiences and Lessons Learned from V&A Assessments

For further successful V&A work under the NC umbrella, more support is needed to allow for the

institutionalisation of NC preparation. Aside from the issue of V&A, it was mentioned that Nepal needs a

mechanism that will aid in making regular GHG updates and documenting best practices.


This discussion centred on elements of modelling, including data collection, the means of generating

relevant outcomes from modelling exercises, and the interpretation of outcomes. Translating model

outcomes and V&A assessments into practical socio-economic adaptation action from government

decision makers is important, and it was agreed that NCs should enable long-term decision making.

Countries provided specific examples of how V&A outcomes have translated to action:

• Uruguay’s V&A assessments help the country establish a coherent framework for various

adaptation actions and measures on the part of a number of actors and agencies. V&A

Assessment indicators are being developed to analyse and prioritise these measures. Results of

the V&A analysis of Uruguay’s INC were used for climate-change planning and triggered an

adaptation project called Coastal Zone Management;

• In Jamaica, V&A assessment results led to the establishment of a common policy framework for

different sectors. For example, coastal zone policies were designed and integrated into the

country’s “Vision 2030” work plan;

• In Sri Lanka, V&A assessment results have been integrated into the National Adaptation Action

Plan. The Asian Development Bank adaptation strategy for Sri Lanka is also based on the SNC

outcomes; and

• In Nepal, a local adaptation plan was based on the outcomes of the V&A Assessment.

Technical aspects of V&A assessments were also discussed, and the following points were made:

• Information for the water resources sector has been greatly improved in Cuba’s SNC, and this

has yielded more concrete and practical results. For their TNC, they foresee an even greater

increase in resolution;

• The sectors analysed in the V&A assessments of Eritrea’s INC and SNC are generally the same,

but the models used in the SNC are more sophisticated and apply a greater number of factors

related to such things as air and water temperatures and sea-level rise; and

• Sudan recommends the tactic of downscaling global models in order to obtain realistic results

for their country and notes the need for training in downscaling techniques.

The presentations on V&A Assessments led to an in-depth discussion of how the vulnerability of certain

sectors to climate change was identified. Countries use a broad range of instruments for this, including

15

modelling and cost-benefit analyses. They also capitalise on priorities identified in national strategy

papers.

The Climate Cell of Bangladesh raised interest. This Cell produces publications and raises public

awareness on climate change issues.

It was agreed that since V&A assessments are valuable exercises that will continue to be used, in future

NCs it would be helpful for countries to highlight explicitly the benefits of these assessments and

associate them with resulting follow-up actions.

Working groups 16:30 – 18:00

Technical Considerations

Group 1

Some important technical constraints have been identified in the development of GHG inventories.

How can these be addressed?

The group identified three types of constraints: institutional, technical and awareness-related.

• Institutional constraints: the high turnover of staff working on GHG inventories, the lack of legal

frameworks that would aid data collection and the difficulty of identifying data providers in

ministries;

• Technical constraints: weaknesses in data management and archiving; undeveloped capacities

that lead to a dearth of reliable data in appropriate formats; and the lack of effective QA/QC

mechanisms;

• As to awareness of the issue of climate change, this is often lacking on the part of policy makers

and data providers, the result being that the implications of the various parts of NCs fail to be

understood and do not translate to action.

The group’s suggestions of ways to address these constraints include:

• establishment of a legal framework that facilitates data collection;

• establishment of regional training centres for data collectors;

• creation of a mechanism for coordinating stakeholders;

• development of firm criteria for selecting participants for training sessions;

• promotion of south-south cooperation and lessons-learned programmes;

• involvement of academia and research institutions in GHG inventories to ensure sustainability;

and

• development of awareness-raising campaigns aimed at policy makers, private sector industries

and the general public.

The group also discussed the need for capacity building in order to improve the quality of GHG

inventories. Specific areas mentioned for capacity building are:

• Good Practice guidelines;

• methodologies for identifying key information sources;

• use of IPCC and UNFCCC software;

• QA/QC; and

• funding management.

Group 2

16

Some important technical constraints have been identified in the development of mitigation analyses.


• Capacity building in the area of modelling is needed. Selected candidates must have appropriate

backgrounds to enable them to capitalise on such training and be able to share their experiences

with others;

• Modelling tends to focus on the energy sector; models for non-energy sectors such as forestry

and transport are needed;

• A cross-sectorial and cross-border approach is necessary. It might be beneficial for some

countries to collaborate with neighbours on the subject of mitigation analyses: in the joint

development of renewable energy sources, for example. Better regional cooperation is also

needed with the aim of eliminating data gaps and improving data reliability. A comprehensive

framework of international cooperation on the part of Non-Annex I parties may be the

cornerstone for future efforts to address the effects of climate change;

• Sometimes even the most solid results are not saleable to policy makers. Communications skills

must be developed in order to more effectively convince officials of the benefits of action;

• A clear legal framework is necessary if the private sector is to become adequately involved; and

• It is important to provide incentives to counteract brain drain.

What are some key capacity-building needs for improving the quality of mitigation analyses?

• Secure the financial assistance necessary so that NCSP workshops and training sessions—

preferably on-the-job training—can continue;

• Design training material to be realistic and achievable in the allotted time frame;

• Provide incentives for likely candidates to attend training sessions;

• Encourage countries to create their own capacity-building activities; and

• Cape Verde noted that a very useful approach to capacity building has been south-south

cooperation with other Portuguese-speaking countries such as Brazil.

Group 3

Some important technical constraints have been identified in the development of V&A assessments.


• Data gaps must be dealt with both in terms of climate and the social economy;

• Centralisation of data would help in various ways, including the facilitation of QA/QC;

• Turnover of knowledgeable staff must be reduced in order to ensure sustainability of models

and methodologies;

• Encourage academic research and local cooperation through research centres; and

• Monitoring of already implemented adaptation measures must be continuous.

What are some key capacity-building needs for improving the quality of V&A assessments?

• Capacity building must not be isolated at one level but rather spread among data gatherers, data

users, those who interpret models, project directors and academicians;

• Capacity building is needed on cost-effective prioritisation of adaptation measures; and

• It is needed on generating scenarios, interpreting models and using assessment tools and

equipment, as well as on available adaptation technology.

17

Day 3: Thursday, 18 October 2012

Session: Biennial Update Reports (BURs)

Facilitators: Jeffery Spooner (Jamaica) and Rawleston Moore (GEF)

8:30 – 8:50 Presentation on BUR Guidelines: Uazamo Kaura, UNFCCC

The New Reporting Requirements: Biennial Update Reports (BURs)

A background of BURs was provided and reminded listeners that Non-Annex I Parties must submit their

first BUR by December 2014. According to decision 2/CP.17, para.41(f) Non-Annex I Parties must submit

BURs every two years. LCDs and SIDS may submit at their discretion. The BUR can be a standalone

document or form part of the NC. For Non-Annex I parties, information in a BUR should be consistent

with that of NCs and the latest NC updates. The BUR must cover the following points:

• as a minimum, the GHG Inventory Report (NIR) for a calendar year that is no more than four

years prior to the date of submission, more recent if possible. There is flexibility here for LCDs

and SIDs;

• a description of domestic MRV agreements;

• an outline of constraints and gaps, as well as of financing, technology and capacity-building

needs and assistance of this type already received;

• information on national circumstances and institutional arrangements;

• information on mitigation actions and their effects, including methodologies and assumptions

applied; and

• information on support received for the preparation of the BUR itself;

Another component of the BUR requirements is International Consultation and Analysis (ICA). According

to decision 2/CP.17 (Annex IV) ICAs are to be performed in order to increase the transparency of

mitigation actions and their effects. They are performed by technical experts in consultation with the

reporting country, and they involve a facilitative sharing of views. The first round of ICAs will begin

within six months of the first round of BUR submissions. The level of a country’s participation in an ICA is

based on capabilities and national circumstances. ICAs are to be non-intrusive, non-punitive, and

respectful of national sovereignty.

ICAs consist of two steps: the technical analysis of the BUR by a team of experts and the facilitative

sharing of views under a SBI. Guidelines on the composition, modalities and procedures of the team of

technical experts are found under the ICA: SBI item 5(b) – (FCCC/SBI/2012/L.21). Currently, three

proposals exist for ICAs:

• that the ICA team be composed of experts from the UNFCCC roster of experts;

• that they be conducted by the CGE; or

• that the ICA experts be staff members of the UNFCCC secretariat.

Discussion of these proposals is to be continued at the UN Climate-Change Conference in Doha, Qatar.


Participants had many questions about BUR and ICA procedures, preparation, funding and submission

guidelines. These include:

• What is the procedure for requesting funding for BUR preparation? Can funding for NC and BUR

preparation be applied for together? If a country’s NC preparation has already begun, can the

18

previously submitted funding application be amended, in order to “top off” funding to

accommodate BUR preparation?

• Will there be NCSP and UNFCCC support?

• Why is the emphasis of BURs on mitigation and not adaptation?

• What will BUR content be with regard to mitigation?

Answers to such questions can be found in UNFCCC guidelines. Participants also had comments about

BURs and ICA, including the following:

• In order to keep up with the two-year reporting pace, it will be important to establish full-time

teams, streamline processes and centrally manage information;

• In a number of countries, BURs and NAMAs will be developed in parallel, so it will be important

to determine their scopes precisely; and

• It was agreed that ICA experts will have to be highly qualified.

Session: Mobilising Financing through the NC

9:30 -10:00 Country Presentations

Presentation Bosnia and Herzegovina: Ozren Laganin

The Role of the NC Process in Identifying Priorities for Mobilisation of Financing

The NC process in Bosnia and Herzegovina has

contributed significantly to the overall process of

shifting to low-carbon development planning. Both

the INC and SNC have contributed to achieving

national environmental objectives. Its SNC finalised,

the country has begun implementing LEDS and NAS,

establishing a system for monitoring emissions and

mitigation actions, and evaluating and adjusting

mitigation measures. These are among the country’s

first priorities in the context of a LEDS, aimed at

attracting funding for NAMAs. The country will take

steps to mobilise different forms of international

funding for energy efficiency in buildings, sustainable

transport, a new generation of thermal power plants

and renewable energy sources. Nevertheless, a

number of issues regarding environment education

and green growth need to be addressed.

Presentation Uruguay: Magdalena Preve

The NC Process in Uruguay: Steps Towards Integrating Climate Change into Planning and Mobilisation

of Financing

The creation of a 2010 National Plan on Climate Change has been a primary means to win the support all

ministries and the allocation of resources. Communication of country priorities for financing was also an

important factor in its mobilisation, as was collaboration with the Ministry of Finance. Some examples

were given of project proposals created under the SNC and submitted to the GEF or other potential

funding sources, such as the Adaptation Fund. The country’s TNC included a climate-change plan.

Uruguay recommends publicising NCs and similar reports as much as possible in order to gain

recognition and spread the results.

19


With Uruguay’s presentation acting as a springboard, this discussion centred on experiences the various

countries have had in the mobilisation of financing arising out of NCs and the use of these funds to

implement GEF and non-GEF projects. Participants discussed those potential funding sources related to

the Convention and the Kyoto Protocols, as well as others. They also discussed the benefits of placing

adaptation and mitigation efforts under the aegis of green economy pathways, which will be beneficial

for potential investors or donors, as well as for recipients.

Some of the financing success stories shared include the following:

• In Bhutan, NAPA proposals developed as part of their INC are pending approval for funding.

Bhutan’s SNC has just been completed, and resulting financing from it will become evident in

the next two to three years;

• In Algeria, many achievements have been realised on a voluntary basis. One example is the

improvement of wastewater treatment, based on NC recommendations;

• Uruguay continues to translate NC outcomes into project proposals, by prioritising options and

by coordinating action among ministries on these priorities. A number of projects have secured

funding and are under implementation;

• The Gambia has initiated projects with external funding of USD8.3 million and USD5.3 million,

primarily for the coastal zone;

• In Eritrea external funds have been secured for the implementation of several projects that

came out of the NC;

• In Albania, hydropower and agriculture projects based on their NC are being funded; and

• Sudan has secured approximately USD7 million for a project based on NC outcomes.

Despite these success stories, it became clear from the discussion that only a fraction of the great

variety of financing opportunities available (such as LDCF, AF and GEF) are taken advantage of, and

many other opportunities remain untapped.

As a sidebar to this discussion, Uruguay elaborated on the most important outputs and lessons learned

from the five NCs the country has already prepared. One crucial success factor is the healthy

coordination that exists among ministries. This helps in the collection and processing of data and

information, in the identification of priorities and in effective use of resources.

Session: Capacity Building, Raising Public Awareness and the Sustain ability of the NC Process

Facilitators: Milena Kozomara (Serbia) and Rawleston Moore (GEF)


Presentation Georgia: Anna Sikharulidze

National Capacities Built in Georgia through the NC Process

Georgia has come away from the NC process with several valuable lessons learned related to capacity

building, including these:

• Capacities that are weak nationally and locally can be strengthened by having NC experts

provide training sessions;

20

• Key NC outcomes open doors to new methodologies and technologies, providing the country

with new opportunities for achieving green, sustainable development;

• The NC process has improved the quality of statistics nationally and facilitated the establishment

of local statistics entities;

• Support to universities and research centres is an important way of fomenting useful climate-

change-related research;

• On-the-job training of experts and internships for students and young professionals are

important;

• Knowledge exchanges and consultations among sectorial teams and other bodies of experts

result in sustainable recommendations. It is important to pass down climate-change learning

from one generation to the next; and

• Use the Worldwide Web for sharing tools and models.

Some next steps were also mentioned, including the encouragement of local and international

stakeholder involvement in needs assessments related to adaptation and mitigation technologies, and

on-the-job training in model application and preparation of project proposals for local experts and

students.

Presentation Sudan: Ismail Elgizouli

Sudan’s NC and Capacity Building

Important outcomes and lessons learned from the NC process in Sudan include:

• the knowledge gained from participation in regional and international climate change initiatives

and events;

• the establishment of institutional arrangements destined to become a permanent infrastructure

for the creation and maintenance of the GHG inventory and NC preparation;

• increasing incorporation of climate-change themes in educational curricula;

• institutional and public awareness raising on climate-change issues through media campaigns

and public events;

• the more than twelve NAPA-orientated workshops held in Khartoum and over twenty

elsewhere; and

• the more than 500 people trained in various climate-change-related areas.

Climate-change-related training in Sudan has been delivered on a variety of topics, including Data

Management, Socio-economic and Climate Scenario Creation, Use of Impact Models in V&A Assessment,

Projection Techniques, Uncertainty Management, the Provision of Backstopping, and the Establishment

of Local Projects.

Awareness-raising activities have taken place on Use of the Media, PowerPoint Creation and

Presentation and the Submission of Papers to Institutions.


Presentation Albania: Mirela Kamberi

Ensuring Sustainability of the NC Process: Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and Recommendations for

Further Improvement

The NC process in Albania has been of paramount importance for mainstreaming and integrating

climate-change recommendations into sectorial development policies. It has also been the motor behind

21

mobilisation of climate-change-targeted financing. Important lessons learned in terms of making the

process sustainable include the following:

• A well-organised project launch is crucial for assuring that all stakeholders fully understand and

take ownership of the process. Discuss roles, functions, and responsibilities within the project’s

decision-making structures including reporting and communication lines and conflict resolution

mechanisms. Hold consultations to promote appropriate policy proposals, produce sound and

accepted results, and to prepare to build human and institutional capacities that are necessary

for the continued success of the NC process; and

• When in-country technical experts are lacking, regional networks work well for the exchange of

skills, information and data.

Some key outcomes from Albania’s NC process include:

• the creation of an inter-ministerial committee on climate change, headed by the Deputy

Minister of Environment and supported by appointed technical contact people in all related

institutions. This body will not only expedite NC preparation; it will also facilitate decision

making in terms of national climate-change policy; and

• the retention of NC teams involved in Albania’s INC and SNC, so they can continue their work on

the TNC and beyond.

As a next step, Albania is currently drafting legislation that will formalise a framework for climate-

change issues, especially the updating of the GHG inventory. The intent is to formulate environmental

legislation along the lines of that of the EU.

Presentation Cape Verde: Francisco Correia

Ensuring Sustainability of the NC Process: Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and Recommendations for

Further Improvement

Cape Verde has come away from the NC process with these lessons learned:

• National experts must be motivated to take up

their tasks;

• Involvement of decision makers is critical to

NC preparation and the sustainability of its

recommendations; and

• The NC must provide relevant information

that can be incorporated into sectorial

planning.

Outcomes from their NC include:

• the mobilisation of financial resources by the

government to implement sectorial plans and

ensure environmental sustainability;

• the creation of a National Centre on Air

Quality;

• successful mainstreaming of climate-change

risks and opportunities into strategic documents (NAPA-II and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper

(PRSP-II); and

• Increased capacity building of the national team through technical cooperation with Brazil and

Portugal.

22

It is important to create the legal and institutional framework necessary for GHG emission data sharing

and to mobilise resources for capacity building programs and to support research centres.

Cape Verde intends to write a special report for policy makers and disseminate the NC to a larger

audience. They have further work to do on mainstreaming NC recommendations into national planning,

in particular for NAMA. They must raise funds for projects identified in the SNC.


This discussion tended to focus on two topics: concrete ways to sustain institutional arrangements for

capacity development and awareness raising, and the sustainability of the NC process and the

implementation of its recommendations. On the topic of capacity development, the following points

were made:

• It is important that NC team experts train people within the ministries in order to ensure a

continuous presence of climate-change-knowledgeable staff;

• Proper capacity needs assessment is also important;

• Quality training of experts can truly influence the decision making of politicians;

• Sudan elaborated on the usefulness of its capacity self-assessment, which identified gaps and

capacity-building needs and based on which a plan was developed; and

• Albania highlighted the necessity of constantly building on the number of experts in a small

country over time. One way to do this is to include climate-change issues in university curricula.

On the topic of maintaining the sustainability of the NC process and its results, participants made the

following points:

• Georgia explained how involving academia in the NC process ensures sustainability. For them it

has provided a safe buffer against staff turnover and changes in ministries, and they hope it will

lead to a new generation of climate-change experts. Former university students who worked on

the NC continue to be engaged in climate-change efforts;

• The support provided by NCSP in the form of workshops and training sessions must continue, so

that a broad range of professionals is developed at the national level to make climate-change

teams resilient to staff turnover. This can be accomplished by the train-the-trainers approach.

This is particularly important for countries in conflict; and

• Cape Verde explained that NC preparation, especially the GHG inventory process, triggered the

creation of their Centre for Air Quality, which addresses issues coming out of the NC. The

parallel development of the NC and NAMAs was also helpful and will serve to make these more

sustainable.

Countries also discussed the particularities of preparing an NC in a small island state like Cape Verde.

One of the most important tasks is to downscale regional models to appropriately reflect the situation

on the ground on the various islands. In order to deal with the special geography of a small island state,

it is necessary to focus first on practical, less expensive measures that are relatively easily implemented.

Finally, many participants agreed that the task of writing up the complex analyses and procedures

involved in an NC and drafting the document itself is a challenge that needs to be acknowledged and to

which training sessions should be dedicated.

23

Session: Next Steps: Plenary Discussion on Priorities and Recommendations for a Future Support

Programme for NCs and BURs


The discussion centred on what the NCSP should be like at this, the outset of a new cycle for that

organisation. How should it operate? What activities should it support and how? In what ways is the

NCSP complementary to other support programmes, such as the CGE?

While bridging the gap between the concluding NCSP cycle and the next one, it was suggested that the

organisation’s website and newsletter be maintained. It was also suggested that the new NCSP could be

launched with a stocktaking and experience-sharing workshop to which all Non-Annex I Parties were

invited.

Suggestions for types of capacity-building activities provided in a new cycle of the NCSP include train-

the-trainers sessions and online workshops and other e-learning activities. These would facilitate

training in important skills to reach a broader audience, including academia and national experts

heretofore uninvolved in climate-change efforts. Social media tools were encouraged as an option for

lively, widespread and archived discussions among various stakeholders all over the world. A key area

mentioned as needing support is that of GHG inventories. The UNFCCC is preparing an online learning

course on GHG inventories, mitigation analyses, V&A assessments.

As it did in the cycle that is ending, the new NCSP will combine global, regional and national support

components. Countries with more experience will be encouraged to provide support to others in their

region. South-south cooperation is just as important to these more experienced countries, since

reporting requirements and technologies keep evolving.

The CGE may be up for renewal soon as well, and this could be an opportunity for the NCSP to

coordinate more closely with that body. Such a joint effort would allow for greater regional and national

support. In light of this, NC teams should participate in CGE workshops. Also related to technical and

regional collaboration was the suggestion that the NCSP establish new regional and local technical

centres. These would facilitate access to regionally and locally relevant information and provide in-depth

expertise on how to apply guidelines to specific national contexts. Such centres could strengthen the

involvement of academia in future NC work and spur south-south collaboration.

Another suggestion was to compile best practices and update the NC Toolkit, particularly regarding its

MRV treatment. And finally, participants agreed that it would be useful to publicise concrete examples

of how NC recommendations have been implemented and what follow-up projects initiated in

subsequent NCs. This would help convince policy makers, the public and financing sources of the

relevance of NCs to national planning and resource mobilisation.

Closing Session


Rawleston Moore (GEF), Geordie Colville (UNEP), Yamil Bonduki (UNDP)

These representatives of the organising institutions provided brief closing statements on the workshop.

They expressed the wish to maintain momentum and build upon the lessons shared. Best practices

24

should help stimulate fresh ideas on how to shape the new NCSP and better publicise national activities

that arise out of NC recommendations. This will heighten the profile of the NC process nationally and

internationally.

Thanks were expressed to the people and government

of Turkey and to the country’s UNDP Country Office

for hosting the workshop. This was the largest NCSP

workshop to date, and the input it has provided will

help define the next phase of NCs and BURs.

Many participants in turn thanked the organisers for

the chance to attend and emphasised the value of the

opportunity to share experiences with other countries

that the workshop provided.

25

Workshop Agenda

United Nations Environment Programme

Global Environment Facility

National Communications Support Programme (NCSP)

NCSP Workshop

Lessons Learned from the National Communications

16-18 October 2012

Istanbul, Turkey

Workshop Agenda

Objectives

The workshop is organized by the NCSP in collaboration with the Turkish Government and the UNDP

country office in Turkey. The main objectives of the workshop are to share experiences gained by

national experts during the preparation of the National Communications and to discuss how they can be

helpful in the process of integrating climate change into development planning frameworks.

Expected Results

In addition to the broad objective of enhanced understanding, the following specific results are

expected by the end of the workshop:

• suggestions on how to consolidate the NC process at the country level for a more sustainable

reporting process to the Convention;

• recommendations on how NCs can be used for decision makers to facilitate the integration of

climate change into relevant planning processes;

• recommendations on engaging key stakeholders in the preparation of NCs to enhance a sense of

ownership of NC results and processes; and

• identification of additional technical areas needing support.

Approach

The workshop has been designed to share information, including lessons learned and best practices,

among attending countries.

Discussions at the workshop are structured around the following five themes:

1. Institutional arrangements and the role of the NC;

2. Using the NC as a tool for integrating climate change into national and sectorial planning;

3. Technical considerations, key challenges, lessons learned and recommendations for further

improvement of GHG inventories, mitigation analyses and vulnerability and adaptation

assessments;

4. Mobilising financing through the NCs; and

5. Capacity building, raising public awareness and the sustainability of the NC process.

Each of these themes will be covered by a general introduction from the facilitators, followed by brief

country presentations, working groups and plenary sessions. The main objective of the presentations is

to highlight country experiences for follow-up discussions and to identify lessons learned.

26

Day 1: Tuesday, 16 October 2012

8:15 - 9:00 Registration

OPENING SESSION – Facilitator: Oznur Oguz Kuntasal (Turkey)

9:00 - 10:30 Opening and Introduction

9:00 - 9:45 Welcome Remarks

o Mr Rawleston Moore, Senior Climate Change Specialist, GEF

o Mr Geordie Colville, Senior Programme Officer, UNEP

o Mr Sedat Kadıoğlu, Deputy Undersecretary, Ministry of Environment and

Urbanisation, Turkey

o Mr Shahid Najam, UNDP Resident Representative

o Prof Dr Lütfü Akça, Undersecretary, Ministry of Forestry and Water, Turkey

9:45 - 10:30 Introduction of Workshop Participants and Background

o Mr Yamil Bonduki, UNDP

10:30 - 11:00 Coffee Break

SESSION 1 – Facilitators: Thinley Namgyel (Bhutan) and Geordie Colville (UNEP)

11:00 - 13:00 Institutional Arrangements and the Role of the NC

An important role of the NC is to facilitate consultations and establish relationships among different

stakeholders. Experience shows that proactive participation by a broad range of stakeholders in the NC

process is greatest when each party sees the benefit of engagement. The session will look at institutional

involvement of key stakeholders, ways to respond to institutional changes and upcoming new players,

and what role the NC should play in the future, so as not to be a stand-alone exercise.


o Turkey: Kadir Demirbolat

o Cook Islands: Mii Matamaki

o Vietnam: Ms Nguyen Van Anh

12.15 – 13:00 Discussion

13:00 - 14:00 Lunch

SESSION 2 - Facilitators: Menouer Boughedaoui (Algeria) and Geordie Colville (UNEP)

14:00 - 16:00 The NC as a Tool for Integrating Climate Change into National and Sectorial Planning

This session will centre on the extent to which NC outcomes have affected national strategies and plans.

It will focus on how NCs can serve countries, not only as reports on climate change, but as tools to use for

climate-change mainstreaming and affecting national policies. The presentations will use NC case studies

to illustrate how the issue of climate change may be integrated into national plans and provide an

exchange of experiences among national teams and experts on lessons learned from the NC process.

27

• Country Presentations

o Afghanistan: Hamidullah Akbary

o Gambia: Lamin Mai Touray

o Uzbekistan: Aleksandr Merkushkin

• Discussion


16:30 - 17:30 Working Groups: Institutional Arrangements and Integrating Climate Change through

NCs

The working groups will focus on opportunities for the use of NCs to integrate climate-change priorities

into national planning processes and to establish a sustainable institutional framework for NC

preparation. Technical assistance and capacity building needs in these areas are to be identified.

17:30 - 18:00 Reporting Back from Working Groups

Day 2: Wednesday, 17 October 2012

SESSION 3 – Facilitators: Malehloa Jockey (Lesotho) and Yamil Bonduki (UNDP)

9:00 - 10:30 Technical Considerations for GHG Inventories, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and


New reporting requirements under the Convention make more critical the need to ensure availability of

better data. This session will assess technical experiences and best practices in conducting GHG

inventories in order to improve results. It will review data considerations and the improvements between

initial and subsequent NCs, including the establishment of efficient QA and QC procedures.


o Macedonia: Pavlina Zdraveva

o Ghana: Joseph Baffoe

o Suriname: Nancy del Prado

• Discussion


11:00 - 13:00 Technical Considerations for Mitigation Analyses, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and


This session will assess technical experiences and best practices for conducting mitigation analyses. It will

review data considerations and improvements between the initial and subsequent NCs, including the

areas of thoroughness, sectors covered, and approaches used. Discussed are the importance of baseline

and mitigation scenarios; challenges in GHG emission projections; prioritisation of mitigation options,

including uncertainties; their feasibility and their connection to development priorities.


o Montenegro: Snezana Marstijepovic

28

o Mexico: Julia Martinez

o Egypt: Elsayed Sabry Mansour

• Discussion

13:00 - 14:00 Lunch

SESSION 4 - Facilitators: Kema Kasturiarachchi (Sri Lanka) and Yamil Bonduki (UNDP)

14:00-16:00 Technical Considerations for V&A Assessments, Key Challenges, Lessons Learned and


This session will assess technical experience and best practices for conducting V&A assessments. It will

review data considerations and improvements between initial and subsequent NCs, including the areas

of thoroughness, sectors covered and approaches used. Discussed are the importance of using climate

scenarios to assess impacts in order to design adaptation strategies; approaches for addressing data

uncertainties; ways in which countries prioritise adaptation options; and ways in which they are linked to

development at the national, sectorial and local levels.


o Bangladesh: Sheik Moazzem

o Cuba: Eduardo Planos

o Eritrea: Seid Salih

o Nepal: Lava Gaunle

• Discussion


16:30 - 17:30 Working Groups: Technical Considerations

These working groups will discuss the key challenges and lessons learned from the preparation of GHG

inventories, mitigation analyses and V&A assessments. Needs for technical assistance and capacity

building in these areas will be identified.

17:30 - 18:00 Reporting Back from Working Groups

Day 3: Thursday, 18 October 2012

SESSION 5 - Facilitators: Jeffery Spooner (Jamaica) and Rawleston Moore (GEF)

8:30 - 9:15 Biennial Update Reports (BURs)

The session will provide an overview of the new reporting requirements under the Convention: The

Biennial Update Reports. It will include a description of the Durban Agreement regarding BURs, their

implications for countries, how they are linked to NCs, and opportunities and challenges associated with

BUR preparation.

• Presentation on BUR Guidelines

29

UNFCCC Secretariat: Uazamo Kaura

• Discussion

9:15 - 10:30 Mobilising Financing through the NC

The NC is as an important basis for taking further steps in the assessment and solicitation of needed

funding and financial planning in order to implement the recommendations it provides. Topics in this

session include estimating costs, allocating funds effectively and using NCs to identify priorities for

climate-change financing. NCs and their project proposals have provided valuable input on activities for

mobilising financing, and examples of these will be given.


o Bosnia & Herzegovina: Ozren Laganin

o Uruguay: Magdalena Preve

• Discussion

10:30 - 11:00 Coffee break

SESSION 6 - Facilitators: Milena Kozomara (Serbia) and Rawleston Moore (GEF)

11:00 - 13:00 Capacity Building, Raising Public Awareness and the Sustainability of the NC Process

NCs both require and provide capacity building at the institutional and individual levels. This session

explores how, through the NC process, countries are establishing more lasting institutional arrangements

and better cooperation among organisations with regards to climate change. For example, many

countries now maintain a permanent staff who handle information gathering and archiving, thereby

assuring the integrity of NCs and follow-up activities.


o Georgia: Anna Sikharulidze

o Sudan: Ismail Elgizouli

o Albania: Mirela Kamberi

o Cape Verde: Francisco Correia

• Discussion

13:00 – 14:00 Next Steps and Closing Session

This consists of a plenary discussion on priorities and recommendations, raising public awareness, and

the sustainability of the NC process as we move into the next phase of the NCSP, as well as on the

preparation of future NCs and BURs. The workshop organisers will then make some closing comments.

14:00 – 15:00 Lunch

30

Workshop Participant List

Country Participant Email Organisation

Afghanistan Mr Hamidullah Akbary [email protected] UNEP/Afghanistan

Albania Ms Mirela Kamberi [email protected] UNDP Albania/MoEFWA

Algeria Mr Menaouer

Boughedaoui

[email protected] University of Blida

Angola Mr Abias Huongo [email protected] MINAMB

Bangladesh Mr Sheik Moazzem

Hossain

[email protected] UNDP Bangladesh

Bhutan Mr Thinley Namgyel [email protected] National Environment Commission

Bosnia-

Herzegovina

Mr Ozren Laganin [email protected] Ministry of Physical Planning, Civil Engineering and Ecology RS,

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Cambodia Mr Navann Ouk [email protected] Ministry of Environment

Cape Verde Mr Francisco Correia [email protected] INMG-National Meteorology

Chile Ms Angela Reinoso [email protected] Ministry of Environment of Chile

Cook Islands Ms Teresa Miimetua

Matamaki

[email protected] National Environment Service

Cuba Mr Vladimir Guevara [email protected] Institute of Meteorology

Cuba Dr Luis R. Paz Castro [email protected] Institute of Meteorology

Cuba Dr Eduardo Planos

Gutiérrez

[email protected] Institute of Meteorology

Egypt Dr Elsayed Sabry Mansour

Nasr

[email protected] Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA)

Eritrea Mr Seid Salih [email protected] Department of Environment, Ministry of Land, Water &

Environment

Gambia Mr Lamin Mai Touray [email protected] Department of Water Resources

Georgia Ms Anna Sikharulidze [email protected] Sustainable Development Centre Remissia

Ghana Mr Joseph Baffoe [email protected] Environmental Protection Agency

Iran Dr Mohammad Soltanieh [email protected]

Iraq Dr Majed Radhi [email protected] Ministry of Environment

Iraq Mr Ali AL-CHALLABI [email protected] Ministry of Environment

Jamaica Mr Jeffery Spooner [email protected] Meteorological Service

Jordan Mr Batir Wardam [email protected] Ministry of Environment

Jordan Eng Mohammad Al Alem [email protected] Ministry of Environment

Kuwait Mr Shereef Alkhayat [email protected] Environment Public Authority

Kyrgyzstan Ms Zuhra Avaihanova [email protected] Climate Change Centre

Kyrgyzstan Dr Shamil Iliasov [email protected] TNC GEF/UNEP projects

31

Lesotho Ms Malehloa Jockey [email protected] Lesotho Meteorological Services

Macedonia Ms Pavlina Zdraveva [email protected] UNDP

Mexico Ms Julia Martínez [email protected] National Institute of Ecology

Montenegro Ms Snezana Marstijepovic [email protected] UNDP Montenegro

Montenegro Mr Andro Drecun [email protected] Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism of Montenegro

Nepal Mr Lava Bahadur KC [email protected] Government of Nepal, Ministry of Environment, Science &

Technology

Niger Mr Abdoulaye Issa [email protected] Executive Secretariat of the National Council of Environment for

Sustainable Development (SE/CNEDD)

Oman Mr Riham Rashid Al-Abri [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Climate Affairs (MECA)

Serbia Ms Natasha Martins [email protected] UNDP Serbia

Serbia Ms Milena Kozomara [email protected] UNDP Serbia

Sri Lanka Ms Kema Kasturiarachchi [email protected] Ministry of Environment

St Lucia Ms Neranda Maurice [email protected] Ministry of Sustainable Development, Energy, Science &

Technology, Government of

Saint Lucia

Sudan Mr Ismail Abdel Rahim

Elgizouli

[email protected] Higher Council for Environment & Natural Resources (HCENR)

Suriname Ms Nancy del Prado [email protected] Ministry of Labour, Technological Development and Environment

Turkey Ms Diren Ertekin [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Ms Fusun Turan [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Mr Gurcan Secgel [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Ms Kader Tugan [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Mr Kadir Demirbolat [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Mr Orhan Solak [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Ms M. Sukran Arcan [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Ms Sule Erdal [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Ms Tuba Seyyah [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Ms Tugba Icmeli [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Turkey Ms Katalin Zaim [email protected] UNDP

Turkey Mr Deniz Tapan [email protected] UNDP

Turkey Mr Berkan Toros [email protected] UNDP

Turkey Ms Oznur Oguz Kuntasal UNDP

Turkey Mr Shahid Najam [email protected] UNDP

Turkey Prof Dr Luftu Akca [email protected] Ministry of Forestry and Water Works

Turkey Mr Sedat Kadıoğlu Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation

Uruguay Ms Magdalena Preve [email protected] National Environment Directorate

Uzbekistan Mr Aleksandr Merkushkin [email protected] Uzhydromet

Vietnam Ms Anh Nguyen Van [email protected] Department of Meteorology, Hydrology and Climate Change,

32

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Viet Nam

Workshop Organizers & Resource Persons

Mr Yamil Bonduki [email protected] UNDP

Mr Ruppert George

Colville

[email protected] UNEP

Mr Rawleston Moore [email protected] GEF

Ms Eva Huttova [email protected] UNDP

Ms Gabriela Walker [email protected] UNDP

Ms Susanne Olbrisch [email protected] UNDP

Ms Maude Veyret-Picot [email protected] UNDP

Ms Analisa Munich [email protected] UNDP

Ms Martha Perdomo [email protected] Consultant

Ms Uazamo Kaura [email protected] UNFCCC

Mr Abdulmajid Ghaleb

Abdo Haddad

[email protected] UNEP/ROWA

report ncsp lessons learned workshop 18 12 - un-gsp.org · introduction of workshop participants...

Documents