Kyoto Protocol and Carbon Sinks

1

• The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
• Robert T. Watson
• Chief Scientist, World Bank
• ANU
• Canberra, Australia
• September 30, 2003

2
Good Science Makes for Good Public Policy

• Comprehensive Scientific Programs at the National
  Level are Essential
• International Coordination of Scientific Programs
  is Highly Desirable
• Joint Public and Private Sector Funding of
  Research is Highly Desirable
• International Scientific, Technical and Economic
  Assessments are Essential best scientists must
  be involved
• Conventions Must Recognize the Key Role of
  Research and Science, Technology and Economics
  Assessments and Use the Results

3
The Value of International Assessments

• International assessments can raise awareness
  and prompt informed action by all stakeholders
  especially useful for contentious and complex
  regional and global issues
• Examples
• Long-range acid deposition regional agreements
  in N. America and Europe
• Stratospheric ozone depletion Vienna Convention
  and the Montreal Protocol
• Human-induced climate change UN Framework
  Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto
  Protocol
• Loss of biological diversity - Convention on
  Biological Diversity
• Large Dams

4
International Assessments

• International Ozone Assessments (1981-present)
• inter-governmental - governments approve the
  broad scope of the assessment
• expert peer-review
• highly influential on national and international
  policy formulation
• International Panel on Climate Change
  (1988-present)
• inter-governmental governments approve the
  scope of each WG and Synthesis Report - input
  from NGOs and private sector
• expert and government peer-review, government
  approval of the SPM
• influential on policy process, albeit limited in
  the US
• Global Biodiversity Assessment (1995)
• non-governmental
• expert peer-review
• limited impact on international policy
  formulation lacked the appropriate mandate
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2001-present)
• non-governmental, but tied to intergovernmental
  processes
• expert and informalgovernment review (TBD)
• broad range of stakeholders on the Board of
  Directors - approve the scope and SPM

5
Assessment Characteristics

• Key features
• Assess knowledge not original research
• Conducted in an open, transparent, representative
  and legitimate process with well defined
  principles and procedures
• Ownership and participation by all relevant
  stakeholders
• Governments, private sector, civil
  society/non-governmental organizations,
  scientific community
• Technically and scientifically accurate
• Prepared by the worlds recognized experts, with
  balanced intellectual (natural and social
  scientists, technologists) and geographic
  participation
• Peer-reviewed by all relevant stakeholders
• Policy relevant, not policy prescriptive
• Risk assessment, management and communication
• Present different views and quantify
  uncertainties
• Outreach-communications strategy

6
(No Transcript)
7
Effect of the International Agreements
onOzone-Depleting Stratospheric Chlorine/Bromine
8
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

• The IPCCs Mandate is to produce Assessments of
  the
• Science (Natural, Technical and Socio-economic)
• of Anthropogenic Climate Change

9
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

• IPCC Reports are
•  Comprehensive
• Interdisciplinary
• Peer Reviewed
• Authoritative

10
Structure of IPCC 1997 - 2001
United Nations

• WMO

UNEP
COP/FCCC
Subsidiary bodies of the framework convention on
climate change
World Climate Programme IGBP Global Climate
Observing system etc
IPCC
IPCC Bureau
WGII Impacts and adaptation
WGI Science
WGIII Mitigation
Lead Authors, Contributors, Reviewers
11
Each Tech support unit is in diff country and can
rotate after each assessment
1000s - govt, academic, private inst etc
About 1000 for each assessment
12
IPCC

• Comprehensive Assessments, Special Reports and
  Technical Papers
• TAR Working Group Reports and a Synthesis Report
• WG 1 - the climate system - past, present and
  future
• WG 2 - impacts, adaptation and vulnerability
• WG 3 - mitigation
• Synthesis Report - policy-relevant cross-cutting
  questions
• Working Group Reports
• a series of chapters, each containing an
  executive summary
• a technical summary
• a summary for policymakers
• Synthesis Report
• a series of answers to each of the
  policy-relevant questions
• a summary for policymakers

13
(No Transcript)
14
IPCC

• Summary for Policymakers -- process
• the most critical element of the working group
  reports
• written for policymakers in less technical
  language
• summarizes the most policy-relevant conclusions
• ensures government ownership of the conclusions
• written by the experts - normally the Chapter
  CLAs
• peer-reviewed by all lead authors and governments
• approved by governments line-by-line, but with
  experts in attendance ensuring total consistency
  with the underlying reports

15

• IPCC
• Synthesis Report
• address policy-relevant questions developed by
  governments through SBSTA and approved by the
  IPCC plenary
• synthesized and integrated information within all
  previous IPCC reports
• consisted of a 100 page report and a 17 page SPM
• simultaneous expert and government review
• SPM approved line by line, longer report adopted
  paragraph by paragraph

16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeThird
Assessment Report 2001

• Scientific assessment (WG I) includes
• Summary for Policymakers (SPM) 20 pages
• Technical Summary (TS) 60 pages
• 14 chapters 780 pages
• Report prepared by 123 Co-ordinating Lead Authors
  and Lead Authors, 516 Contributing Authors, 21
  Review Editors and 420 Expert Reviewers.
• 99 countries represented.
• SPM agreed line by line at Plenary
  Intergovernmental Meeting at Shanghai, January
  2001, with delegates from 99 countries and 50
  scientists representing the Lead Authors.

20
Key steps in preparation of Working Group I
(science) component of Third Assessment Report
Bad Munsteriefel Scoping Meeting
Vienna
Shanghai
VII
VIII

• WORKING GROUP I SESSION
• LEAD AUTHORS MEETING
• TS / SPM
• DRAFTING
• INFORMAL REVIEW
• EXPERT REVIEW
• GOVERNMENT REVIEW

Paris
Arusha
Auckland
Victoria
Shanghai
1
2
3
4
5
New York
1998
1999
2000
2001
21
(No Transcript)
22
IPCC LULUCF

• Assessed options for definitions of forests,
  afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation
• Assessed the potential advantages and
  disadvantages of different accounting systems
• Assessed the potential of different LULUCF
  activities in Annex I and non- Annex I countries

• Assessed the ability to measure carbon in all
  pools
• Assessed the economic costs associated with
  different LULUCF activities
• Assessed feasibility of project-based accounting

23
Can the Direct and Indirect Human-induced
sequestration be separated?

• For activities that involve land-use changes
  (e.g., from grassland/pasture to forest) it may
  be very difficult, if not impossible, to
  distinguish with present scientific tools that
  portion of the observed stock change that is
  directly human-induced from that portion that is
  caused by indirect and natural factors.
• For activities that involve land-management
  changes (e.g., tillage to no-till agriculture),
  it should be feasible to partially distinguish
  between the direct and indirect human-induced
  components through control plots and modeling,
  but not to separate out natural factors

24
(No Transcript)
25
IPCC Good Practice GuidelinesTo be next week

• For UNFCCC
• Basis for a Consistent Representation of Land
  Areas
• How to keep track of the land and its carbon
• LUCF Good Practice Guidelines
• How to measure all carbon pools
• Forests, grasslands, managed lands, soils, others

• Kyoto Protocol
• Supplementary methods
• What do we need for the Kyoto Protocol?
• Kyoto lands
• Cross-cutting issues
• Uncertainties
• How to account for forest degradation

26
The Charge from the UNFCCC to look at human
effects on carbon sources and sinks

• (the development of) .. Practicable
  methodologies to factor out direct human-induced
  changes in carbon stocks and greenhouse gas
  emissions by sources and removals by sinks due to
  indirect human-induced and natural effects (such
  as those from carbon dioxide fertilization and
  nitrogen deposition) and effects due to past
  practices in forests Decision 11/CP.7,
  Marrakech Accords, FCCC/CP/2001/13Add.1)
• That accounting excludes removals (of carbon
  dioxide from the atmosphere) resulting from (i)
  elevated carbon dioxide concentrations above
  their pre-industrial level, (ii) indirect
  nitrogen deposition, and (iii) the dynamic
  effects of age structure resulting from
  activities and practices before the reference
  year Draft decision -/CMP.1, Marrakech
  Accords, FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.1.

27
Findings from the recent IPCC meeting in Geneva

• There is no practicable methodology that
  would factor out direct human-induced effects
  from indirect human-induced and natural effects
  for any broad range of LULUCF activities
• Research efforts are addressing some of the
  effects, e.g., carbon dioxide fertilization
• In many circumstances, the direct effects of
  ARD activities on carbon stocks and GHG emissions
  and removals will be much larger than the sum of
  the indirect human-induced and natural effects

28
Communication with the public via the media is
essential
29
IPCC

• Why does or should a scientist engage in the
  IPCC process - pros and cons
• Pros
• working with best experts in the world
• broadens most scientists perspective -
  cross-disciplinary - cross-cultural - global
• will be read and used by a wide range of
  stakeholders - informs national and international
  policy formulation - ensures that the best
  scientific information is used in policy
  formulation
• improves the understanding of the policy process
  and what information policymakers need
• Cons
• travel and salary funds for developed country
  scientists often scarce
• time consuming, especially with double review,
  thus taking away from doing research

30
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

• The IPCC Process develops Ownership of IPCC
  Reports
• by the Scientific Community and by Governments

31
The IPCC the Framework Convention on Climate
Change (FCCC)

• The IPCC 1990 Report provided a sound scientific
  basis
• for agreement of the FCCC in Rio in 1992
• IPCC Reports (e.g. the LULUCF Report) have
  provided important inputs
• to meetings of the COP
• The IPCC Inventory Guidelines provide a technical
  basis
• for the parts of the Kyoto Protocol that concern
  sinks