No abstract

No abstract

Acknowledgement v Summary vi Rationale and purpose of the study viii highlighting the need for an increase in social safety nets. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) CIFOR advances human well-being, equity and environmental integrity by conducting innovative research, developing partners' capacity, and actively engaging in dialogue with all stakeholders to inform policies and practices that affect forests and people. CIFOR is a CGIAR Research Center, and leads the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA). Our headquarters are in Bogor, Indonesia, with offices in Nairobi

There is a need for independent monitoring approaches (i.e. unbiased data, tools and methods) that stakeholders involved in land-use sector mitigation activities can rely on for their own goals, but which would also be perceived as transparent and legitimate by others and support accountability of all stakeholders in the framework of the Paris Agreement.Independent monitoring is not a specific tool, a single system or a one-serves-all approach. It is rather a diversity of approaches and initiatives with the purpose of increasing transparency and broadening stakeholder participation and confidence by providing free and open methods, data, and tools that are complementary to mandated reporting by national governments.We identify key elements of independent monitoring: • transparency in data sources, definitions, methodologies and assumptions;• free and open methods, data, and tools, which are truly 'barrier free' to all stakeholders;• increased participation and accountability of stakeholders;• complementarity to mandated reporting by countries;• promotion of accuracy, consistency, completeness and comparability of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates. Independent monitoring should be considered an important mechanism for enhancing transparency in the land-use sector. Interested stakeholders can engage and benefit from independent monitoring approaches when starting to implement the Paris Agreement; we provide examples and recommendations as starting points.

We analyzed submissions to the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) from Parties and Observer Organizations on two issues: (i) party and observer positions on inclusion of further guidance on REDD+ safeguard information systems (SIS); and (ii) developing country Party experiences and lessons learned from SIS development. We also carried out a brief survey among REDD+ negotiators. The major findings are summarized as follows:• Some Parties are against the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) providing further guidance on SIS, but the majority of submissions and survey respondents favor further guidance.• Some Parties express concern about the potential trade-offs between further guidance and the promotion of country-driven approaches and national sovereignty.• Submissions both in favor of and against further guidance emphasize the need to minimize the burden of creation of and reporting on SIS.• While developed country Party submissions emphasize the need for SIS to demonstrate adequate governance and safeguard implementation, civil society organizations highlighted issues around equity and participation of local people in the process.• The contrasting views suggest that a viable compromise to move the safeguarding work forward could be to produce guidance on how to develop a country-driven approach.Mary Menton information on how REDD+ safeguards are being 'addressed and respected' and provide a summary of this information to the UNFCCC through their National Communications. Thus, safeguards will be linked to both national and international reporting systems. The Warsaw REDD+ Framework requires countries to provide the most recent SIS summary before they are eligible to receive results-based payments (RBPs). The RBPs system within the UNFCCC was further developed in October 2014, where the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board agreed on a REDD+ RBP framework, which includes submission of SIS summary reports as a prerequisite for RBPs, but without being explicit about how the content of these reports will be assessed or followed up.International guidance for SIS was adopted at COP 17 in Durban CIFOR infobriefs provide concise, accurate, peer-reviewed information on current topics in forest research