Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

1. Forest Carbon Partnership Facility Financing Sources for Readiness outside the FCPF Participants Committee Meeting (FCPF PC3) Montreux, Switzerland June 16-18, 2009

2. Readiness Definition of the FCPF FCPF Readiness • Organize and Consult • REDD Strategy designed • Reference Scenario developed • Monitoring and Carbon Stock assessment/Inventories: • different tiers and accuracy • Using default factors/existing inventory data • Finance additional inventories, permanent plots • Full assessment for forest degradation Beyond Readiness • Implementation of Demonstration Projects • Legislative and Institutional reforms • Investment phases

3. Readiness Costs – estimates and proposals • jj *Assessment of RPins, external and WB internal assessment of funding needs of REDD countries, as of November 2008 (not including larger countries)

4. Financing Gap? • Main differences between early estimates and the estimates in the current R-Plans are cost of MRV (cover more functions that the preparation for carbon stock change detection and reporting) • We also saw a much higher need for consultation and communication expenditures • Outside reviews (UNFCCC technical paper) and internal analysis suggest however that the FCPF contribution can enable an average country to reach readiness, but • Expectations have to be realistic, • There is a need for regional and global support programs • Pre processing images (available to the public), • Regional cooperation/approaches, • Lessons learned from early experiences • Coordination of external finance needs improvements

5. Committed and pledged funds (incomplete list) *Values from Assessment Report (Norway), Meridian Institute and WB own research

6. Characteristics of Funding • Most Funding is going into demonstration project preparation, less into preparing the country to become ready for REDD management at a national level • Identified funding gap in RPlans could theoretically be funded by other donors and supporters, but • Funding activities are not made sufficiently transparent • Unequal distribution of funding between countries • National coordination mechanism is not yet in place to communicate priorities to donors • Uncertainty as of how much funding is dedicated towards Readiness Preparation

7. What could be the role of the FCPF? • Create an Information Platform for funding opportunities: • Work with donors, REDD countries and existing coordination mechanisms (Meridian Institute and others) to create a platform to gather following information: • Type of Grant available • organized by donor and country • Technical background information (funding request & reports) • Implementing partners • Implementation period • Organize Platform as a funding and learning instrument • Request to donors/organizations and countries to respond to questionnaire to be sent out by FCPF over the summer

8. What could be the role of the FCPF? • 2. Use Readiness Preparation Proposal (former RPlan) as a funding coordination mechanism: • First RPlans have not yet used the document for grant coordination

9. What could be the role of the FCPF? • 3. Adequate Sequencing of activities at a REDD country level: • Use the R-PP as a planning instrument for sequenced action (so far not adequately used as such) • Concentrate on most important activities first, eg. • Feasibility studies and gap analysis • remote sensing capacity • consultation and REDD awareness • Institutional arrangements, etc. • What are the main issues that need to be solved to create the confidence for early action?