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

Readiness Definition of the FCPF  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  Implementation of Demonstration Projects  Legislative and Institutional reforms  Investment phases FCPF Readiness Beyond Readiness

jj Readiness Costs – estimates and proposals Readiness Components Average Cost estimate RPIN* Chatham House est. (average) R-Plan Indonesia R-Plan Guyana R-Plan Panama REDD Management REDD Strategy , Consultations 3651, ,500 Env. Social Assessment 502, Implementation Framework 3161, REL 5162,5006, Monitoring 1,0086,4751,19110,000 TOTAL 3,2325,50018,5683,86015,155 *Assessment of RPins, external and WB internal assessment of funding needs of REDD countries, as of November 2008 (not including larger countries)

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 Financing Gap?

Committed and pledged funds (incomplete list) Organizations/donors Estimates (mil$) 2012* Areas of funding Focus on Readiness Australian Int. Forest Carbon Init.200MRV, Dem Projects,mainly Congo Basin Fund150Forest Management,partly Congo Basin Forest Partnership230REDD capacity building, studiesmainly FAO National Forest Program160 Capacity and Information sharing partly Finland150MRV, inventorymainly Found. (Moore, Packard, Rockefeller)32Small scale, capacity building, research,mainly GEF109Biodiversity. Climate change, degrad.partly Germany788Biodiversity, forest protectionpartly ITTO50SFM, capacity buildingpartly Norwegian CF Initiative2500Demo project, Readiness supportmainly Regional Development Banks580Investments, capacity building, studiespartly TNC38Dem project, capacity buildingmainly UNREDD50Readiness, dem. projectsmainly Others – not complete:bilateral donors (AFD, Denmark, Intercoop., The Netherlands, Japan, USA, UK, etc.), NGOs (WWF, CI, RFF, etc.), research institutes (Woods Hole, IPAM, etc.) private sector (Macquarie,..) * Values from Assessment Report (Norway), Meridian Institute and WB own research

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 Characteristics of Funding

What could be the role of the FCPF? 1.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

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 Table 1a: Summary of National REDD Activities and Budget Main ActivitySub-Activity Estimated Cost Total REDD Working Group $ 500,000$$$ $ $$$$ $ Consultations $ 500,000$$$ $ $$$$ $ Reference Scenario, etc. $ 600,000$$$ $ $$$$ $ FUNDING SOURCES Total$$$$ $ Domestic Government$$$$ $ FCPF$ 1.1 million$$$ $ UN-REDD Programme (if applicable)$$$$ $ Other Development Partner 1$$$$ $ Other Development Partner 2$$$$ $ Other Development Partner 3$$$$ $

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?