Presented by Veronique (Niki) De Sy at a workshop on 'Sharing insights across REDD+ countries: Opportunities and obstacles for effective, efficient, and equitable carbon and non-carbon results' from 21-23 February 2017 in Naypyidaw, Myanmar.

1. Developing MRV systems for REDD+
Knowledge sharing workshop Myanmar
23 February, Dr. Veronique (Niki) De Sy

2. A national REDD+ MRV system
National
International
Local
principles and procedures specified
by the IPCC Good Practice
Guidelines and REDD+ framework
needs and priorities of the national
REDD+ policy and implementation
strategy;
support for REDD+ activities on the
ground

3. Area Change and remote sensing capacity 2015
Forest inventory capacity 2015
(Source: Romijn et al. 2015, Forest Ecology & Management)

4. Module 3: Forest monitoring,
measurement, reporting and verification
 How to incorporate multiple drivers of deforestation and
forest degradation into MMRV, evaluation and RELs
 Better AFOLU information:
● better data and assessment on mitigation policy
options
● the role of forests in setting country targets and
planning mitigation activities in the broader land
use sector
 MMRV capacity:
● Stakeholder needs & gaps
● Independent/transparent monitoring

5. The role of Earth Observation
5
Forest information product
Local pilot and
research
studies
Large area
research
demonstrations
Operational
use on
national level
Forest area change monitoring +++ +++ ++
Near-real time deforestation
detection
++ + +
Land use change patterns and
tracking of human activities
++ + +
Forest degradation monitoring ++ + +
Monitoring of wildfires and burnt
areas
+++ ++ +
Biomass mapping +++ ++ -
Sub-national hotspot monitoring +++ + +
Forest type mapping + - -
(Source: De Sy et al. 2012, COSUST)

6. Direct drivers of deforestation
6
1990 - 2005

7. Direct drivers of deforestation
7
1990 - 2005

8. Example Indonesia
8
32%
34%0%
2%
11%
3% 18%
(Source: Romijn et al. 2013, Environmental Science & Policy)

9. Hotspots of AFOLU (Agriculture, Forests and Other Land Uses) emissions
(Source: Roman-Cuesta et al, 2016, BGS)
Emission sources

10. Above ground biomass of woody
vegetation
Source: Avitabile et al. 2016, GCB
• An integrated pan‐tropical
biomass map using multiple
reference datasets
• Novel data fusion approach
• Reduced bias at regional scale
• Possible to apply with own
reference data
Data available at lucid.wur.nl

11. lucid.wur.nl

12. Global wetlands
http://www.cifor.org/global-wetlands/
12

13. Global wetlands
13

14. Change Magnitude
high
low
2005-62006-72007-82008-92009-102010-112011-12
SPOT5: Feb 2011 (band2)
Monitoring
Period:
breakpoint
(mid-2009)
BFAST Monitor
http://bfast.r-forge.r-project.org/
(Source: DeVries et al., 2015, RSE)

15. Interactive monitoring: local expert monitoring
versus remote sensing
(Source: Pratihast et al. 2014, Forests)

16. Interactive monitoring system design
• Operational monitoring in Kafa, Ethiopia in near-real time mode
since Oct. 2014
• Inception for system at national and local level in Peru – joint
research incl. multi-level governance
(Source: Pratihast et al., 2016, PLOS One)
http://www.wageningenur.nl/cbm

17. Community-based forest monitoring
http://www.cbm.wur.nl

18. LiDAR
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNX94wh9KgQ

19. Other resources
 World Bank & GOFC-GOLD training materials
 GOFC-GOLD sourcebook
 Global Forest Observations Initiative (GFOI) Methods and
Guidance Document (MGD) and REDDCompass
 FAO Open Foris software tools
 World Bank FCPF & Winrock REDD+ Decision Support
Toolbox
 BFAST Open-source toolbox for forest change monitoring
 Boston Education in Earth Observation Data Analysis
(BEEODA)
 Interactive, mobile-based forest monitoring tool
(MobIFM)
20

20. Post-Paris and land use sector
• Forests strong in Paris agreement (Art. 5)
• Efforts should not harm food production (Art.2)
• Land use sector is unique in its large negative
emissions potential (forest sinks)
• Bottom-up process
• Monitoring issues:
• Regular stock-taking by countries
• Transparency
• Implementation of climate smart land use
activities

21. There is a need for 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.

22. Independent transparent monitoring
 not a specific tool, a single system or a one-serves-all
approach
 diversity of approaches and initiatives:
● increase transparency
● broaden stakeholder participation
● Increase confidence
 free and open methods, data, and tools - complementary to
mandated reporting by national governments.
 Infobrief: “Enhancing transparency in the land use sector:
the role of independent monitoring”
Online at http://dx.doi.org/10.17528/cifor/006256 or http://www.cifor.org/library/6256/enhancing-
transparency-in-the-land-use-sector-exploring-the-role-of-independent-monitoring-approaches/

23. Summary & looking forward
 Different roles of MMRV & NFMS in REDD+
 Transparency is key for Paris agreement
 Ongoing/upcoming research:
● Emission factors (remote sensing &
field work)
● Drivers of deforestation
● RELs
● Forest sinks and restoration
 Contribution of remote sensing, open data
& tools
National
International
Local

24. Questions?
Dr. V. De Sy
niki.desy@wur.nl
Dr. C. Martius
c.martius@cgiar.org
Prof. Dr. M. Herold
martin.herold@wur.nl
www.cifor.org/gcs/
lucid.wur.nl