Background

The enhanced transparency framework (ETF) under the Paris Agreement and its corresponding modalities, procedures, and guidelines (MPGs) provide the details of the reporting and review system that are applicable to all Parties to the Paris Agreement. The ETF will supersede the UNFCCC’s existing MRV process. However, it is not a case of scrapping the old system completely and replacing it with a new one.  The ETF has been built on the UNFCCC’s existing MRV process, which has been constantly evolving and getting more complex over the past 30 years.

Under the existing MRV process, all countries must submit national communications (NCs) every four years. Since 2014, countries also must submit either biennial reports (BRs) or biennial update reports (BURs) on progress and updates since their last NCs. Developed countries are required to submit GHG inventories on annual basis whereas developing countries submit GHG inventories together with their NCs and BURs.

Under the existing MRV process, developed and developing countries undergo international assessment and review (IAR) and international consultation and analysis (ICA) processes respectively, for assessing and analyzing the information submitted in their national reports and their effects on tackling climate change.   IAR process consists of two steps:  1) technical review of the developed country Party’s submitted information in annual GHG inventories, BRs and NCs by international experts and 2) a multilateral assessment of the progress in fulfilling their mitigation targets. Similarly, IAR process consists of two steps:  1) technical analysis of the developing country’s submitted information in BURs by international experts and 2) a facilitative sharing of views of the progress in fulfilling their mitigation targets.  

Under the ETF, all Parties to the Paris Agreement shall submit Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs), replacing BRs and BURs, and undergo a unified review system (technical review of BTRs and facilitative multilateral consideration of progress), replacing the IAR and ICA processes. All Parties will continue to submit national communications and adaptation plans whereas annual GHG inventories submission by the developed country Parties.  Countries that are not Parties to the Paris Agreement, will continue to report and undergo review and analysis under the existing MRV process.

Parties and other relevant stakeholders have recognized that the existing MRV process (IAR and ICA) is functioning well. They underscored some positive experiences and benefits of their participation in the process since its start in 2014.

Description

As part of #Together4Transparency at COP27, the main objective of this event is to discuss how transitioning to the ETF can benefit from and be facilitated by useful insights, experiences, lessons learned, and best practices/approaches gained from the existing MRV process (IAR and ICA).

The event will follow the format of moderated panel discussion addressing a set of guiding questions. The panel will consist of representatives from developed countries (2), developing countries (2), experts (2: one from TTE and one from ERT) and international organizations (1) to offer diverse views and perspectives on posed questions.  To set the scene, the secretariat will deliver a background presentation to highlight key observations and trends of the existing MRV process.  At the end, the audience will also have an opportunity to interact with the panelists.

Panelists

• Yannis Sempos, Greece, isebos@mail.ntua.gr
• Hans Kolshus , Norway, hans.kolshus@miljodir.no
• Daniel Tutu Benefoh, dbenefor2000@gmail.com> or
  Juliana Boateng juliabb21@yahoo.com, Ghana
• Vahakn Kabakian, Lebanon, vahakn.kabakian@gmail.com
• Sekai Ngarize, Zimbabwe, sngarize47@gmail.com
• Shikha Bhasin, Council on Energy, Environment and Water, India, shikha.bhasin@ceew.in

The event will be moderated by Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez, Vice-chair of the SBI.

Set of guiding questions

Drawing upon the past and ongoing engagement in the MRV process, the panelists are requested to address all or some of the key guiding questions:

• What are the key observations, trends, progress made, best practices and approaches adopted in the reporting and review process over the 30 years (such as enhanced institutional and legal framework, data collection and management, methodological improvements, stakeholder engagement) that are relevant to the transition to the ETF ?
• How the existing MRV process is playing a significant role in strengthening national capacities and global collaboration to enhance transparency of climate actions and raise climate ambitions?
• What are the tangible and intangible benefits realized from and opportunities created (such as input for national and global stocktake and policy formulation, political buy-in) by the existing MRV process?
• From the participation in the existing MRV process, what are some of the key lessons learned that are applicable for transitioning to the Enhanced Transparency Framework?
• What are key issues/challenges, as well as potential solutions, based on the insights from exiting MRV process, should be taken into consideration while implementing the ETF?

Agenda