EX-Ante Carbon –balance Tool - EX-ACT A Flash introduction FAO EX-ACT team: Martial Bernoux Louis Bockel Uwe Grewer Anass Toudert Laure-Sophie Schiettecatte Roma, 27 September 2018

Agroforestry sub-module (ongoing) EX-ACT Tool development timeline 2008 2009 2010 2011-2015 2016-2018 EX-ACT upgrading and EX-ACT use upscaling to 60 countries Concept note Tool design EX-ACT VC Development of EX-ACT VC tool for the assessment of value chains Biodiversity module MRV tool development For Bank investments and the evaluation and monitoring of small projects (ex-ante, middle term, ex-post) TCS TCI ESA EX-ACT v1 Technical Guidelines User guides Agroforestry sub-module (ongoing) A simple tool to provide rapid ex-ante estimations of the impact of agriculture and forestry development projects on GHG emissions and carbon sequestration, using available data (cost-effective) and fitting within standard project formulation or evaluation format.

One tool, several potential uses 2008 2009 2010 2011-2015 2016-2018 Scaling up and interaction One tool, several potential uses Identifying externalities Anticipating GHG and carbon impacts of agriculture and forestry activities in a development context Strengthening value chains Help to get additional funding Support policy decision-making A tool for teachers

Gross and Net balance in Results 1 Description 8 major categories 2. Land Use Change Deforestation Reforestation Other 3. Crop production Annual crops Perennial crops Irrigated rice 4. Pasture and Livestock Pastures Livestock 5. Degradation Forest Organic soils 7. Investment and infrastructure Inputs Energy Construction 6. Coastal wetlands 8. Fisheries & Aquaculture Fisheries Aquaculture Matrix of change Soil Climate Localization Gross and Net balance in CO2-e ha-1 yr-1 Default agroecological zones and EF and coefficients GHG emissions and removals per hectare vary according to site factors, forest or plantations types, stages of stand development and management practices. It is good practice to stratify forest land into various sub categories to reduce the variation in growth rate and other forests parameters and to reduce uncertainty. As a default EX-ACT and according to the IPCC methodology use the most recent ecological zone and forest cover classifications developed by FAO. FAO is the main source of activity data and emission factors for forest and other land-use categories in Tier 1 level calculations. Examples of terminology from FAO are: biomass growth, mean annual increment, biomass loss, and wood-removal

Default agroecological zones and EF and coefficients What is EX-ACT? You can always use your own coefficients Soil Climate Localization Localization Soil Climate Default agroecological zones and EF and coefficients Default agroecological zones and EF and coefficients

A first look at main data needs Activities foreseen … that may impact on mitigation (GHG reduction/releases) -Different areas of land uses and land use changes in ha Management practices (residue burning, improved agronomic practice, nutrient management, organic management, tillage management) Quantities of inputs used For livestock, evolution of herd Energy consumption Investments in infrastructure What would happen in the future if the project is not implemented ? What is expected in the future if the project is implemented ? What is the current situation ?

The structure and logic Time (years) Implementation phase With project Without project Capitalization phase Difference used to compute the final C balance in tonne CO2 equivalent (ha of land use, number of cattle heads,…) Variable considered x0 x1 x2 3 different dynamics of change (adoption) of practices Benefits of the project t0 t1 t2 Thus xo gives the initial situation of land use and management practices in the project area, e.g. the amount of cropland managed under improved nutrient management. The project intervention (With-Project scenario) will lead to an increase in the improved managed area to x2. In absence of the project intervention (Without-Project scenario) it is instead expected that this increase is smaller and only x1 hectares are managed in an improved way (cf. baseline scenario building). The first is the implementation phase, the period during which active project activities are carried out, which is represented by the area between t0 and t1 This period defines the capitalization phase which lasts from t1 until t2. : Even after the point that a new equilibrium in land use and practices is reached at t1, further changes may occur as the result of the preceding intervention, for instance changes soil carbon content or biomass.

Future without project More or less GHG’s released ? An example... Future without project 7 000 ha of deforestation 1 000 ha of afforestation 1 000 ha annual crops (conventional tillage, burning) 1 000 ha establishment of perennial crops 1 500 cattle under conventional practices Future with project 2 500 ha of deforestation 2 000 ha of afforestation 1 000 ha annual crops (residue mulching, organic manure) 1 500 ha establishment of perennial crops 500 cattle with improved feeding practices More or less GHG’s released ? Rehabilitation of a degraded watershed in order to improve livelihood and increase income for community Will this cause more GHG emissions or sequester more carbon What is the likely impact on C stock change How do we design the project to minimize the CC impacts? The Gross Results of a specific scenario are defined as the overall impact from all GHGs expressed in CO2 equivalents that were emitted or sequestered due to its implementation. The Carbon-Balance is defined as the marginal difference in Gross Results between the project scenario and the business-as-usual scenario.

Gross Results Emissions: 100 000 t 30 000 t Sequestration: -20 000 t -50 000 t The EX-Ante Carbon balance Tool (EX-ACT): Logic and Application

The Carbon balance _ + = The EX-Ante Carbon balance Tool (EX-ACT): Logic and Application

The Carbon balance

Current use of the tool: Examples of EX-ACT trainings About 80 countries which benefited from training workshops More than 70 countries with EX-ACT project or policy appraisals The EX-Ante Carbon balance Tool (EX-ACT): Logic and Application

Thanks! Website: www.fao.org/tc/exact E-mail: EX-ACT@fao.org EX-ACT team: Martial Bernoux, martial.bernoux@fao.org Louis Bockel, louis.bockel@fao.org Uwe Grewer, uwe.grewer@fao.org Anass Toudert, anass.toudert@fao.org Laure-Sophie Schiettecatte, lauresophie.schiettecatte@fao.org

Partners: IFAD – USAID – WB – GEF – AFD – AfDB – ADB – WWF – FAO EX-ACT AFOLU INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO Partners: IFAD – USAID – WB – GEF – AFD – AfDB – ADB – WWF – FAO More than 200 projects US$ 26 billion - 4.8 billion tCO2-e mitigated   - Rural development - Food security - Value chain AFOLU = MITIGATION ENGINE - Sustainable Forest management - Sustainable land management - Climate adaptation - Coastal wetlands & aquaculture - Watershed management -Agroforestry -Livestock intensification -Food security The EX-Ante Carbon balance Tool (EX-ACT): Logic and Application

Applications of the ex-act tool One tool, several potentials Forest Management Projects Food Security and Sustainable Intensification Watershed Development Sustainable Land Management Land Rehabilitation Conservation Projects  www.fao.org/tc/exact

One tool, several potentials Sustainable agriculture Land reclamation in India Conversion of degraded land to agriculture: rice, agroforestry, grasslands, annual crop

Uttar Pradesh Sodic Land Reclamation III Project in INDIA Objective: to increase the agricultural productivity of degraded lands in selected areas of UP Annual crops 228 503 ha Annual crops 228 503 ha Perennial crops 3 000 ha Perennial crops 3 000 ha -16.6 million tCO2-e during 20 years -2.2 tCO2-e/ha/yr Degraded lands 347 754 ha Degraded lands 347 754 ha Grassland 2 000 ha Grassland 2 000 ha Flooded rice 114 251 ha Flooded rice 114 251 ha

One tool, several potentials Coffee value chain analysis - Haiti Revival of the coffee sector in Haiti Conversion of degraded land to agroforestry (mainly coffee) Substituting old coffee plantations with new ones

One tool, several potentials Rice value chain analysis Good rice management practices in Madagascar Importance of adapted rice management practices

Business as usual scenario Some examples from diverse countries - Madagscar Rice production in Madagascar Carbon footprint 4.8 kg of CO2eq per kg of paddy 7.2 kg of CO2eq per kg of rice Current annual emissions: 12.9 Million tons of CO2eq Methane production of aquatic rice (67%) Deforestation effect (29%) Persistence of hilly S&B rice (tavy) Carbon balance Towards an Upgrading scenario for 2003-2020 Business as usual scenario Upgrading scenario -Contuniously flooding rice management -Laissez aller policy letting S&B increase by 3.1%/year Switch of 300000 ha to intermitted flooding and non flooded preseason - improved organic amendment - Stop any increase of S&B rice - Net increase of fertilizers used The upgraded scenario will allow to reduce 5.6 million tons of CO2eq/year between 2003-2020 => 45% due to ↘CH4 (from continuously to intermitted flooding) => 54% linked with reduction of deforestation due to tavy

 Return 24/06/2010

 Return 24/06/2010

 Return 24/06/2010

 Return 24/06/2010