1. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation Forest Carbon Partnership Facility Participants Committee Meeting (FCPF PC 2) Gamboa, Panama, March 11-13, 2009 Procedures for Readiness Plan Review and Approval

2. Outline  Overview  R-Plan review and approval procedures  Schedule for review  Model for R-Plan review  Roster of Experts  TAP 2 objectives  R-Plan template  R-Plan review criteria  Conclusion

3. Overview  Mimics the R-PIN review process of TAP #1  Uses a cycle of draft, comment, and revision  Submission of R-Plan 9 weeks before PC meeting  Establishes Technical Advisory Panel #2:  Review of R-Plans  Technical Assistance  Roster of Experts  Internal Bank review  Web posting of revised R-Plan prior to PC meeting: available to public  3 R-Plan submissions to PC allowed

4. Logic of Schedule R-Plan Process and Schedule: 1.Full draft R-Plan due 9 weeks before PC meeting 2.Informal FMT and Bank comments provided to country in 2 weeks 3.Formal TAP and Bank internal review due 5 weeks before PC meeting 4.Country can revise R-Plan after comments 5.Bank no-objection to R-Plan (Safeguards) 6.Revised R-Plan posted on web for PC and public review 2 weeks before PC meeting 7.PC decision whether to approve

5. W 1W 2W 3W 4W 5W 6W 9 R-Plan draft received by FMT FMT & Bank informal comments provided to Country TAP review completed and sent to Country Revised R-Plan posted on website; Bank no-objection PC Meeting TIME TASK MILESTONE W 7 Proposed R-Plan Review and Approval Schedule W 8 Time, in Weeks FMT & Bank provide comments & assistance + no-objection TAP reviews R-Plan Country incorporates feedback PC reviews R-Plan

6. TENTATIVE R-Plan Approval Schedule NOTES: 1) June schedule compressed 2) PC meeting or approval virtual? R-Plan Draft Received by FMT FMT & Bank Informal Comments Provided to Country TAP Review Sent to Country Revised R- Plan Posted on FCPF Website PC Meeting PC – 9 weeksPC – 7 weeksPC – 5 weeksPC – 2 weeksPC April 20 May 4May 18June 1 June 15–17, 2009 PC 3, Montreux August 24 September 7September 21 October 12 October 26–28, 2009 PC 4, Washington January 11, 2010 January 25February 8March 1 March 15-17, 2010 PC 5, Location TBD May 3, 2010 May 10May 24June 7 June 28-29, 2010 PC 6, Location TBD August 23, 2010 September 6September 20 October 11 October 25-27, 2010 PC 7, Location TBD

7. Models for R-Plan Review Process R-Plan Review Process is Modeled On:  FCPF R-PIN review  UNFCCC Secretariat’s In-Depth Review of National Communications:  5-6 experts selected by Secretariat and known to Country  UNFCCC CDM Expert Panels (A/R Working Group, Meth Panel, Small Scale Panel):  Public panel of experts, but Secretariat assigns experts anonymously to review methodology or project

8. Roster of Experts  FMT uses Roster to hire TAP experts to:  Review each R-Plan  Provide technical assistance in thematic areas, e.g. :  Forest policy, governance  Reference scenarios  Monitoring of REDD  REDD implementation framework  Social and environmental impacts  Experts in RoE identified by Participants and others. Includes global balance of:  Subject specialists  Specific country expertise  Living Document  100 experts at present  Revised as new themes for technical assistance are identified, and more countries enter R-Plan development  Inputs from PC welcome Roster of Experts (RoE)

9. Screen Shot of Roster of Experts on FCPF Web Site

10. TAP 2: Objective 1 Review of R-Plans  4 - 6 (<10) individual experts selected by FMT from RoE to constitute ‘TAP Country R-Plan Review Team’  Cross-disciplinary expertise  1 expert with FCPF R-PIN review experience (lead reviewer) + 1 expert with country experience (public)  Other experts from RoE (anonymous)  Review methods: desk review, country conference calls, meetings, occasional country visit  Avoid expert conflicts of interest  Final TAP Country R-Plan Review Team synthesis made public (as for R-PINs)

11. TAP 2: Objective 2 Technical Assistance and Expertise  Experts selected by FMT from RoE to provide technical expertise in a range of REDD issues  REDD methods development (e.g., how to set reference case)  Limited assistance in response to country request (e.g., how to set up national GHG registry)  Participation in expert processes, workshops, meetings on REDD

12. FMT Role FMT Management of the TAP  Manages contracting, work, and quality of products  Encourages consistency across R-Plan review teams and products  Facilitate knowledge management to Participants and policy process  FMT consults with FCPF Bureau on major decisions or commitments of resources  Remuneration: standard Bank practices  Contract period:  March 15, 2009, to June 30, 2009  Extension possible to June 30, 2010

13. Current R-Plan Template (v.2) The REDD Country explains how it plans to: 1.Assess Land Use, Forest Policy and Governance * 2.Organize its REDD Readiness Management ** 3.Design its national REDD Strategy 4.Design its REDD Implementation Framework 5.Assess the Impacts of REDD Strategy 6.Assess the Investment and Capacity Building Needs 7.Establish its national Reference Scenario 8.Design its national Monitoring, Verification & Reporting System 9.Design a Readiness Management System (optional) * The actual assessment is required ** A Consultation and Participation Plan is required

14.  R-Plan Template v.2 available since October 2008 at http://wbcarbonfinance.org/Router.cfm?Page=FCPF&FID=34267&ItemID=34267&ft=Do cLib&ht=43249&dl=1  French and Spanish version of the R-Plan now also available  Comments received and reviewed  Efforts to streamline template; substance does not change  Outline of R-Plan Template v.3 proposed for PC consideration  There are costs and benefits to the revision  If outline approved  Outline will be fleshed and translated in French and Spanish  R-Plans submitted under v.2 will be grandfathered R-Plan Template Revision?

15. Proposed Revised R-Plan Template (v.3) The REDD Country explains how it plans to: 1.Prepare and Consult * 2.Design its national REDD Strategy and Implementation Framework ** 3.Establish its national Reference Scenario 4.Design its national Monitoring, Verification & Reporting System 5.Manage Readiness Process Please see hand-out for further details * Including a Consultation and Participation Plan ** Starting w/ assessment of land use, forest policy & governance

16. Timeline of Readiness Work and R-Plan Components Prepare & Consult Develop REDD Strategy & Implement. Framework Reference Scenario: Stage 1 Management of Readiness Process Ref. Scenario: Stage 2 Design MRV: Stage 2Design MRV System: Stage 1 STAGE 1: Prepare, Consult, and Draft Full R-Plan Stage 2: Refine Full Readiness Package, as Policy Clearer Readiness Process

17. Cross- Cutting Criteria (1) R-Plan Review: 6 Cross-Cutting Criteria for review of entire R-Plan  Criterion (i): Ownership, transparency, and dissemination of the R-Plan by the government and relevant stakeholders  Criterion (ii): Coherence between the proposed activities in R-Plan (including early ideas on REDD Strategy) and existing national and sectoral strategies  Criterion (iii): Completeness of information and data provided

18. Cross- Cutting Criteria (2)  Criterion (iv): Clear responsibilities for the execution of REDD activities to be financed  Criterion (v): Feasibility of proposed activities to achieve Readiness to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, and their likelihood of success in achieving Readiness (once fully funded and implemented)  Criterion (vi): Variety of approaches

19. Cross-Cutting Criteria and Standards to Be Met (1)  Criterion (i): Ownership, transparency, and dissemination of the R-Plan by the government and relevant stakeholders Inclusiveness of reasonable consultation and participation by major stakeholders:  Consultation process for R-Plan development thus far, and the Consultation and Participation Plan included in the R-Plan (which looks forward in time)  Cross-cutting nature of national working group on REDD (including major stakeholders and key government agencies)  Process for developing REDD strategy

20.  Criterion (ii): Coherence between the proposed activities in R-Plan (including early ideas on REDD Strategy) and existing national and sectoral strategies R-Plan makes clear reference to country sector strategies and identifies major potential synergies or inconsistencies with REDD plans and process Cross-Cutting Criteria and Standards to Be Met (2)

21.  Criterion (iii): Completeness of information and data provided  The R-Plan reviews key information and studies available, and performs gap analysis of information or studies needed.  ToR or plans provided for all components, + implementation budget and schedule Cross-Cutting Criteria and Standards to Be Met (3)

22.  Criterion (iv): Clear responsibilities for the execution of REDD activities to be financed A clear, inclusive, and functioning national REDD working group process and set of institutional arrangements for executing the R-Plan studies and activities is presented Cross-Cutting Criteria and Standards to Be Met (4)

23.  Criterion (v): Feasibility of proposed activities to achieve Readiness to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, and their likelihood of success in achieving Readiness (once fully funded and implemented) Includes adequate description of early design of MRV system, including rural livelihoods, and conservation of biodiversity (full MRV design may occur at a later stage, informed by the needs of the policy process) Cross-Cutting Criteria and Standards to Be Met (5)

24.  Criterion (vi): Variety of approaches (defined as approaches that can contribute to the learning objective of the FCPF):  Approaches to tackle deforestation and forest degradation  Innovative and/or advanced concepts of MRV  Benefit sharing  Regional leadership in addressing REDD  Approaches that are inclusive and combine with livelihood enhancements, incl. on the role of forest-dependent indigenous peoples and other forest dwellers, focus on land rights, etc. Cross-Cutting Criteria and Standards to Be Met (6)

25. Specific Component Standards (1) R-Plan Component, Requirements, and Standard to be Met 1. Land use, forest policy and governance quick assessment: Component Standard: Assessment identifying major land use trends, and deforestation and degradation drivers. Provides insightful assessment of efforts to reverse these trends and their outcome, and identifies significant gaps, challenges, and opportunities to address REDD 2. Management of Readiness: 2a. Convene National REDD Working Group: Description of the existing or proposed coordination of REDD activities nationally, adequately integrated with the existing land use policy dialogue, that is relatively inclusive of major government agencies and other major stakeholders that likely need to be involved in addressing REDD. The functions, membership, decision making process, dissemination of information adequately described 2b. Prepare a REDD Consultation, Participation, Outreach Plan: Plan to achieve a reasonable process of continual consultation, participation, and outreach that ensures stakeholder involvement in REDD deliberations and implementation at both the national and relevant subnational scales

26. Specific Component Standards (2) 3. Design the REDD strategy: 3a. Assess candidate activities for a REDD Strategy: ToR or other information is provided to elaborate how the country plans to move from this preliminary assessment to the elaboration of a fuller, more complete and adequately vetted REDD strategy over time 3b. Evaluate potential additional benefits of REDD, including biodiversity conservation and rural livelihood: ToR or plan for how to more fully assess these potential benefits and impacts is provided, that seem likely to adequately address the integration of these two benefits over time in relation to the REDD strategy and evolving monitoring system 3c. Trade-offs Analysis: ToR or plan to further develop the ability to conduct such a trade-off assessment is presented that seems likely to eventually ensure adequate assessment of such trade-offs 3d. Risk assessment of your REDD strategy ToR or plan to further elaborate such barriers and risks is presented that seems likely to allow their full evaluation and adequate incorporation into the eventual REDD strategy

27. Specific Component Standards (3) 4. REDD implementation framework: ToR or a plan to further elaborate institutional arrangements and issues relevant to REDD in the country setting that identifies key issues, explore potential arrangements to address them, and offer a work plan that seems likely to allow their full evaluation and adequate incorporation into the eventual Readiness Package 5. Assess the social and environmental impacts of candidate REDD strategy activities: Identify potential key impacts, and present a ToR or plan to evaluate how to address those impacts via studies, consultations, and other methods 6. Assess investment and capacity building requirements: Present ToR or a plan for how to estimate investment and capacity needs to eventually implement the REDD strategy

28. Specific Component Standards (4) 7. Develop a reference scenario of deforestation and degradation: Present ToR or plan for how the reference scenario will be developed, including major data requirements, early ideas on which methods to use, and how a reference scenario would be presented for consultation 8. Design and implement a monitoring, reporting and verification system for REDD: ToR or plan for how the monitoring, reporting and verification system will be developed, including major data requirements, early ideas on which methods to use, and how the system would be presented for consultation. Early ideas on how the system could incorporate monitoring of rural livelihoods, biodiversity, and social and environmental impacts into an evolving REDD monitoring system 9. Design a system of management, implementation, and evaluation of Readiness preparation activities (optional): Present early ideas on how the R-Plan and Readiness activity generally would be implemented and managed, and what evaluation process and criteria and indicators would be followed

29. Conclusion Include in PC Resolutions:  No-objection to proposed TAP 2 Terms of Reference for R-Plan review and technical assistance  No-objection to proposed Roster of Experts  No objection to proposed R-Plan approval process Other Decisions:  Need to revise R-Plan template?

30. Annex: FMT’s Roles in R-Plans From FCPF Charter:  Assist REDD Country Participant to prepare and implement R-Plan (at Country’s request)  Propose members and ToR for TAPs  Coordinate with relevant international bodies  Ensure compliance with World Bank Operational Policies and Procedures  Encourage knowledge sharing