Jump to Navigation

Parties have submitted their views on further LULUCF treatment!

Die ersten Länder haben ihre Stellungnahmen zur zukünftigen Behandlung des LULUCF Sektors abgegeben!

  • You can find the text here/Der Text (in Englisch)
    Text asDownload, 930 kB
  • There is also a draft for the negotiations by the chair (see p.6, 14-15)/der Vorsitz hat auch einen Textvorschlag für die kommenden Verhandlungen formuliert
    Text asDownload, 250 kB

 

Some remarkable statements submitted within this first round:

Switzerland

"As an option, accounting for HWPs could begin on a voluntary basis, assuming accounting for forest management is compulsory, and approach-specific minimal data requirements for use of wood could be formulated. In order to ensure conservative accounting, Switzerland suggests that in this case only wood exchanged between countries that all voluntarily account for HWP be eligible for crediting."

Australia

"Australia supports New Zealandís proposal that the approach only be applied to wood products
harvested from 1 January 2013 from lands that are covered by a given Party in a post-2012
outcome. "

Canada

"Adding HWP as another pool in the accounting will help create that incentive. Treating forest management and HWP in an integrated way in the accounting could dramatically reduce the implications of alternative HWP estimation approaches."

European Union

"Accounting would be confined to wood originating from forests for which emissions and removals are accounted for"

Japan

"Based on the ideas above, it is necessary that the accounting method (for harvested wood products) should meet the following requirement: Conform with the accounting rules on emissions and removals by forest-related activities under Articles 3.3 and 3.4"

 

Seems other parties have not decided how to vote yet. Let us introduce a short checklist for them...

Be aware, in case of 3.4 Forest Management you can consider

  • Gross-net (current approach)
  • Net-Net with 1990 base year
  • Net-Net with forward looking baseline (Canadian proposal)
  • Convention reporting

 

So, you have to think about:

  • Gross-net or net-net
  • Factoring out
  • Natural disturbance
  • HWP (harvested wood products)
  • Caps or no caps (or bars instead of)
  • Voluntary or compulsory

 


Copyright:

Issued by:  Climateforests@blogspot.com

Author: Chris Henschel

e-Mail:

Issue date:  Feb 2009

Link to Article: Origin of this text

---------------


LULUCF - First country submissions 09


 



Blog | by Dr. Radut