may 2014 agriculture global practice...

1

WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture

World Bank GHG Accounting Guidance Note #3: Agriculture Sector Investment Projects (v1)

May 2014

Agriculture Global Practice (AGP)

Disclaimer: this document is a work in progress and constantly updated; some supporting material in annexes and weblinks are still incomplete. The document builds on the GHG Accounting Guidance Note for Agriculture Sector Investment Projects. All comments are welcome, please send these to Ademola Braimoh (AGP, [email protected]), cc: Christine Heumesser (AGP, [email protected])

CPF maintains a website for GHG accounting at http://ghgaccounting. The site contains the latest information and templates to be followed and should be checked when conducting GHG accounting for projects.

1. INTRODUCTION

In November 2012, a group of International Financial Institutions (IFIs), including the World Bank, agreed to harmonize their approaches to project-level greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting. Each institution would follow established methodologies consistent with international best practices, and the methodologies would be applied during project appraisal. GHG accounting is a means to assess the impacts a project is likely to have, and taken together, to measure the overall impacts an institution’s lending portfolio will have on GHG emissions. Investments which are identified as being climate-smart and which lead to similarly positive socio-economic outcomes can then be properly weighted according to multiple criteria (WBG 2012). As part of the World Bank Group Environment Strategy, all World Bank (WB) investment projects must undertake GHG accounting (‘carbon footprinting’) starting in fiscal year FY14 (July 2013). The phasing-in of GHG accounting will be done gradually from FY14 to FY16. The first sectors included in the rollout phase (FY14) were energy, transport, and forestry. From FY 15, GHG accounting will be undertaken for agriculture sector projects and will be required at the project approval stage. Agriculture accounts for about a quarter of anthropogenic GHG emissions, mainly from deforestation and agricultural emissions from livestock, soil, and nutrient management (IPCC 2014). The agriculture sector accounts for nearly 50% of global emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4). Nitrous oxide is a powerful warming agent and is about 300 times more effective at heating the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, and methane has a global warming potential about 21 times that of CO2 on a 100-year timescale. The scale of global emissions from agriculture and land-use change is increasing as a result of population growth, growing consumption of meat and dairy products, and the rising use of nitrogen fertilizers.

90369 P

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

ed

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://ghgaccounting/

2


Several options exist for mitigation of GHG emissions in agriculture. The most prominent of these are improved crop and grazing land management, the restoration of organic soils, and the restoration of degraded lands. Other mitigation options include improved water management, positive land use change and enhanced livestock and manure management. Many of these options use current technologies and can be implemented immediately, but technological development will be a key driver ensuring the efficacy of additional mitigation measures in the future. The global mitigation potential of agriculture and forestry is estimated at 7.18 – 10.60 GtCO2-e/yr at carbon prices up to US$100 per ton of CO2

equivalent. About a third of this can be achieved at prices up to $20 (IPCC, 2014). This note provides guidance to World Bank staff for conducting GHG emissions assessment for investment projects in agriculture. Section 2 clarifies the project types requiring GHG assessment, while Section 3 discusses harmonization issues within the World Bank Group. Section 4 provides information on the EX-ACT tool and resources available at the Bank with which to conduct GHG analyses. Section 5 discusses the practical implementation of GHG accounting in World Bank projects, including the role of the GHG Accounting Help Desk at the Agriculture Global Practice (AGP). Section 6 concludes with the application of key concepts.

2. TYPES OF WORLD BANK PROJECTS INCLUDED

Projects to be included for GHG assessment are all operations classified with the sector codes AB (Agricultural extension and research), AH (Crops), AI (Irrigation and Drainage), AJ (Animal Production), and AZ (General Agriculture). The requirement to prepare GHG assessments applies to investment operations.1 Development Policy Lending (DPL) projects are not included. Additionally, Investment Fund Projects (IFP) which finance ‘non-site specific’ activities, such as capacity building and strengthening of institutions, policy development, and governance are excluded. The assessment will be carried out by the project team with support from the GHG Accounting Help Desk at AGP. The assessment is ex ante, and is conducted only once during project preparation. GHG accounting is not used in monitoring during implementation unless it forms part of the results framework. A selection tool (decision tree) for determining if a particular project requires incorporating GHG footprinting and the appropriate tool to use is presented in Annex I. If a project requires GHG accounting, the question arises whether it will generate carbon credits and as such is regulated by a formal, internationally recognized mandatory or voluntary standard such as the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). If so, the procedures described in this document are to be superseded by those of an internationally recognized third party such as the Executive Board of the UNFCCC’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or the validation or verification body approved under the VCS.

1 This includes also projects financed from trust funds.

3


If approved as generating carbon credits, the measurement and data provided in documents such as the Project Design Document (PDD, in the case of CDM), or equivalent, can be used. Generally, all projects for which reliable and accurate GHG accounting is undertaken for other reasons can use those results to avoid duplication of work. The World Bank has developed a VCS approved methodology that quantifies the GHG emission reductions of sustainable land management practice activities that enhance aboveground, belowground and soil-based carbon stocks of agricultural areas. (http://www.v-c-s.org/methodologies/VM0017). If a project is not regulated by a formal internationally recognized standard; it is subject to project-level GHG accounting. The decision of whether or not project restructuring or additional financing triggers revised GHG assessment will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. In essence, if additional resources are allocated or the scope is varied, a GHG assessment should be conducted. The assessment needs to be conducted for emergency operations as well, though the timeframe is more flexible and assessment may be completed during implementation.

Box 1: Guidelines and Standards

The Good Practice Guidance (IPCC 2003) and the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Emissions (IPCC, 2006) provide general guidance and a framework to estimate, measure, monitor and report carbon stock changes and greenhouse gas emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities. They include definitions and classifications, detailed calculation steps with underpinning equations, default emission factors and other parameters, and reporting templates.2 There are three primary standards for carbon assessment. These include the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the Climate Action Reserve, and the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). These standards accredit and supervise a number of methodologies or protocols to estimate, measure, monitor and possibly credit net GHG removals by sinks resulting from the implementation of LULUCF activities. They do so by providing a number of rules and principles for GHG accounting such as definition of the baseline scenario, modalities for considering carbon pools and sources of emissions, and ways to account for leakage and permanence.

3. HARMONIZATION WITHIN THE WORLD BANK GROUP

The World Bank (i.e. IDA and IBRD) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) have different project preparation procedures and finance different types of projects. However, these guidelines will be aligned to the extent possible with the practices used by IFC. This alignment will be maintained in all future guidance and whenever feasible, similar systems will be applied across WBG.

2 http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol2.html

http://www.v-c-s.org/methodologies/VM0017

http://www.v-c-s.org/methodologies/VM0017

http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol2.html

4


The Global Environment Facility (GEF) and various climate and carbon financing programs also have their requirements for GHG accounting. To promote harmonization of GHG accounting processes and requirements among different financing programs, a more rigorous assessment could be substituted for the ex-ante assessment required at the concept stage.3

4. RESOURCES FOR GHG ACCOUNTING

In selecting tools for GHG accounting, the WB is guided by the principles of simplicity, transparency, harmonization, and credibility, recognizing that trade-offs between accuracy and time and resources required are likely (WB 2013). Among several tools , the Ex-Ante Carbon balance Tool (EX-ACT) has been selected as the primary tool for GHG accounting in agriculture at the World Bank. EX-ACT has been successfully piloted in WB agriculture Projects in Brazil, Russia, India, China, Niger, Nigeria and Morocco (WB 2011). Since then, its application has grown considerably, covering evaluations of projects and programs in about 38 countries. EX-ACT is a robust accounting tool offering the advantage of a broad of scope of GHG analysis. It is user friendly, interactive and participatory. It is very flexible in terms of requirements for coefficients and site-specific data, and can handle land use conversion, changes in agricultural practices and projections over long time horizons. Its outputs can also be used in the financial and economic analyses of projects.

3 GEF5 has a requirement to have an ex ante GHG assessment in Project Information Form (PIF) or in Project Concept Note (PCN). However, there is no formal requirement to use specific tools. It is understood that WB ex ante assessment meets the GEF criteria as such. Decision on applicability under GEF6 will be done separately. 4 Simple, in terms of assessment time and/or resources and application by project task teams; Transparent, in terms of being objective and clear about methodological choices and assumptions; Harmonized, in terms of alignment with tried and tested approaches, including those used by other IFIs; Credible, in terms of the robustness of analytical underpinning, which is also linked to the other three principles (WB 2013). 5 A comparison of GHG accounting tools is provided by World Bank (2011) and Colomb et al. (2013).

5


EX-ACT was developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to provide ex-ante measurements of the mitigation impact of agriculture and forestry development projects. EX-ACT enables estimating the net carbon (C) balance and C sequestration potential of projects which promote the adoption of improved land management practices compared with a business as usual scenario. EX-ACT can be used at the project preparation stage, to assist task teams in refining components and activities to increase the mitigation benefits of projects. EX-ACT is widely applicable in the agriculture sector. Typical applications include crop production intensification, livestock development, food security, rural development, agroforestry, perennial agriculture, forest protection and management, watershed development, land rehabilitation, and bioenergy. The main output of the tool consists of the C balance resulting from the difference between a scenario with a project and a baseline scenario without the project. Though EX-ACT has been designed for the project level it can easily be scaled up to program, sector or national level (Bernoux et al. 2010). EX-ACT consists of a set of six linked Excel sheets, covering agriculture, forestry and other land uses. These six modules allow users to input specific or general information about the project including, changes in land use, agricultural management practices, inputs and other project investments. The EX-ACT modules are shown in Figure 1 and described briefly below:

Figure 1: The EX-ACT modules

6


1. A general description of the project, including information on the location, climate and soil characteristics and duration of the project.

2. Land use change, in which information on land use changes regarding deforestation, afforestation and reforestation, and non-forest land use change is inserted.

3. Crop production and management, to specify agronomic practices, tillage practices, water and nutrient management, and manure application.

4. Grassland and livestock, specifying grassland management and livestock feeding practices.

5. Land degradation that captures information on forest degradation, drainage of organic soils, and peat extraction

6. Inputs and further investment, which captures information fertilizer and agro-chemical use, fuel consumption and electricity use.

A checklist for choosing the relevant study module is presented in Annex 2. The use of EX-ACT comprises 3 steps: 1. A general description of the project (geographic area, climate and soil characteristics,

duration of the project);

2. Identification of current land use, future land use in case the project is not implemented and changes in land use and technologies foreseen by project components using specific “modules” (deforestation, forestation, forest degradation, annual/perennial crops, rice cultivation, grasslands, livestock, inputs, energy); and

3. Computation of C-balance with and without the project using IPCC default values and – when available – ad-hoc coefficients.

The main output of the tool consists of the C-balance resulting from project activities.

The EX-ACT tool and a broad range of additional information can be found at http://www.fao.org/tc/exact/en/. The GHG Accounting Help Desk at AGP has prepared “EX-ACT Quick Guidance for Users,” that provides an overview and explanation of methodology, results and data needs for the application and final use of EX-ACT. It complements the more comprehensive EX-ACT User Manual and it is targeted at leading World Bank users to proficiency in the independent use of the tool. These and other resources are available at http://ghgaccounting.

http://www.fao.org/tc/exact/en/

http://ghgaccounting/

7


5. IMPLEMENTATION

GHG accounting will become routine and part of the regular project preparation cycle and will be considered as one of the tasks conducted by the project preparation team. Resources for the assessment will come from project preparation budgets. Figure 2 depicts the typical steps of the net emissions calculation process.

Figure 2 GHG accounting in project preparation

To implement sustainable agricultural strategies, task team leaders (TTLs), project staff, and consultants must have ready access to expertise, sound appraisal methodologies (such as EX-ACT), to evaluate potential GHG impacts, and mitigation strategies for their projects. The GHG Accounting Help Desk in the Agriculture Global Practice is designed, during the initial year of the GHG Accounting rollout, as a mandatory resource towards these ends. Collaboration with the guidance unit in the development of sustainable Bank agricultural projects will help streamline the understanding of the challenges and opportunities associated with GHG assessment for World Bank agricultural investments. The GHG Accounting Help Desk will provide guidance on EX-ACT and other accounting tools at project preparation, implementation and completion stages, and on other pertinent GHG related issues that TTLs can apply to their projects. The unit will also provide specific guidance for other funding sources – such as the GEF – which also have developed specific GHG evaluation and monitoring requirements for agriculture projects.

Support from GHG Accounting Help Desk at the Agriculture Global Practice

8


6. REPORTING

The measurement of GHG accounting will be conducted at the project level. However, whether or not reporting and dissemination will be at corporate level (e.g. specific annual reports) or at project level (e.g. in PADs) is still to be determined.6, 7 A reporting sample is found in Annex 3.

7. APPLICATION OF KEY CONCEPTS

Because GHG accounting is being introduced at several IFIs, the institutions have agreed on a joint approach and terminology to allow coherence across institutions (WB 2012). However, their consistent application for accounting purposes requires sector-specific agreement and interpretation on the key concepts. Definitions of these concepts are provided in the World Bank Group GHG Accounting Guidance Note (WB 2013). In all GHG accounting, WB guidelines and definitions are applied (WB 2013). Their specific application to investment projects in agriculture is outlined below.

7.1 Gross vs. Net Emissions

Both gross and net emissions will be calculated. Gross emissions refer to the actual project emissions; while net emissions denote the change in emissions as a result of the implementation of a WB investment project. Net emissions are calculated as the difference between emissions in the project scenario and emissions occurring in the corresponding baseline scenario. The approach of the WB will focus on net emissions, although gross calculations are typically identified as well. The reporting of these two types of emissions will be decided separately (see section 6 above).

6 There is no decision yet on whether or not GHG footprints are to be disclosed at the project level. It is not yet [March 2014] clear if some clients would oppose disclosing project specific carbon accounting results. Until final decisions have been made, project teams need to take this in to consideration. 7 In the initial stage of GHG reporting, GHG reporting is an interim, offline reporting. GHG reporting will become part of the Operations Portal at a later stage.

Box 2: The GHG accounting roll-out process at AGP The GHG Accounting Help Desk of the AGP was set up in FY 14 to support the application and the mainstreaming of GHG accounting in agriculture operations. In March 2014, a Learning and Management System, LMS-accredited face-to-face EX-ACT training was held in DC, followed by another for country staff in Brazil in April 2014. More of such trainings may be held at other country locations in future. In addition, an e-learning course is being developed together with the Climate Change Group (CCG). The e-course on EX-ACT will further facilitate the mainstreaming of the use of the tool and provide an online-forum for peer learning with an online expert facilitation.

9


7.2 Baseline

The baseline, also called ‘reference’ or ‘counterfactual’ scenario, is a crucial in GHG estimation, as the carbon balance of a project (“net emissions”) is given by the difference of the overall effect of the project and the baseline scenarios. The baseline scenario is represented by the most plausible scenario and includes the most credible options of land use, possible land use changes and management practices that could have occurred on the land within the project boundaries but without the project actually occurring. The baseline is an extrapolated value of gross GHG emissions as they would have occurred in the absence of the project. It is thus the scenario that reasonably describes changes over time in carbon stocks and GHG emissions within the project boundary in the absence of the proposed project activity. Estimating the baseline is among the most challenging elements of conducting a GHG analysis as it requires an understanding of current land use options and management practices and their evolution, as well as, their extrapolation in a credible scenario. Clearly, the further out in time a project scenario is projected, the more assumptions are needed for a baseline projection. The baseline can be static or dynamic. In contrast to the static elements, which do not change over time and assume that the pre-project assumptions extend into the future, the dynamic elements change over the timeframe of the assessment and are more complicated to develop. Dynamic baseline are typically preferred, but often cannot be achieved due to the lack of data to assess hypothetical scenarios. If data are lacking for credible projections, GHG analysis may opt for a simplified description of the baseline corresponding to a continuation of current land-use or a static scenario (WB 2013). In EX-ACT, users can choose between, or combine, three approaches to generate a baseline scenario. These are

i. No change scenario: is often used in small-scale projects. This is a static scenario as it assumes no changes in the land use and management practices with respect to the initial situation.

ii. Use of past trends: is a dynamic scenario and based on the assumption that without a project the changes in land use and practices will evolve in the same way as in the past. In small scale projects, expert consultation could inform these processes, while in in large scale projects, past trends are often extrapolate from secondary data.

iii. Use of future trends: is a dynamic scenario and estimates the future land uses and management practices based on quantitative data for several or few selected variables.

The default baseline is the current use of the land.

10


7.3 Project Boundaries and Scope

The project area is the discrete site(s) where a project is implemented (i.e., the area under the control of the project component). The scope of the GHG assessment will encompass scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, as decided in the IFI harmonized approach to GHG accounting. It could also include scope 3 emissions attributable to a project, which should be clearly stated in relevant policies, procedures and results. 8 The project boundaries should include all activities, facilities or infrastructure that is being financed. This includes the project area and other components that will be impacted by the project such as inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, infrastructure, and energy consumption) and leakage, i.e. emissions occurring outside the project’s boundaries as a result of project activities.9

7.4 Relevant gases

GHG accounting, such as EX-ACT, ideally considers estimated values of all five carbon pools as well as estimated coefficients of CH4, N2O and selected CO2 emissions. A carbon pool is a reservoir with the capacity to accumulate (remove) or release (emit) carbon. Five carbon pools are usually considered in a GHG analysis including: above ground living biomass, below ground living biomass, dead wood (standing, laying or on ground, or in the soil, e.g. dead root stocks), leaf litter, and soil carbon. Ideally, all carbon pools should be included. However, this depends to a large extent on data availability and default values may be needed.10 The relevant GHG associated with agricultural activities are CO2, CH4, and N2O. As these gases have different global warming potentials, their flows are converted into one metric for accounting purposes, Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (tCO2e), based on their global warming potential (GWP). CO2 has a 100 year GWP of 1, CH4 of 25 and N2O of 298. The main emission sources in agriculture, which can be accounted for in EX-ACT are:

i. Fertilized soils emitting nitrous oxide (N2O);

ii. Cattle enteric fermentation emitting methane (CH4);

8 Scope 1 includes all direct GHG emissions; scope 2 refers to indirect emission from consumption of purchased electricity, heat or steam; and scope 3 includes other indirect emission such as the extraction and production of purchased materials and fuels, transport-related activities in vehicles not owned or controlled by the reporting entity, electricity-related activities (e.g. T&D losses) not covered in Scope 2, outsourced activities, waste disposal, etc. (http://www.ghgprotocol.org/).

9 An example of leakage is a project which reduces deforestation in region A by promoting alternative solutions to wood fuel through e.g. crop intensification, but indirectly results in increasing deforestation in region B outside the project boundary.

10 Usually the default is that harvested wood products are considered emitted on the date of harvest. This is reasonable for fuel wood. However, fiber and saw logs/construction wood have much longer life cycles. Global methodologies are currently being developed e.g. by IPCC. In addition, IFC is developing an approach for handling wood products in GHG accounting. The approach used in WB assessments will be aligned with that of IFC to the extent possible.

http://www.ghgprotocol.org/

11


iii. Biomass burning (emitting N2O and CH4);

iv. Rice production (emitting CH4);

v. Manure (emitting N2O and CH4);

vi. Fertilizer production (emitting N2O and CO2);

vii. Irrigation (emitting CO2); and

viii. Farming machinery (emitting CO2).

7.5 Timeframe

The economic and financial analysis of WB projects often considers 30-year time horizon, and a similar timeframe is used for the GHG assessment11. EX-ACT can handle projections for longer time horizons with user modifications. In the case of forestry projects, this allows ensuring the saturation of carbon sequestration into biomass as plantations progressively reach maturity is accurately captured. EX-ACT allows setting two different time periods for the project, denoted as the implementation phase and the capitalization phase. The implementation phase is analogue to the investment phase and considered to be the active period of the project. The capitalization phase is a period where project benefits are still occurring as a consequence of the activities of the implementation phase.

7.6 Emission Factors

A variety of parameters are critical to estimate carbon stocks and changes in carbon stock. These include factors relating to biomass growth and changes in land use (e.g., deforestation rate). The IPCC provides Tier 1 data for many of these parameters while Tier 2 (and possibly 3) can be obtained from companion documentation to carbon offset projects, or underlying database of tool. The highest available tier should be used.

Box 3: Tiers 1, 2 and 3 Datasets

“Different methods can be used to estimate emissions or removals from most source and sink categories. The selection of a particular method will depend on the desired degree of estimation detail, the availability of activity data and emission factors, and the financial and human resources available to complete the inventory. In IPCC terminology, the lowest ranking or simplest method is “Tier 1”, while more elaborate methods are “Tier 2” and “Tier 3.”

Tier 1 methods typically utilize IPCC default emission factors and require the most basic, and least disaggregated, activity data. Higher tiers usually utilize more elaborate methods and source-specific, technology-specific, region specific and/or country-specific emission factors, which are often based on measurements, and normally require more highly disaggregated activity data. Tier 2 and 3 methods require more detailed data and/or measurements for their application. In cases where a national methodology exists, which is consistent with the IPCC Guidelines, it is highly advisable to use the national methodology. This methodology should be fully documented in order to allow the reader to understand why this particular method is better than the default one proposed by the IPCC.” (UNFCCC 2009 : 9)

UNFCCC resource guide for preparing the national communications of non-annex I parties, module 3: National

11 For plantation projects this may need to be adjusted based on rotation lengths to avoid misleading values.

12


greenhouse gas inventories

(http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide3.pdf)

7.7 Threshold

Usually, a quick ex-ante estimate is conducted to determine whether a project falls over a preset threshold for analysis. In accordance with other IFIs, a threshold of 20 ktCO2eq per year (net) is recommended, i.e. projects that generate net GHG emission reductions (carbon sequestration) greater than 20 ktCO2eq per average year are subject to a further per hectare analysis. The impact of this threshold will be assessed during implementation to understand whether some project types would be systematically excluded from GHG accounting.

7.8 Attribution/cost sharing

In pooled funding, GHG accounting will cover the whole project, irrespective of WB’s share of the overall project budget.

7.9 Estimate ranges

Often at the project appraisal stage, many issues of the project design and implementation are still unconfirmed and the data available are often range estimates. As a general rule, the lower (more conservative) boundary value is used in the GHG assessments. However, if some other value clearly has a higher probability, the team may use the most likely value.

8. UPDATING AND FURTHER INFORMATION

This approach is subject to refinement and expansion based on testing and feedback during implementation. For additional information please visit http://ghgaccounting. For contacts, please get in touch with:

CPF (GHG accounting at corporate level, collaboration with other IFIs):

Jane Ebinger Sameer Akbar

Agriculture Global Practice (interpretation at the project level)

Ademola Braimoh Ijeoma Emenanjo Maurice Rawlins Christine Heumesser Maria Ana de Rijk

http://ghgaccounting./

http://ghgaccounting./

13


Technical Working Group Gabriella Izzi Maurizio Guadagni Tijen Arin Lori Ann Conzo (IFC) Philippe Ambrosi Maria Amazonas Grant Milne Junu Shrethsa (GEF) Riikka Rajalahti Abel Lufafa

14


9. REFERENCES:

Bernoux, M., et al. (2010): Ex-Ante greenhouse gas balance of agricultural and forestry development programs. Sci. Agric., 67(1), 31-40

Colomb, V., et al. (2013): Selection of appropriate calculators for landscape-scale greenhouse gas assessment for agriculture and forestry. Environment Research Letters, 8, 1-10.

IPCC (2003): Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry. Edited by Jim Penman, et al. IPCC.

IPCC (2006): 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T., and Tanabe K. (eds). Geneva: IPCC.

IPCC Working Group III Contribution to AR5 (2014): Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of climate change. Chapter 11. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU). Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/ (May, 2014)

UNFCC (2009): UNFCCC Resource Guide For Preparing the National Communications of

Non-Annex I Parties: Module 3 National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Available athttp://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide3.pdf (May, 2014)

World Bank (2011): Carbon-footprinting of ARD projects: Testing the Ex-Ante Carbon

Balance Appraisal Tool (EX-ACT). Washington, DC.

World Bank (2012): International Financial Institution Framework for Harmonized Approach to Greenhouse Gas Accounting. Available at: http://climatechange.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/IFI_Framework_for_Harmonized_Approach%20to_Greenhouse_Gas_Accounting.pdf (March, 2014)

World Bank (2013): GHG Accounting: Definitions and Key Concepts. Available at: http://intresources.worldbank.org/INTCC/Resources/VERSION1GhgAccountingGuidanceNote.pdf (March, 2014).

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide3.pdf

Annexes

ANNEX I: PROJECT ELIGIBILITY AND DECISION-TREE FOR TOOL SELECTION

1. Eligibility for GHG Accounting projects in agriculture:

Annexes

Annex II: Checklist for choosing EX-ACT modules

Carbon-balance Impact EX-ACT Project

intervention

Main Impact Area Module(s) to be filled YES NO

PO

SIT

IVE

(S

INK

)

A Reduced emissions of carbon dioxide

A1 Reduction in rate of deforestation Land use change

A2 Reduction in forest degradation Land degradation

A3 Adoption of improved cropland management Crop production

A4 Introduction of renewable energy and energy-saving technologies

Investments

B Reduced emissions of methane and nitrous oxide

B1 Improved animal production Livestock

B2 Improved management of livestock waste Livestock

B3 More efficient management of irrigation water in rice Crop production

B4 Improved nutrient management Crop production, Livestock

C Carbon sequestration

C1 Conservation farming practices Crop production

C2 Improved forest management practices Land use change

C3 Afforestation and reforestation Land use change

C4 Adoption of agro-forestry Crop production

C5 Improved grassland management Grassland

C6 Restoration of degraded land Land use change

NE

GA

TIV

E (

SO

UR

CE

)

D Increased emissions of methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide

D1 Increased livestock production Livestock

D2 Increased irrigated rice production Crop production

D3 Increased fertilizer use and over-fertilization Inputs

D4 Production, transportation, storage and transfer of agricultural chemicals

Inputs

D5 Increased electricity consumption Investments

D6 Increased fuel consumption Investments

D7 Installation of irrigation systems Investments

D8 Building of infrastructure Investments

E Decreased carbon stocks

E1 Increased deforestation & timber logging Land use change

E2 Increased land degradation (forests, croplands, grassland)

Land degradation, Grassland

E3 Cropland expansion Land use change

E4 Residue burning, deep tillage, ... Crop production

Annexes

Annex III a: World Bank Agriculture GHG Inventory Reporting Template

Assumptions Baseline Gross GHG Emissions

1

Enter details regarding Land Use Change GHG emissions what is being included/excluded, why, the duration and estimated amount.

2

Enter details regarding Crop Production GHG emissions what is being included/excluded, why, the duration and estimated amount.

3

Enter details regarding Grassland and Livestock GHG emissions, what is being included/excluded, why, the duration and estimated amount.

4

Enter details regarding any Land Degradation GHG emissions (i.e. Scope 3) what is being included/excluded, why, the duration and estimated amount.

5

If applicable, enter details on any Input and Investments GHG emissions what is being included/excluded, why, the duration and estimated amount.

Annex III b: GHG Value Chain Calculations

Total Emissions in t CO2-eq for the different phases of the Value Chain Emissions (tCO2/t product)

Without With

PRODUCTION

PROCESSING

TRANSPORT

USE

WASTE

may 2014 agriculture global practice...

Documents