REDD+, international cooperation in forestry, sustainable forest management; national forest inventory; forest monitoring; remote sensing.
In addition to the comments provided in a previous contribution on document 1, which were aimed at answering the moderators' first question, answers to questions 2 and 3 are provided below.
In response to the second question on the inclusion of the Tier assessment for some of the variables, it is considered that it will be necessary to have more guidance in the document on the guidelines for filling out the FRA 2025 questionnaire so that countries can adequately identify which Tier they are using for reporting; in general terms, it is considered that this assessment provides greater transparency and reliability on the data reported by each country.
If necessary, the FRA team should guide the countries to help them determine the Tier level at which their information is presented.
Concerning the third question, it is considered that although Mexico has the technical capacity to respond appropriately to the FRA 2025 questionnaire, for the moment we are not in a position to increase the frequency of reporting, mainly due to insufficient institutional and financial capacity to collect, analyze and report the information on a more frequent basis. However, countries with the capabilities to do it should be encouraged.
Please, see Mexico's comments in the attached document:
Background paper 1 FRA 2025 - what has changed and why?
In response to the facilitator's questions, these are our responses:
1. We agree on the revised terms of reference, we have no suggestions other than asking FRA team to start its implementation as soon as possible; starting the process with regional NC workshops this year, i.e. in November or early December, will provide more valuable time to national correspondents to start with the national process for collecting data and information, taking into account that reporting process has to be finalized by end of 2023.
2. To the extent possible, implementing tools (i.e. videoconferences, message groups, etc.) for exchanging comments or points of view among NC in almost real-time is recommended. Also, the designation of an FAO regional responsible for providing guidance to NC would be helpful.
3. Please, see the response to question 1; starting the process as soon as possible will make it possible to conclude the reporting process by the end of 2023. Implementing the reporting process within the proposed timeline will be challenging for the NC.
4. Understanding the list of FRA outputs as those presented in section 5 of the document, we agree on these and the proposed timeline for their presentation. We suggest organizing regional/subregional events for presenting the proposed outputs to the extent possible in collaboration with the NC as appropriate.
This response is aimed to address the 3 questions posted by facilitators.
We understand the need for a more frequent report as expressed in different multilateral platforms, especially in those fora related to Sustainable Development and the SDG, however, not every country will be in a position of increasing the frequency of their reports as some will require additional human and/or financial resources to do it. However, countries with the capacity of increasing the frequency of their reports should be encouraged. The FRA team should take into consideration that a limited number of reports with an increased frequency will not be useful to provide meaningful subregional, regional, and/or global trends, as information at this level will be incomplete.
Before proposing more frequent reports, FRA should assess what is the capacity of the countries to update key forest indicators.
On the other hand, the results of the remote sensing survey have demonstrated their usefulness and power to generate aggregated information at the global, regional or sub-regional level on the estimation of the extent and change of forest areas, which could be complemented with information at the same levels obtained from studies or available remote sensing information, among other sources.We recognize that such information might not have the same level of confidence for the countries, but this approach would be very useful to provide subregional, regional, and / or global trends of a set of key indicators.
We consider this a more likely and efficient approach to implement than asking countries to increase the frequency of their reports.
In regard to Background paper 3 "Proposal for more frequent voluntary reporting", we appreciate and acknowledge the proposal formulated by the FRA, which will have to be carefully reviewed by each country to assess whether the necessary institutional capacities are in place for more frequent reporting of the key tables and indicators proposed in the document. It is highly likely that increasing the frequency of FRA reporting will require additional human and financial resources to meet such a commitment.
We suggest implementing a pilot program with voluntary countries and/or regions, starting immediately after the release of the results of FRA 2025 to assess whether the implementation of this proposal is achievable and data reported is reliable.
It should be noted that in order for this proposal for more frequent reporting to be meaningful, it is necessary that the greatest number of countries within a subregion, region or globally are adhere to it. Otherwise, the information may be significantly biased when analyzed at the global, regional or sub-regional level.
On the other hand, the results of the remote sensing survey have demonstrated their usefulness and power to generate aggregated information at the global, regional or sub-regional level on the estimation of the extent and change of forest areas, which could be complemented with information at the same levels obtained from studies or available remote sensing information, among other sources.
These are the responses to the facilitating questions:
1. We consider that implementing the RSS within the FRA process has proven to be successful; the sampling approach implemented by the RSS is the most cost-efficient, reliable, and accurate method for estimating forest area and forest area changes at national, subregional, regional, and/or global level in the absence of reliable and comparable forest maps. Although it is not spatially explicit, its results provided relevant data about the permanence and change of forests and other forest land areas.
We also consider that the methodological approach implemented by the RSS could be useful for reporting forest area and forest area changes at subregional, regional, and global levels more frequently than every five years.
2. In general terms, we agree with the results of the RSS, although we only had the chance to review the results at the global and regional (North America) levels; we suggest that the FRA team could share data at the national level with countries interested in making comparisons with the information they reported. This might increase the confidence in the results of the RSS at all levels.
The RSS could improve its methodological approach and its utility for countries if it includes comparable land use categories (IPCC categories) as those used for reporting activity data within the national GHG inventories. It would be a great step towards the use of FRA information in the context of the Enhanced Transparency Framework of the Paris Agreement. It would also use this information to implement an improved Tier 1 assessment of GHG emissions and removals at global, regional, and/or subregional levels.
3. Yes; we support and encourage FAO to continue with the implementation of the RSS from now on. To the extent possible it would be interesting to pilot the assessment of forest degradation and forest recovery as new categories.
4. Yes; we will be very interested in continuing our participation in the national workshops, and kindly ask to FAO to share national results to compare them with our national statistics on forest area and forest area change. We also agree that the RSS has been helpful in promoting a better understanding of the FRA reporting categories, which also contributes to the harmonization of data reported by countries.
M. Armando Alanis
Comments to document Operational Guidance for improved primary forest reporting for the Global Forest Resources Assessment. Draft 3.3
In general terms, we consider it as a complete document that offers an interesting compilation of available information to support national efforts to assess the extent and location of primary forests according to the FRA definition.
We find this document relevant as it proposes a step-by-step approach, starting from the review of the definitions of primary forests in the countries vs the definition of primary forests in the context of the FRA; we consider this approach to be useful for harmonizing reporting, as it starts from the use of common criteria or indicators for adequate identification and reporting of this type of forests.
In the case of tropical forests, however, this exercise will be more complex than in the case of boreal forests, and some additional criteria may be required; on the other hand, we consider that it will be an important challenge to establish the most appropriate threshold values according to the circumstances of each country. We also agree that the table resulting from the regional workshop for Latin America will be a very valuable input in this process.
Finally, we consider that, in the case of Mexico, it is feasible to implement these guidelines to approximate an estimate of the location and extent of primary forests in Mexico according to the FRA definition.