Topic III: The review week and review procedures

Transcription

1 Topic III: The review week and review procedures Presented at the: REFRESHER SEMINAR ON STEPWISE APPROACH TO INVENTORY REVIEWS AND BEST PRACTICES FOR THE REVIEW PROCESS Daniela Romano, Newton Paciornik

2 Workflow for the review week: Lead reviewers Lead and guide ERT s work on all issues: guide and manage participation of trainees and new experts in the review Conduct introductory briefing to the ERT distribute/confirm roles define steps in review Launch work on transcripts Launch work on zeroorder draft Launch work on 1) Presentations (ICRs) 2) Saturday Paper Lead presentations of findings (ICR) and define completion schedule Lead elaboration of the Saturday paper: send the paper to the Party Prepare the zero-order draft, complete LR QC checklist Agree with the ERT on completion schedule Input from ERT

3 The review week and the review procedure Actions during the review week Lead reviewers: Conduct introductory briefing to the ERT; distribute/confirm roles; define steps in review Considering the significance of individual sectoral tasks, nevertheless it is important to highlight from the start that the review and its ARR are a collective responsibility Launch, lead and guide ERT work: on substantive findings on the review transcripts on the zero-order draft of the report on the presentations (for ICRs) on the Saturday paper (for KP Parties)

4 The review week and the review procedure Actions during the review week Lead reviewers: Guide and manage participation of trainees and new experts in the review: New experts require special support during the review Time management is usually an issue to supervise Need to be encouraged to share their doubts Early identification of deviation of review procedures or delay is ideal

5 The review week and the review procedure Actions during the review week Lead reviewers: Oversee communication between the ERT and the Party experts; provide guidance/advice as needed Help communication ensuring that message from the ERT is clear Help correct any misunderstanding and seeking clarification needed Organize and manage daily wrap-up meetings of the ERT Ensure that wrap-up is not taken as a report from each expert only Wrap-up is the opportunity for early course correction Encourage active participation of all ERT on all sectoral discussions

6 The review week and the review procedure Actions in the review week Lead reviewers: Work with review experts supporting their work, discussing findings Lead ERT presentations of findings to the Party (ICRs only) Lead ERT in the preparation and finalization of the Saturday paper Send the Saturday paper officially to the Party Prepare with the ERT, and the assistance of the Secretariat, as needed, a zero order draft of the review report Agree with the ERT on the report completion schedule The lead reviewer is not a boss (or should it be?)

7 Workflow for the review week: Expert review team Take part in introductory briefing to the ERT Output from ERT Work on review: findings, review transcripts, draft review report,... Complete sectoral parts of the ARR, the Saturday paper, review transcripts and, for ICR, presentations

8 The review week and the review procedure Centralized review Vs In-country review: Requirements of the review are the same Centralized-review Each expert has to deal with more than one Party Difficulty with accessing to additional information from the Party when needed Difficulty to contact Party officials Difficult to assess National System functions, particularly QA/QC and archiving Time delay between questions to the Party and answers implies that early formulation of questions to the Party is essential

9 The review week and the review procedure Centralized review Vs In-country review: In-country review Overall better conditions for the review Possibility to interact with country experts Possibility of multiple meetings and clarifications Possibility to access detailed information including calculation sheets and confidential information Possibility to access QA/QC documentation and check National System functions If time management is bad (e.g. endless country presentations) advantages of in-country review are lost

10 The review week and the review procedure Actions during the review week Review experts: Take active part in the introductory briefing to the ERT; share the preliminary views/findings In the ICR, participate actively in dialogue with Party during the Party s presentations (not just for his/her sector) Participate in daily wrap-up meetings Full participation Opportunity to discuss findings and options (do not be shy, inputs from other experts are important) Opportunity to look at cross-sectoral needs Check schedule and delays Planning ahead

11 The review week and the review procedure Actions during the review week Review experts: Conduct reviewer s work: Review findings review transcripts draft review report Is there an optimal schedule valid for every expert? Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Work on the review transcripts Work on zero-order draft Work on Saturday paper Work on presentations (ICR)

12 Actions during the review week Review the inventory for his/her sector in accordance with the provisions of the UNFCCC (and KP): Assess if estimates are in accordance with IPCC guidelines and GPG Consistency Time series CRF x NIR Comparability Completeness Accuracy Transparency Feed findings to generalist for overall assessment

13 Actions during the review week Focus particularly on: Completeness (NE, NO, NA?, IE? notation keys) Recommendations of previous ERTs Recalculated categories S&A Part II/Review transcript issues Key categories Nevertheless the focus on the issues above, the review must be complete covering all categories and all crosscutting issues Experts tend to focus on categories and issues that are familiar to them; that should be avoided as much as possible

14 Actions during the review week Consistency in the review : Among Parties (increase with experience of experts) Among review years (different ERTs) New ERT can flag an issue not identified by previous ERTs (good inconsistency) Different interpretations of good practice Example: allocation options (e.g. iron and steel industry regarding allocation of emissions to the energy sector or the industrial processes sector) Good exchange among ERT with particular contribution of lead reviewers can help to identify potential deviations of consistency

15 Actions during the review week Findings: All findings should be included in the review transcripts and reported in the zero order draft It is best practice that all findings leading to recommendations or encouragements are finalized in the review week, particularly for the ICR where the findings are presented to the Party on Friday Nevertheless, if an issue is found after the review week and is not identified as a potential problem, it needs to be included as a recommendation or encouragement in the report The worst situation is when an issue is found that should have been flagged as a potential problem, leading to a difficult situation in relation to the report (more in the next presentation)

16 Actions during the review week Identification of potential problems All potential problems have to be identified in the review week and included in the list of potential problems forwarded to the Party on Saturday Inventory problems Underestimations of emissions of Annex A categories for commitment period years (estimates not in accordance with IPCC GPG and or 1996 IPCC GLs) Completeness (categories* not estimated or only partially estimated, including geographical coverage) Transparency on data and methodology (not allowing to assess if the emission estimates are accurate or at least not underestimated) * For which methods are provided in 1996 IPCC GL or GPG

17 Actions during the review week Identification of potential problems Supplementary information KP-LULUCF. Two cases: Accounting at the end of the commitment period: Party has to report KP 3.3 and 3.4 activities anyway. If reporting is missing or if reporting issues are identified showing that the national system is not able to correctly perform mandatory reporting functions, a potential problem is identified Annual accounting: In addition to the reporting problems in the case above, estimates have to be reviewed and underestimation of emissions and overestimation of removals have to be identified. Adjustments may be applied

18 KP-LULUCF Accounting at the end of the commitment period Accounting at the end of CP Examples (current reviews) Party do not include information on KP-LULUCF activities Information that a missing pool is not a net source Insufficient demonstration that removals are directly human-induced for 3.3 activities Identification and traceability of lands (could be a NS problem)

19 KP-LULUCF Annual accounting Annual accounting examples Carbon pools missing Incomplete geographical coverage Information that a missing pool is not a net source Estimates not in line with GPG LULUCF Party do not include information on KP-LULUCF activities Information that a missing pool is not a net source Insufficient demonstration that removals are directly human-induced for 3.3 activities Identification and traceability of lands (could be a NS problem)

20 Identification of potential problems Supplementary information Identification of potential problems Supplementary information (cont.) National System mandatory functions QA/QC Key categories Uncertainty Archiving National Registry KP units and CPR KP 3.14

21 Summary

22 The review week and the review procedure The review and its ARR are a collective ERT responsibility Lead reviewers must work with review experts supporting their work and discussing their findings Briefing and productive wrap-up meetings are essential for the success of the review. Refraining from discussion can lead to wrong findings and too late course corrections It is best practice that all findings leading to recommendations or encouragements are finalized in the review week It is worst practice to identify issues that should have been flagged as a potential problem, only after the review week