 So, hello everybody. Welcome, Ilaya. We're waiting for you. Yes. Yes, now we will start. So good afternoon, everybody. Thanks for being here. It's not easy to find it. I know it's also a long week. Some people have left already, but we have also quite some participation online. So very happy and pleased to be here. Pleased to have this wonderful panel as well. So I will just say a few words on the setting of this side event. We don't have so much time, but I hope it can have a nice discussion. For the people who are in the GFY meeting, we have been talking all the time on mitigation mainly, although we also heard quite some adaptation popping up, but we didn't really tackle it. So I'm extremely grateful to have the colleagues at OCB who have done a lot of work on this, and so they will share with us what also has been done in agriculture to see what's there for forest and how we can tackle this. So we've been talking about better data, better decisions. We've talked a lot about all the data available. We heard also a lot about the AI. The ideas, do we get better decisions because we have a better data for the adaptation? One of the outcomes was that there's still so much work to be done. So really the efforts on adaptation should be really popped up. And so that's also one of the examples of the top CCOs, which I think Antonia will talk about. So one of the questions also in this whole meeting was a lot on definitions. So what is a forest? What is mitigation? What is adaptation? So I just took the IPCC definition. So adjustment in natural human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or explodes beneficial opportunities. So it says a lot and it also says it's very abstract. So we're going to go into detail and Elisa and Marcel will talk about what they've been doing. So the monitoring, not too much about all the money, the funding for people who are following the cops and also the negotiations. So you might know that this funding has scaled up since Glasgow. The adaptation needs, although following the UNEP report, they say that there's a lot of billions needed. They're going to detail how much we need a lot of money, let's say. And then the tracking of progress, the monitoring systems and adaptation measures, there's a really gap and a clear mandate. So this is also why under supervising of Amy Duchel in the forest and climate team, this is a new work stream we really want to explore and see what we can offer to the countries and what the country's already doing so how we can collaborate. So we heard a lot on the NFMS systems, also the adaptation, we have the M&E system. So monitoring and evaluation to see where countries stands, what they would need it. Antonia is going to talk about what's already available. We all know that remote sensing can play a role there. But as also said before, there's a lot of data. What can we do and how can it be linked? So why FAO? So for people who were in the GFY meeting, you heard maybe already too much about open forest. So let's say in a nutshell and for countries working with it. So I know also Uganda has worked with it. So we have this open forest suite of modules. Won't go into all the details. Some of you have been in C-PAL events. There was EarthMap, the Collect Earth. So there's a lot of tools that's all freely available, can be downloaded, they can be supported with it. So hopefully also for the adaptation we can tweak and come up with modules which really fit the country needs. So C-PAL, I won't talk about it because you heard it a lot. People who really want to know more, please come and see me. But I think everybody knows about it. You can also see all these logos. So it's not our own thing. It's really collaboration. We're not a research institute. So we collaborate with academia on this. And then all the different platforms. So we heard this as well. We heard on the UNFCCC, we had about the standards. So countries, you, the countries here know they have to report to so many different frameworks. Very often there's data which for the different frameworks is generated differently. One of the things at least FAU wants to help with is to have one source of data which then can report to all the different frameworks, which of course would be a better way of using money. So the wishlist adaptation. What can we do? So hope to hear a bit more on what has been done, especially for the agriculture. We're talking a lot in this whole meeting on the change in land cover and use. We heard also from some countries, they want to have more on the soil properties because we're not only talking about the above ground biomass. So remote sensing with long data records to see what was in the past and also what's going to be in the future. And then also the help with the public and the private also for adaptation. Most likely that's going to be an issue. So then why do we think for FAU at least we can try to help you in case there's a need because I said also in the meeting this week, I think FAU only wants to come up with things that are useful for countries. Otherwise our role is redundant. So the adaptation monitoring in the NAPS. So we have done a study. So Antoine is also here. So there has been a study to see how much MNE is already in existing NAPS. And so based on that to see really a new area of work to build on existing platforms and the FAU tools in order to help countries to also monitor adaptation. So I said proof of concept to be developed. So we will work in some pilot countries. But again, that's not FAU is going to implement and impose it's up to really needs of countries to contact us and to work with us on that. I think this is my last slide. So now we have a few presentations and I think we're a bit short on time because of the short break. So we're going to have first Elisa from OCB. She's going to talk what they have been doing on agriculture adaptation. So this is yours. So he's here. Thanks for the introduction. Good afternoon to everybody. It's a pleasure to be here. So we'll be giving a short overview of the work we have been doing under two programs. We will start the work on monitoring for adaptation under the NAPAG integrating agriculture national adaptation plan program and then we are continuing under the current program SCALA. As you can read scaling up climate ambition in land use and agriculture through NDC NAPS. Our journey started with the development of this technical guidance note to guide countries on strengthening their M&E systems and national level to report on agriculture and for agriculture here we intend crops, livestock, forestry and fisheries. So this guy does not really help us because hard line seven different steps to advance countries on developing the national M&E systems considering that different countries start from different starting points. So we deal with countries that have policy that are very well developed with regard to for example they have a well-defined NAP for the agricultural sector. We have countries that already started in the working monitoring and evaluation like project level and trying to design a system to report at the national level. So without going too much into detail in the different steps but it's critical light that under the first two steps it's important to understand the adaptation planning process so the policy context in which we operate because the exercise of going through the existing policies the NAP, NDC, the climate change strategies, the sectoral strategies is useful to understand which are the targets and the objectives to be monitored. And under step three it's about understanding the scope and the purpose and the focus of the M&E system. Step four it's about the actual development of the system which also include the identification of the indicators, the data, the information needs and in particular the institutional roles with regard to data collection, data management and data analysis. The M&E plan which is developed under the last step helps the actual operationalization of the system so basically help understanding the frequency of measurement, how to record the measure, how to define the baseline who is responsible for using the results of the M&E system which is also crucial. So let's look at the concrete case so you will understand better how these seven steps were applied into different countries. In Guatemala we've been working very closely with, this was a joint program match by FAO-UNDP so we worked with the country-based offices of UNDP and the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Environment while making this, I'm stressing this point because the context specificity of adaptation requires very ad hoc selection of the dimension to be monitored that are country specific, context specific but very broad at the same time because when we talk about adaptation in agricultural sector as you will see from indicators we really have to cover the difference of sector, each sector has its own priorities so involving a broad range of stakeholders was crucial. So let's look at the different steps so on the step one and two as I was mentioning before we have done this desk review of the national plants and policies so we really screened the goals, the targets, the objectives and the commitments of the nation within the UNFCCC so what is stated, what the country is trying to achieve under their NAPs and the MVCs and the national policies on climate change. We've done specifically for the agricultural sector because the goal was to develop a mere agriculture which is the acronym from this penny which is basically a multi emulation reporting system. On the step three and four here you can see a simplification of the MERS system. Basically the focus was on key agricultural sector as I was mentioning before so agriculture lies to forest stream fisheries with food securities as cross cutting theme. This is because this system basically was thought to help the tracking, the implementation of the adaptation agricultural component of the NAP but also on the step three and four we've done this exercise of taking stock of the information that the country was already monitoring since the country had already two systems, two MNIS system. One for the is there was a planning monitoring evaluation system for the MAGA so that's why in the future you see SIPSE, it's the Spanish acronym for Systema di Planificacion Seguimento Evaluacion and an emerging national system for climate change. On the step five we continue the exercise by identifying as I was saying the existing data and defining new indicators that were specifically important for tracking the adaptation practices so the focus was on the implementation and monitoring of the practices that were already ongoing either they had the budget already budgeted by the MAGA or the mar and the two different ministries or were already implementing the contents of programs. Under step six and seven this was a key in this picture you can see the institutional arrangement so it was about defining the responsibility with regard to generating gathering and systemized information and how to use this information. So in the case of Guatemala this point was the idea of using this information for at the operational level so extension workers would have used this the technical staff and national level within the ministry so a strategic level and the political level so the high level decision makers with the main use of the results of the M&E system. Now a quick overview of Uganda. Here you can see the components of the nap for the agricultural sector and the performance dimension that this M&E framework intends to monitor. I'm bringing Uganda because Uganda has some interesting you help us narrowing down some is a key element of success so it worked well because first of all it was designed on the basis of extensive stakeholder consultation it was based I was mentioning on the stop taking exercise of objective targets and practices included indicators that were measuring they were already measured within available data and so can be produced with minimum effort was so in the way to be already included in the existing M&E framework and was conceived and this is important for reporting on adaptation at the national level at the international level so you use both this bottom up top down approach in the sense that the consultation involved the people that would have been implementing the M&E system in light of using the results to inform progress towards the design of programs and policies and national levels well as report the progress of Uganda in under UNFCCC processes and also key point was the definition of the protocols for collecting data at the local level and the testing of the system in practical terms. That's all from my side. Sorry, I had this last slide in which I am here indicating that if you would like to read more we have three case studies on the work we have done in Guatemala, Colombia and a multi-country case study for additional reading. Thank you. Thank you so much, Elisa, was very enlightening. I think we have time for a few questions. It was all very clear. Well maybe I can start, have a small question. This meeting was a lot on the link remote sensing data and field data and so you mentioned quite some indicators. So can you elaborate a bit on the data that was gathered with remote sensing? Do you have a view on that? How useful it has been? Is it more existing data from in the field? Yes, this is a very good point. In this system there wasn't specifically the use of remote sensors as far as I know because it was all about using the information that was already gathering the extension workers in the field but we are advancing with regard to this because we are writing now a paper on adaptation metrics and we are suggesting the use of some SDG indicators including those who are on forestry and the idea is really to use the information that FAO already does and collect through the remote sensing and build. So the suggestion is to explain how to unpackage the global golden adaptation, three elements of the global golden adaptation, identifying the SDG indicators can be that are relevant for the national context to report on reduced vulnerability, adaptive capacity and resilience and within the SDG's indicators as monitor land use change, many of them make the use of remote sensing. So this is like forward looking. To hear it because it's a very hot topic and a lot of countries really want to move into that. Thank you so much. Do you know if there's a country of question? Yeah. Thank you for the presentation. From the various studies in case studies you have mentioned, can you identify some key indicators that fit maybe not all the situation but are key to consider for adaptation policy? And could you also give some flavor or example about how those national governments consider this with data and use them for further policies? Yes. Okay. So the both questions are very tricky question because there is an international debate on which are the key indicators for adaptation. So this is like you are asking me to answer a question that is not answered in international fora. But we can suggest we can identify some like general let's say metrics or classes of indicators that will help understanding whether you adapt or not and can be monitored that are meaningful if you monitor across the along with the climate data. So for example the status of the natural resources and the ecosystem because they provide key ecosystem function and they are key for resilience in adaptive capacity. So status of forest conservation for example or status of forest land use change. So if you track some water availability for example or status of conservation of genetic resources and then there are all the indicators there in the describes the level of manage the implementation management practices management practices with regard to natural resource management again biodiversity conservation that was today this internet event super interesting event about the linkages within climate change and biodiversity conservation. So all the managers they implemented the level of efforts to as implementation of the national policies level of integration of adaptation in the sustainable development agenda. So the process indicator outcome based indicator really the span is very very broad as you can see so but in the paper we outlined some of the key classes and metrics and then how countries use the results the results if the results are for example with regard to the actual effectiveness or specific adaptation practices for example water resource management practices I'm thinking about the dry corridor in Guatemala the degree of effectiveness of these practices within the current context of climate variability gives a sense of whether the implementation of your policies are working or not and then they are considered in light of future climate change scenarios so how we are dotting at the within the current climate change scenario and where this would be potentially still feasible and effective in the long term. Okay thank you very much Elisa. So then to talk about international fora I think this is a very international forum and we have now the honor to have Marcel Birnout who's working with us here in FAO which is also the IPCC focal point so he will talk about what IPCC says on adaptation monitoring strategies. Let me start to save time because I'm taller than Elisa. So Inge kindly asking me to to say a few words on what I know on how IPCC is taking this of adaptation just to say so I am FAO we were close with IPCC I'm not the only one Inge also was associated with me on other here in the room I know that you are also part of the IPCC process that is quite a complex process so I have only very few slides and I hope that the debate will be perhaps the question will be so more interesting. So where is adaptation in the IPCC agenda? So just back to Basis and just for all to be fully aware IPCC you know most of the times there is three working group no there was four working group so and we have the name of the working group so on on the science what we know on climate the cause radiative forcing so you know where the greenhouse gas are from then you have a working group two that is really on adaptation on vulnerability so you have already you can see a lot of work on adaptations because it's not new so the last you have on IPCC you can see below the produce regular the last line assessment report so we have an understanding where we are in term of adaptation globally per sector with some question cross cutting issues and so on framework that exists so IPCC is doing some kind of compilation IPCC is never producing new science they are compiling available information so what front center it is represented is key because basically IPCC can take this on board so basically this is at most important that we have also doing the the war then you have the famous working group three that was the last report on mitigation where we are on abatement of greenhouse gas or also the sink part that for for a sector is at most important on you have the TFI on the TFI is that that's for some national greenhouse gas inventories might be when they will change the name we'll see at the end my last slide it's to produce methodology metrics guidelines that can apply to all countries to have some common way to report things on common way to understand what the other is doing so and I will perhaps explain a little bit later so those three working groups work sometime together for special report so they can decide there was a special report 1.5 so here 1.5 the target policy agreement was mostly mitigation but there was a special report on the on land on here all the working group was implied on the TFI also so you can have a different arrangement between the working group to address the different issues here you have I did nothing it's not me I'm wait a moment I did not touch nothing it's you so if you need some positive vibes this is a guy so it can work but if we need you so okay so you can see here on one sentence basically what IPCC is doing in terms of adaptation so I will not read you can read all it's really simple trying to compile a different aspect state knowledge tools resources what we have on also planning implementation so on you can have a source some group so here I put one task group so you might remember some of you the TGK that was one of the first group working on adaptation that group was extinguished because basically also IPCC is following new development so basically that group have been reframed reshaped with a new term of reference that is knows the task group on TG data so mentioning the importance so to have data on Elisa show show show that and it was the question we need that that was a side adaptation on what we're doing to face adaptation to introduce adaptation strategy we need data so that's why that group is very important on also you have the group is also responsible or have a link with the IPCC data distribution center so all of you can access also access the this is a data that were used to produce a report so if you want also to do some kind of your own analysis to understand better you have access to all those data at regional level not at country level but you can if you have a 90 person extract it's not a very complex but perhaps my only key message here IPCC does not provide a one-size-fits-all methodology there is no methodology this is you have all have heard about a national green or gas guideline so there was one common methodology so but for adaptations the moment there is nothing but when we look outside IPCC on the UNFCC side because IPCC is an independent body it's a science but intergovernmental but it reacts to requests of UNFCC UNFCC this is the body that deals with policy decision binding decision on climate so UNFCC can request or ask IPCC to develop something then IPCC will develop then up to IPCC to decide what they do with they welcome they use it mandatory or not so they can do a lot so sometimes it's complex but so you have those two bodies and there is a new global goal on adaptation on UNFCC if you look and I will be short here basically it was mostly for the first 10 years mostly on mitigation those are really moving also on a more realistic vision with embedding adaptation lose and damage climate justice or all those different aspects that are also very important to face climate change so now you have much more work that in the past on adaptation on you have the adaptation committee so that is a body a technical body under the UNFCC umbrella that try to address that issue of adaptation on here I put only three reports with the link I guess you can share presentation after they are looking what we have in term of methodology for assessing adaptation needs their application a draft technical paper so it's all public and you can see the mostly all recent that were produced just before the last cup on I was looking those reports I just extracted one from one of the report because it was also mentioning the FAO and in that sentence basically you can have a here the essence of what all those reports are saying it's possible to measure progress in a sector at a national scale this can be done you can have on we have seen two examples you can have metrics you can develop but to aggregate that at global level and to have a common way to understand the other it's very complex because adaptation is specific a farmer will have a farmer or forester will have to adapt to its own circumstances on from the other side of the valley it can be different still you have a regional level but it's really on this is less as a tricky point you were mentioning a huge debate this is that's tricky part that is we don't have magic indicator that can respond to all the different situations we have a lot of different indicators so it's all to build to to assemble all those complex data because then at the end we need the data to to build something that can be useful so for the moment there is no but there is that wish that necessity because if you and CC have a common goal or global goal on adaptation basically we need to track that we need to be able to respond are we in the right direction or not and then this we get on to the country so basically they have to report so it's we are at the momentum where you were mentioning the debate exactly we need to solve that so in the future on here i put 20x so i don't know what 20x and also you know IPCC will have election with a new new chair new structure we enter into a new cycle so we will have a new assessment report but also new spatial report new methodology report eventually that have to be decided by parties that are the same under the new FCC that might decide to call IPCC to do something so i put here some ideas so that might be not so stupid in the future we might see a new CC decision calling inviting IPCC to develop or to compile such common indicator metric guideline or to update at least some existing materials if you look on special report technical report very precise report a part of having adaptation in the working group too you don't have really a specific report that is really recent on adaptation you have that one 94 so it's not very recent on assessing climate change impact on adaptation you have another one twenty twelve you have other report or you have a report of technical expert meeting on that address adaptation alone or adaptation in other context so there is a real need for developing a common framework i will not say metrics but a common framework or to assess the different metrics and it's not only IPCC and here we have also know the global biodiversity framework so country have to report also on biodiversity you have under the UNCCD the land degradation neutrality target so there are also but basically countries are saying okay find good to have a report on that report on that report on that but it would be really more simple for countries to have a unique way to have some different aspect in terms of reporting was a can tackle different challenges with one structure that would be responsible to report and i'm quite sure that some indicator summit week can be helpful for both adaptation mitigation biodiversity land degradation on probably other agenda so this is what we need so it's a call for moving all together trying to put our brain working so thanks for the invitation happy to respond to any question or not to the panel of the question thank you thanks so much marcia that was extremely enlightening i think for everybody in the room because indeed we were talking a lot especially in this forum of geofy on the global the national the different scales we all know that adaptation is really specifically on the local scale so now there's questions from the room maybe Amy wants to say something now thanks to both lisa and marcia that was that was very nice maybe a question related to the global goal and adaptation expectations for the global stock take on adaptation that that those technical dialogues and sort of what we will expect from the adaptation work streamed by late november cop 28 i mean sort of any insight into that because that's a there has something needs to be shown there so kind of what insights you have on that process and what we might expect from from measuring progress on adaptation so on the global stock take there is ongoing a call a call for parties on the observer to submit their views on where we are and to update what they are doing and it's clear that in the call you already have the section of five section on one is adaptation on those one is on cross cutting issues that where you have holistic vision where adaptation fits well also i cannot respond to it forward to question because there is a lot of debate it's really politically sensitive because it's also related to land on degradation but what is clear at the UNFCC level on the global stock take or land on degradation that we need to find a consensus in terms of methodology it's how to say that when UNFCC was born with the objective on greenhouse gas and mitigation it was let's say a very top down process so it was quite also easy to ask for common methodology to IPCC on also mitigation is global we can see the effect you can inject CO2 today here and you will see the effect everywhere so it was very global on the adaptation on it's up up also with a new way to see policy at a global level the Paris agreement is more bottom up approach where you have every single country saying i can do that i can improve but i will do this and i want also some kind of autonomy to say what i want to see my adaptation part in my mitigation part on this no is being reflected at the level of the global stock take every discussion you have on on on adaptation some countries are seeing because you have the Paris agreement you have NDCs they will have to report on you will have to certify end of December 2024 to have the first being your transparency report where you will have to report on what you're doing on your action in term of mitigation in term of adaptation and also financing aspect so adaptation is there you will have to report and some countries are strong in say we should use the same approach as the Paris agreement or it was built so bottom up every country will tell you will report in a way this has been superseded in a way with no we have a framework for the btr for the reporting but that framework is still too too huge not precise enough you will report on some action but we are not yet where we would be able to report at the really impact on so it's very difficult to respond to your question i guess this coming year we will see clearly that uh how we move from that new way to have a more bottom up approach from parties but with that necessity to have a common understanding on to know where we are because basically if you ask teams that are responsible for review i guess you already been part of a international review and you are called when you have a document of a country saying okay i did that and you have an international team for them it's easy because they refer to international framework international agreed methodology but then if they have an adaptation reporting on the 200 countries 200 different reports 200 different way it would be impossible to to handle or so they need at least a way or common denominator to see what they can say so this for me there is no no way back we need to have something global but this is the beauty of the complexity we will have to address how to to build this and i'm quite sure we have enough nowadays because we have data we have plenty of data we have never been so many data we have a lot of satellite on the ground measurements so so if you look back with a kind of historical eye what we have in terms of data per square meter on the planet in the past was nearly zero on nowadays we have so many satellites looking at very different with different sensor on different aspect we have monitoring system that are regional we have so we have but we need to find that intelligent way to assume that on this what will be boosted also by the financial aspect because we have also the article six you're all aware because there was a plenty of discussion and this is the same issue article six you will have to track and to avoid duplication so it's mean national way to to monitor national registry to share this registry with an international registry to be sure when you call the border to not have double counting so the way is here we need to have national system in place to tackle mitigation adaptation article six global biodiversity framework because also the finance are not outside and they're more in that way and shrinking so sorry if not to have a more precise question but we really need to have a look and i hope at least the global stock take will say hey guys we are at that but we need to reach that and how to to set a plan for the coming year on with the global goal also on adaptation yeah thank you from world alliance who buy indigenous peoples thank you for your presentation i would like to ask i understand it's difficult when you are talking about how to work internationally how to put the the international standard of course when you are talking about adaptation we need to think of the specificity of the indigenous peoples and local communities and is there any way to adapt the tools that you are using to get the knowledge from the indigenous peoples and local communities because although they are scattered in different part of the world but this we can say that they have can we can found like common or international local indigenous peoples and local communities standard that they can standard that we can develop and also we need to find a way to understand this knowledge and to to adapt this knowledge or combine this knowledge with the modern knowledge that that we have of course there's much of this traditional knowledge or experiences or good practices there is there a way that through your work i know don't know how you are doing this but do you try to find these knowledge or good practices and combine it with your other well thank you yeah here i can respond from ocb level but i guess a little bit if you're level because it's a it's a concern that it's a really cross-cutting concern yes we have tools that are global but we are trying to turn our tool more intelligent and also it's not we do not limit only to the tool so we have a different tools you have seen some tools but we know that those tools are just tools that need to be part of also stakeholder consultation stakeholder discussion at very different level from national sub-national and local and when i was looking here at the global level we need a global level to report it will be let's say the country level but within the country it does not mean that you do not need to have a more complex system that will also be adapted to the different community or different context and we need that because whatever the country is not the same if you go one side of the country to the plenty of country you have a lot of example you have more than one let's say one context one social social context environmental context climatic context so we need to to that so if you are people that are working with the different tools and you have tools there that i can see at least daniel here is working on a tool is adaptation by university carbon mapping tool so for instance it's a it's a global tool covering all the world but the idea is how to use this in a process where you will consult with people and bring people playing with the tool when people from forestry eric link with team or the team they are using their tools are not just behind the screen they go to the country the train people they exchange their feedback and they use the tool with people in the country and this should be done because we need also to listen to people because at the end this is a people on sometime they are already implementing some solution and we need also to be able to catch that so this is your concern is really already part of f a o let's say where to approach that but it's also part of the UN FCC you know we have a constituency specific for indigenous people there is a constituency for yours also very important because people like me okay i find i am on my halfway out already so but we have a incoming generation people that need really to be the one supporting the effect of what we did so like that so on that international process as already there's also completely in mind but it's how to link the global to the local but when i say local it's very local it's it's very most of people are really having few hectares or even some time less so how to link that this is a challenge that is possible thanks a lot that's a very good start also to move now to the global and hopefully antonio will bring some answers to all these questions or maybe some more questions so we have antonio bombelli from the gcos and he's going to talk about the global climate observations for the adaptation monitoring yes thank you inga so maybe i can start trying to capture a couple of points from the previous two presentations that for monitoring adaptation we need measurable and tangible indicators of course and there is this issue that the monstial underline that is not obvious to move from national to global level because we will need a sort of common indicator to be developed okay we don't have the answers the solution but we are trying to go toward that direction in the fame of gcos and the gcos is the global climate of serving system and this work is the presentation from a small working group and the small I mean here you see the name so it's not my work it's a work of several people and I just jumped in the last less than one year on that so very very few words because I think we are late about gcos just to understand the context this is a co-sponsored program so the main sponsor is WMRO the World Meteorological Organization of UN then there is UNESCO through the IOC the Intersonographic Commission UNEP and the International Scientific Council I think we can go to this slide where just to show again that gcos works toward a global climate or not towards to support a global climate of observations to support starting from user needs the improvement of the the systems for monitoring climate to promote free and open access to data and probably one of the most important results are the gcos implementation plan released every five years where there are actions complete actions to improve the global climate or serving system that is not the gcos system is made by pieces everywhere in the world every international organization or even a national or regional level are with the net towards the satellite system they contribute to the climate system and there is the ECV requirements so I move back to the previous slides to show you that gcos is organized in three panels scientific panels across the three domains of atmosphere land and ocean I work on the land and the sort the TOPC, the SEL also special panel on climate that is the more relevant for FAO for many reasons and the ECV the essential climate variables are probably the most known gcos product I would say there are 55 variables across the different domains and for for example in the biosphere we have land cover, fire, albedo, biomass etc etc and I mentioned probably the most relevant for FAO and together with the gcos implementation plan it was released the ECV new requirements report and we will see something after about that where there are the requirements meaning at what resolution we need to measure a viable spatial resolution, temporal resolution for climate purpose of course because these requirements can change depending the application and adaptation is one of these applications where our exercise was to see if the current requirements for ECV fit for adaptation purpose and of course everyone is welcome to contribute to the gcos implementation plan so moving to the work called GAT the gcos adaptation task team this was a working group to assess how current ECVs could be used or need maybe some modification to be useful for adaptation and there can be two kinds of use of climate observations so observation for adaptation so to improve the understanding of climate change impacts or observation of adaptation so to monitor to assess the effectiveness of adaptation strategies so this is linked also to monitoring and evaluation framework that was showed also in the first presentation and this working group worked on three different case studies on gluvial flood risk assessment in urban areas on also in streams but the relevant one for this session and for general for GFI is the forest wildfire of course this is a data link to forest and so I'm going to talk about that and so in general maybe I have more or less said so the main scope was to us to evaluate the suitability of assisting ECVs for adaptation and in case to identify if new CVs would be needed for adaptation purpose so we mentioned also IPCC the working group too and so why forest wildfire I think it's as many others I would say expected changes wildfires are one of these that are expected the impacts of wildfires are expected to increase because of climate change and then the perturbation caused by wildfires range across for many different level including global carbon budgets from local to regional even global again and then but let's have a hope because the forest-based adaptation can be an opportunity to adapt to climate change to promote resilience so there is it was decided as a case studies because there is an increasing risk due to fires but with forest management there can be a lot of opportunity to adapt and so the approach was to review more or less what are the current essential climate variables so ECVs what are the requirements and see if these requirements are relevant or need some changes so this group went through the temporal spatial resolutions to see the adequacy of current variables and current observational systems to address a specific adaptation need so what is more or less the result we are still in I would say in the middle of the process let's see how we will move on but basically here we have a lot of tables just to show you as a sample so the variables were divided depending on the potential application area so for example to for the application for detect files and then there'll be a view that are that the relevant ECVs were identified that there is an ECV called file so obviously this is relevant and the each ECVs each ECV essential climate variable normally is described by one or more product meaning specific variables that give you the picture of what it's called ECV for example there is active fire or burnt area there are two products of the ECV on fire and here you have the spatial resolution and temporal resolution for these two ECVs that were decided after few years of work of the I would say the whole GICOS community that is not the GICOS category it's the scientific community working with GICOS then there was an open review to everyone so should be the should reflect the the current capability as a scientific level and here you see two different scales so there is G, B and T means goal, breakthrough, threshold I mean the resolution was divided at three different levels that the goal would be the highest decidable one that for climate purpose is would be the best but should be feasible maybe not very in a very short time but not should not be just a dream because otherwise it's not useful and then the threshold is the minimum level needed so less than the threshold probably is not useful at all for at least global climate purposes and so in some cases these requirements were evaluated good also for for adaptation purposes in some other cases where you see for example here yes you see the arrow for example the other ECB cloud properties it was a assessor that a higher resolution is needed for the clouds generated by files for example so just to show you that the exercise done was at this level so to review the current specifications for ECB and see if they are adequate or not for adaptation and if not what can be that the next work should be what can be the side resolution so you see this was done for several ECBs so I will not go through all the the variable but this report is available even if this still needs some it will be a little updated in a few months but at the end 17 essential climate variables were reviewed with more than 30 products that were identified as relevant for what file application and as already said in some cases they were considered useful in some other cases we will need some improvement and some common challenges from the case studies of digital adaptation testing so not only for file but more in general and some of these challenges were already raised in the previous presentation is that adaptation is local in nature while G cost is global in nature the G is global so it's not easy to match and to move from to downscale from global be relevant also until the local scale but for sure the global maybe easier the regional context level can provide consistency context where the local different local attention strategies maybe also there was the other question about how to consider the local knowledge etc so to to contextualize the local knowledge global level we need to move across scales so this is for sure a challenge and then observation requirements can be used also are needed also for monitoring the streams but I will just maybe say that of course resolution is present times I mean in addition to the higher resolution that we said so I show you the tables with space or spatial or temporary solution but we need also additional characteristics like homogeneity or long-term time series often are needed to have again consistency or data in near real time that a global scale maybe are difficult but a local could be easier another point to rest up is the importance of analysis so moving from available data I also will say that we have really there is often a lot of data we don't exploit them analysis is important especially to to close gaps in space and times and so it's also important to work can be used analysis also for adaptation and the additional data not necessarily climate climate related data are also needed when you work for adaptation so G-course is more focused on climate observations but if we we need to have the global not the global a complete picture we need social economic data demography environmental detail and also the often especially when you go a local level you need to work more interpretability to scale up etc and just I think this is my last slide more or less that what can be the stakeholders the stakeholders of this work it can be of course national and local governments the national forest monitoring system that I suppose are also here managers civil protection of course forest company rural community insurance and I'm wondering and you I don't know some of you you are from FEO but some others say from JFI maybe you belong to these categories or not I don't know maybe we can see and this is this was my last slide but I close with this one because there will be maybe you know in October this big conference in Kigali from the World Climate Research Program and the G-course we'll have a post-class session right on adaptation so I mean some mission is closed but if you are interested to to go maybe not only for G-course there are many others in taking sessions okay there is this bigger conference okay thank you very much thanks a lot Antonio to show all the data and all these indicators I hope the country still keep the pace to do this I don't know we have time for one question if any no specific questions yeah Flavia the microphone is coming thank you so my name is Flavia and I'm it's very interesting presentation thank you very much so when I see the amount of data of when we are talking about adaptation mitigation it came to my mind this new regulation on e-oodie forestation right so how it's going to be how do you see the support of GCOs of C-POW of many other tools that we have available to support this country for example Brazil or small holders to comply with this new regulation of the e-oodie forestation and degradation not only deforestation but we have this very complex component with degradation thank you one more who wants to start I pushed those your question mentioned tools but tools are just tools it's basically the way you use them and what you are seeing whatever the legislation it is you need to have a body to enforce or to check what you are doing most of the time we say that body need to be at national level so if the concern is to follow deforestation and degradation in a country it has to be done at national level with some kind of level of independence or at least showing that you are using signs behind or not using guess best and be sure that then you have always international level to check back to ensure what the national level is doing is compatible or reporting numbers that are compatible it's happened recently with different countries I will not mention the countries where you have a national number you can see what international bodies are saying if it's a line or not so but the tools are just tools and you can use always the tools the way you want so we should not never say this tool is the best so basically saying the truth no the tool can be the best and then you have very different view of the same tools so that's it maybe I can try to say something on this line probably yeah I mean probably there are different steps before we should there should be you should identify variables and indicators to be measured and then the methodology to use these variable indicators to monitor to verify etc probably at the end the tools that based on these indicators that this methodology can be used to support countries and this should be everything package much more rest you said in international I would say a grid context or something so to to be consistent again from local to global level so there are different steps to be used and then just to cross with gcos gcos what model level of variables indicators or model at the beginning of the of this kind of chain yeah I can use a good example under the UNCCD as a convention to fight certification and non-degradation there was a discussion of the non-degradation neutrality and how what are the best way to monitor that and there was one of the indicators the NDVI so one of the index of greenness of and but basically that index in a global level if it can go in the right direction but you can have the same index if you look for some bush encroachment so you will have your NDVI going in the right direction but basically it's mean non-degradation so you always need that level of national level stakeholder consultation because you can always also an indicator globally that can tell you oh we are going in the right direction and people the one will tell you no we are not going in the right direction because here it means something else that what you can see globally so on this was a very good example so under the UNCCDs are really reflecting that and it is said in their guidance to monitor non-degradation neutrality you have global indicators but you need some kind of ground expert level check people checks stakeholder consultation to look at the result and to say yes it's like that or not really so this is really important yeah maybe just to comment maybe from the real capacity building field like they call it because I don't think the term is so nice anyway um oh we also have Gabby here so I think I'm a dinosaur of GFY so we're doing this capacity building for 15 years and as you said we used to do tool capacity so we would go into a country they say we want to learn about radar we would come in with a team not only us also silver carbon and all the other implementing agencies to train people on tools I think maybe five or six years back we stopped the tool thing also because the seed money for all this capacity building had dried up so we were like we want to start from a deliverable and we go back from that so for example then both countries came in we want to help with forest reference level or emission level for example then we would go take the reference level with the country and work backwards to see and then the gaps were filled with the tools options which are needed because I said by Marcel there's so many tools what is the best tool there's not the best tool the best is what a country can assimilate and institutionalize in the process and that's something we learned by doing and Brazil was one of the first where we had that huge capacity building it's Petty Claudio just left because he was the starting on this and so we looked on what they have and filled the gaps in the systems now I think we'd copy here so we had that country led planning which you might have heard of in the GFI meeting so the idea is really and I there's also my personal meeting it's not a found opinion is that it's time that the countries are in the driver's seat and that's a bit what you were saying so often implanting agencies would come in and say this is how you can do it but I think it's really time to have the long-term planning as Naikwa was saying it from the World Bank the countries decide on the long-term planning how they want to do it and what they want to do it and for this we have the country led planning in the GFI which I copy here is one of the lead persons to see what is needed and it's a country to call in and then calling in not specifically an agency or a tool but a deliverable something they want to achieve and well of course it's a new concept it's quite a new concept so it's also another option so I think that's the way we would go and then of course linked with the global part with the new indicators and then whatever indicator is there you know especially if it's remote sensing it can all be applied but I think the shift in paradigm should be that it's a long country lead planning because by coming in with a ad hoc one-time go on a tool that says it can be good but if you don't know how and how it can best be applied it's tough because we always we heard a lot about the turnover we heard that there's no resilience in the country we all know that if someone gets strained they go to other jobs but I think that's everywhere it's also in developing countries but to keep the resilience if when a country has a plan also a long-term plan on what they want with the capacity building or with the incentive I think this is I don't know Gabby you want to say something specific sorry I don't put you on the spot but given you are here on the country yeah we are a group of people working with in the O4I you know to help countries we are in the designing phase of the program but we are here to talk to people from countries because we as a group want to provide the tools they can use or develop also new tools that countries are interested in to develop or to have for a long-term planning of their system their national forest monitoring system so anytime we can just have a coffee afterwards and I can talk more a little bit more about it with the people in this countries so Gustavo thanks very much for joining us we don't want to put you on the spot neither but it will be nice to discuss a bit because exactly what Flavia what your question is saying and this is at least for Amy's team and the work we're doing we don't want to invent and come up with new tools or things whatever we only want to be at the support of countries and so this is also one of the ideas because we have so much experience at least for the forestry part on the NFMS to see how we can help like we were seeing before as Marcel was saying to not confuse countries and have more data more systems because it's already extremely complex and also to have all these system built to keep them to maintain them it's a lot so we're very pleased to have Bob Kazungo from Uganda so it's nice to have Uganda because we heard Elisa already a bit about it to hear what you say what your needs are how you see it if Vau has a role to play maybe not maybe we can just watch and help in case it is maybe it can be with the global indicators so we're very pleased to have you and to have everybody of the country so please feel free so Bob if you want to give you a few slides Good afternoon A pleasure to be here this afternoon What I'm going to talk about is actually not what is done by me alone I have I'm part of the MRV team under the climate change portfolio although I'm from forestry but because the climate change is very difficult for you to support climate change from forestry especially when we're trying to look at the complete package or set for MRV for reporting the UNFCCC so I'm part of the MRV team and so when Inge requested me to say something about adaptation monitoring in Uganda I'm very pleased to request the team that specifically looks at that in the climate change department to work with me to prepare what I'm going to share with you so I'm pleased to be here to share that part of the message I think there is some distortion here but anyway I will talk about the background to adaptation monitoring in Uganda I will talk about what institutional arrangements we have in the country the tools that we have so far for adaptation monitoring and also climate vulnerability assessment opportunity for adaptation monitoring because we've been talking about indicators indicators is one of the first things you do you know as you when you frame the vulnerability assessment then you look out for the indicators so we have an opportunity in the country that there is some work that has been going on on the climate vulnerability assessment and has provided some indicators that we are now feeding into the system the MRV system in the country so just as a way back when I know this is a common common knowledge but just wanted to connect this conversation with the UNFCCC NAPA programs that the discussion started at the 7th conference of parties in Marrakech Morocco and also just to mention that Uganda launched its NAPA that is National Adaptation Program Vaccine in 2007 and since then different sectors have been developing their own adaptation plans and agriculture took the first step to do that other sectors have also been able to develop others are still continuing to develop and from the NAPA that we have as a country we have eight areas of sort of like project profile areas general project profile areas which from which partners in the country are now unpacking to deliver adaptation related actions for the country and this includes commentary growing land degradation projects training metallurgical services community water and sanitation projects water production project drought adaptation projects vectors based on disease control projects indigenous knowledge and natural resources management projects and climate change involvement planning projects so those are sort of like broad project profiles that the country developed with their NAPA with our NAPA because I'm from the country okay and then and the NAPA implementation strategy focuses largely on enhancement of resilience so this is quite important and it adopts an integrated programmatic approach to implementation of those interventions that we mentioned above there the eight but also the strategies of the NAPA rely on community and ecosystem adaptation in the most vulnerable communities of the country and so we'll talk about adaptation being at local level that's that's a powerful statement because you can't deliver adaptation without the communities so the implementation will lead these communities to be more resilient to the impacts of climate change that's how we look at it from Uganda's point of view and so the agent called DERA4 for us to be able to have evidence that we have delivered on this we need the data we need information we need to capture this but more importantly we need to monitor that so that's how we're looking at it from Uganda's perspective but then what is happening I mean in terms of the institutions I think just like many other countries I mean there is always the lead for this process and my minister who I come from and the climate change department that I work with I'm from the forestry department but the climate change department you know I work with them quite closely on a day-to-day more or less we are responsible for monitoring implementation of all the climate change actions adaptation and mitigation and of course with our NAPA we also agreed that every ministry department and agency has a focal point for climate change and these are desk officers in every ministry so these are the focal the persons that are on a day-to-day interfacing with the climate change department or with the MRV team especially if we are to look at the data issues but we didn't only end at the national level we have lower local governments like many governments others have provinces for us we have district local governments so in Uganda we have structured our administrative units in the way of the central government then their local governments and then their lower local governments which we call sub counties and then their parishes and villages the lowest level but so at the local government level we have and we have about 145 district local governments so those are quite many but each of those has a natural resources department and the head of that department natural resources is the one responsible for issues to do with modern climate change actions and this has been enshrined within the national climate change act of 2021 so that's quite important for us because then we know who is responsible for what but in terms of the structure of our MRV very quickly I want to let you know that when we got this support from the MDC support program of the country to develop an MRV system we agreed that the climate change department sex charge of that but then we select a coordinator for the MRV system who will be very well supported by MRV information and technology administrator this guy looks at the issues of the right structures trying to look at the quality controls of the data you know giving rights of access and rights of picking information from the MRV system to other stakeholders but they are supported by nodo officers and these nodo officers have been have been developed at the component level because each of the MRV has components to which we're broken into components five components one is on GHE, GHE inventory then mitigation, adaptation, climate finance and then considerations for sign of sustainable development goal so these nodo officers are responsible for those specific components and they feed the MRV IT administrator of course with the coordination of the MRV coordinator with all the information that is required and they have specific rights of access to that system and of course all these are supported by a user group, a module user group that we have at lower levels district local governments and other partners especially for activity data collection and entry into the system so that is a summary of our structure of MRV system in the country but in terms of the tools we decided to have integrated national MRV system and you can see the components that I've talked about with specific requirements for us to deliver and the one enrolled you can see there is what brings us here this afternoon so the adaptation actions are part of one of the component number three within our integrated national MRV system and I would like to mention also that there's been quite a bit of work that has enabled us to continue picking indicators for example you might have heard of the global climate change alliance the GCCA project for example which is presented by F.A.O from 2007 we have another phase now looked at resilience of agricultural ecosystems and a lot of indicators, capacity was built including capacity of the teams that are part of the data acquisition teams for this system so we have a lot of work in the background in addition to the main MRV system that is supporting the enhancement of transparency and data acquisition for this system and so for adaptation actions of course we know that the end-disciplination roadmap as the yellow priority adaptation actions that we were looking at we also know that we were responsible for tracking those adaptation actions but most importantly monitoring and reporting of those actions and delivering results and communicating those results but all that of course leads to preparing an MRV report the NDC report is a benefits from this work in terms of the national GHG inventory report the national communications we have developed a communication report when you read it it has it has some aspects of adaptation in there by annual reports by an update reports and the national financial and technical support part of transparency requirements as well Sorry, thank you I just want to quickly just to talk about the climate vulnerability assessment opportunity for adaptation monitoring as well because we've been talking about indicators I mean these indicators are many generally when you look at adaptation and unpacking so many indicators and so just like I think I agree with the last presenter who said that the indicators are so many that sometimes you have got to prioritize them you have got to pull out what works for you as a country so my ministry in partnership with UNEP has been implementing the climate vulnerabilities assessment a project with the main aim of identifying and measuring national climate vulnerabilities and to track adaptation efforts and resilience and this project is coming to an end this June just next month but the key output of that which is relevant for this conversation are the indicators for major resilience at national level for all key adaptation sectors within the Uganda's national determined contribution but the process of index development I mean this is I'm sure for those who've worked within the systems or worked on the risk and vulnerability assessment across the globe you know that we have those steps requirements to undertake and we're using mainly the I mean we're borrowing of course from the UNDP kite climate action impact tool and other tools to be able to to harmonize and come up with this so we first did of course a risk and vulnerability framing and then selected the indicators developed data collection and processing tools but of course we also have been doing some weightaging this is just about trying to prioritize to weight each of these indicators which one is more influential than than the other indicator aggregation do we do an index validation and then of course we represented this assessment are within within this risk and vulnerability assessment a report that we have a draft for now we are delivering this project in the coming few few weeks and closing it I don't expect an extension anyway but all that of course is supported by literature analysis data collection from different points of the of the government local government levels we also of course try to highlight the importance of those indicators when we're doing the weightaging we also do of course use the weighted average techniques to do the aggregations the ability tests are quite important and of course we employ GS best maps and charts and tables to present this assessment in a more useful and more understandable man and not forgetting that the stakeholder consultations that happen at different levels but more so at the risk and vulnerability framing level to identify what are these risks and of course we don't categorize these risks through components and then of course we develop a criteria for selection of those indicators and we you know we prepare dimensions on components of ability best on IPCC forming as guided and then also would be a final selection of the indicators but of course all that is supported by other data collection opportunities like the one I've talked about from GCCA and other projects that we have and you know then we have a vulnerability assessment report that I'm sure will be churned out to the public in the next couple of of weeks and the focus I picked up this slide because of the indicators that are important the risk components were then filed way four the hazard exposure of vulnerability and sectoral data and we propose the number of indicators as you can see there I'm not comfortable reading all of them but what I must say is that a number of these indicators have a relationship with climate change vulnerability and reporting on adaptation so I'll challenge you to have a look at these slides to get an in depth I tried to pull out as much as I could from the assessment and indicators that we selected I want to thank you Thank you so much Bob to show how it really works in the country and thank you so much for sharing this unfortunately it seems we were getting kicked out of this meeting room so before doing this I really want to thank also the Indonesians who really provided us with a fully fledged presentation so it's on the slides it's on the platform so I would really encourage everybody to look into the slides unfortunately because we don't also have technical assistance anymore for the presentation so we have few more minutes so maybe we also have other countries Gustavo we got all the way to get here I don't know if you want to say something but Colombia wants to do maybe it would be great if you can just hear some key message from countries what we can offer on adaptation we heard a lot on the global indicators all these existing things do you think what's the most crucial thing a country is needed or you look to FAO or other implementing agencies or GFY to help you with so Gustavo yeah thank you my work in Colombia has been centered in mitigation in the forestry sector there are NAPAs related with the forestry sector in the country they have been different kind of actions at the local level supporting community work and looking at a value in the use of the forest and adaptation with the different changes related with climate change and one of the things that I have always wondered it's how to get quantitative indicators of the of how effective is a different it's a different NAP power a different program related with adaptation versus another one there has been maybe that's as a general term there has been a lot of resources put into adaptation but how can you measure that success which one is more I don't know it could be kind of expanded more and which one would have to meet another kind of evaluations is something that it's needed in Colombia and I guess in in other parts of the world there are qualitative indicators most of the time but I tried to think that we could make together ways of looking to quantitative indicators with forestry I sometimes believe that the different efforts that we have done in mitigation actions mostly had been centered in what in the forestation actions however restoration could be seen as a mitigation and an adaptation action the increase in carbon stocks in forest and it can also be seen that way and it could be also related with non-carbon benefits that could be associated with forests and maybe those indicators that have been built in the mitigation sector in red sector can also be incorporated and also incorporated the safeguards and all the other social and economic importance to kind of build a a kind of process that could be mitigation and adaptation valuable I just wanted to to hear maybe the different ideas and the ways other countries are working in adaptation in the forest thank you thank you yes I don't know if there's someone else who wants to say something because I think we really have to close this session they really kick us out the good thing is that we're all invited for a coffee break and the other good thing is that we also have people to bring you there so this time you won't get lost so I know Tom wants to Antoine you want to say something yeah thank you very much for the content and all these discussions and I think adaptation certainly is kind of abstract and sometimes can seem something difficult to monitor because it's cross-sectoral because it includes processes that needs to link local to global and so I think it's a really interesting discussion that could seem sometimes very difficult or something not very tangible but as you were mentioning right now Gustavo the very concrete practices are the ones that speak to building adaptation and resilience you know restoration building disaster risk management interventions and so in that discussion we've been we put out a recent technical paper that I wanted to promote on forest-based adaptation building upon the work of IPCC and recognizing that these are tangible measures that are already operating that already work in the field and that need to be upscaled and so this is the kind of discussion that we're excited to bring here to GFOI to start a transition to see also how can we recognize the contributions of forest and trees outside of forest to adaptation so thank you very much for this session and look forward to come and continue the conversation with colleagues yes thanks everybody