90369
1
World Bank GHG Accounting Guidance Note #3:
Agriculture Sector Investment Projects (v1)
May 2014
Agriculture Global Practice (AGP)
Disclaimer: this document is a work in progress and constantly updated; some supporting
material in annexes and weblinks are still incomplete. The document builds on the GHG
Accounting Guidance Note for Agriculture Sector Investment Projects. All comments are
welcome, please send these to Ademola Braimoh (AGP, abraimoh@worldbank.org), cc:
Christine Heumesser (AGP, cheumesser@worldbank.org)
CPF maintains a website for GHG accounting at http://ghgaccounting. The site contains the
latest information and templates to be followed and should be checked when conducting GHG
accounting for projects.
1. INTRODUCTION
In November 2012, a group of International Financial Institutions (IFIs), including the
World Bank, agreed to harmonize their approaches to project-level greenhouse gas (GHG)
accounting. Each institution would follow established methodologies consistent with
international best practices, and the methodologies would be applied during project
appraisal. GHG accounting is a means to assess the impacts a project is likely to have, and
taken together, to measure the overall impacts an institution’s lending portfolio will have on
GHG emissions. Investments which are identified as being climate-smart and which lead to
similarly positive socio-economic outcomes can then be properly weighted according to
multiple criteria (WBG 2012).
As part of the World Bank Group Environment Strategy, all World Bank (WB) investment
projects must undertake GHG accounting (‘carbon footprinting’) starting in fiscal year FY14
(July 2013). The phasing-in of GHG accounting will be done gradually from FY14 to FY16.
The first sectors included in the rollout phase (FY14) were energy, transport, and forestry.
From FY 15, GHG accounting will be undertaken for agriculture sector projects and will be
required at the project approval stage.
Agriculture accounts for about a quarter of anthropogenic GHG emissions, mainly from
deforestation and agricultural emissions from livestock, soil, and nutrient management
(IPCC 2014). The agriculture sector accounts for nearly 50% of global emissions of nitrous
oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4). Nitrous oxide is a powerful warming agent and is about
300 times more effective at heating the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, and methane has a
global warming potential about 21 times that of CO2 on a 100-year timescale. The scale of
global emissions from agriculture and land-use change is increasing as a result of
population growth, growing consumption of meat and dairy products, and the rising use of
nitrogen fertilizers.
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
2
Several options exist for mitigation of GHG emissions in agriculture. The most prominent of
these are improved crop and grazing land management, the restoration of organic soils, and
the restoration of degraded lands. Other mitigation options include improved water
management, positive land use change and enhanced livestock and manure management.
Many of these options use current technologies and can be implemented immediately, but
technological development will be a key driver ensuring the efficacy of additional mitigation
measures in the future. The global mitigation potential of agriculture and forestry is
estimated at 7.18 – 10.60 GtCO2-e/yr at carbon prices up to US$100 per ton of CO2
equivalent. About a third of this can be achieved at prices up to $20 (IPCC, 2014).
This note provides guidance to World Bank staff for conducting GHG emissions assessment
for investment projects in agriculture. Section 2 clarifies the project types requiring GHG
assessment, while Section 3 discusses harmonization issues within the World Bank Group.
Section 4 provides information on the EX-ACT tool and resources available at the Bank with
which to conduct GHG analyses. Section 5 discusses the practical implementation of GHG
accounting in World Bank projects, including the role of the GHG Accounting Help Desk at
the Agriculture Global Practice (AGP). Section 6 concludes with the application of key
concepts.
2. TYPES OF WORLD BANK PROJECTS INCLUDED
Projects to be included for GHG assessment are all operations classified with the sector
codes AB (Agricultural extension and research), AH (Crops), AI (Irrigation and Drainage), AJ
(Animal Production), and AZ (General Agriculture). The requirement to prepare GHG
assessments applies to investment operations.1 Development Policy Lending (DPL) projects
are not included. Additionally, Investment Fund Projects (IFP) which finance ‘non-site
specific’ activities, such as capacity building and strengthening of institutions, policy
development, and governance are excluded.
The assessment will be carried out by the project team with support from the GHG
Accounting Help Desk at AGP. The assessment is ex ante, and is conducted only once during
project preparation. GHG accounting is not used in monitoring during implementation
unless it forms part of the results framework. A selection tool (decision tree) for
determining if a particular project requires incorporating GHG footprinting and the
appropriate tool to use is presented in Annex I.
If a project requires GHG accounting, the question arises whether it will generate carbon
credits and as such is regulated by a formal, internationally recognized mandatory or
voluntary standard such as the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). If so, the procedures
described in this document are to be superseded by those of an internationally recognized
third party such as the Executive Board of the UNFCCC’s Clean Development Mechanism
(CDM) or the validation or verification body approved under the VCS.
1
This includes also projects financed from trust funds.
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
3
If approved as generating carbon credits, the measurement and data provided in documents
such as the Project Design Document (PDD, in the case of CDM), or equivalent, can be used.
Generally, all projects for which reliable and accurate GHG accounting is undertaken for
other reasons can use those results to avoid duplication of work. The World Bank has
developed a VCS approved methodology that quantifies the GHG emission reductions of
sustainable land management practice activities that enhance aboveground, belowground
and
soil-based
carbon
stocks
of
agricultural
areas.
(http://www.v-cs.org/methodologies/VM0017). If a project is not regulated by a formal internationally
recognized standard; it is subject to project-level GHG accounting.
The decision of whether or not project restructuring or additional financing triggers revised
GHG assessment will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. In essence, if additional resources
are allocated or the scope is varied, a GHG assessment should be conducted. The assessment
needs to be conducted for emergency operations as well, though the timeframe is more
flexible and assessment may be completed during implementation.
Box 1: Guidelines and Standards
The Good Practice Guidance (IPCC 2003) and the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Emissions (IPCC, 2006) provide general guidance and a framework to estimate, measure, monitor and
report carbon stock changes and greenhouse gas emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry
(LULUCF) activities. They include definitions and classifications, detailed calculation steps with
underpinning equations, default emission factors and other parameters, and reporting templates. 2
There are three primary standards for carbon assessment. These include the Clean Development
Mechanism (CDM), the Climate Action Reserve, and the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). These
standards accredit and supervise a number of methodologies or protocols to estimate, measure, monitor
and possibly credit net GHG removals by sinks resulting from the implementation of LULUCF activities.
They do so by providing a number of rules and principles for GHG accounting such as definition of the
baseline scenario, modalities for considering carbon pools and sources of emissions, and ways to
account for leakage and permanence.
3. HARMONIZATION WITHIN THE WORLD BANK GROUP
The World Bank (i.e. IDA and IBRD) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) have
different project preparation procedures and finance different types of projects. However,
these guidelines will be aligned to the extent possible with the practices used by IFC. This
alignment will be maintained in all future guidance and whenever feasible, similar systems
will be applied across WBG.
2
http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol2.html
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
4
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) and various climate and carbon financing programs
also have their requirements for GHG accounting. To promote harmonization of GHG
accounting processes and requirements among different financing programs, a more
rigorous assessment could be substituted for the ex-ante assessment required at the
concept stage.3
4. RESOURCES FOR GHG ACCOUNTING
In selecting tools for GHG accounting, the WB is guided by the principles of simplicity,
transparency, harmonization, and credibility, recognizing that trade-offs between accuracy
and time and resources required are likely (WB 2013).4
Among several tools5, the Ex-Ante Carbon balance Tool (EX-ACT) has been selected as the
primary tool for GHG accounting in agriculture at the World Bank. EX-ACT has been
successfully piloted in WB agriculture Projects in Brazil, Russia, India, China, Niger, Nigeria
and Morocco (WB 2011). Since then, its application has grown considerably, covering
evaluations of projects and programs in about 38 countries. EX-ACT is a robust accounting
tool offering the advantage of a broad of scope of GHG analysis. It is user friendly,
interactive and participatory. It is very flexible in terms of requirements for coefficients and
site-specific data, and can handle land use conversion, changes in agricultural practices and
projections over long time horizons. Its outputs can also be used in the financial and
economic analyses of projects.
GEF5 has a requirement to have an ex ante GHG assessment in Project Information Form (PIF) or in
Project Concept Note (PCN). However, there is no formal requirement to use specific tools. It is
understood that WB ex ante assessment meets the GEF criteria as such. Decision on applicability
under GEF6 will be done separately.
4 Simple, in terms of assessment time and/or resources and application by project task teams;
Transparent, in terms of being objective and clear about methodological choices and assumptions;
Harmonized, in terms of alignment with tried and tested approaches, including those used by other
IFIs; Credible, in terms of the robustness of analytical underpinning, which is also linked to the other
three principles (WB 2013).
5 A comparison of GHG accounting tools is provided by World Bank (2011) and Colomb et al. (2013).
3
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
5
EX-ACT was developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to provide ex-ante
measurements of the mitigation impact of agriculture and forestry development projects.
EX-ACT enables estimating the net carbon (C) balance and C sequestration potential of
projects which promote the adoption of improved land management practices compared
with a business as usual scenario. EX-ACT can be used at the project preparation stage, to
assist task teams in refining components and activities to increase the mitigation benefits of
projects. EX-ACT is widely applicable in the agriculture sector. Typical applications include
crop production intensification, livestock development, food security, rural development,
agroforestry, perennial agriculture, forest protection and management, watershed
development, land rehabilitation, and bioenergy. The main output of the tool consists of the
C balance resulting from the difference between a scenario with a project and a baseline
scenario without the project. Though EX-ACT has been designed for the project level it can
easily be scaled up to program, sector or national level (Bernoux et al. 2010).
EX-ACT consists of a set of six linked Excel sheets, covering agriculture, forestry and other
land uses. These six modules allow users to input specific or general information about the
project including, changes in land use, agricultural management practices, inputs and other
project investments. The EX-ACT modules are shown in Figure 1 and described briefly
below:
Figure 1: The EX-ACT modules
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
6
1. A general description of the project, including information on the location,
climate and soil characteristics and duration of the project.
2. Land use change, in which information on land use changes regarding
deforestation, afforestation and reforestation, and non-forest land use change is
inserted.
3. Crop production and management, to specify agronomic practices, tillage
practices, water and nutrient management, and manure application.
4. Grassland and livestock, specifying grassland management and livestock feeding
practices.
5. Land degradation that captures information on forest degradation, drainage of
organic soils, and peat extraction
6. Inputs and further investment, which captures information fertilizer and agrochemical use, fuel consumption and electricity use.
A checklist for choosing the relevant study module is presented in Annex 2. The use of EXACT comprises 3 steps:
1. A general description of the project (geographic area, climate and soil characteristics,
duration of the project);
2. Identification of current land use, future land use in case the project is not implemented
and changes in land use and technologies foreseen by project components using
specific “modules” (deforestation, forestation, forest degradation, annual/perennial
crops, rice cultivation, grasslands, livestock, inputs, energy); and
3. Computation of C-balance with and without the project using IPCC default values and –
when available – ad-hoc coefficients.
The main output of the tool consists of the C-balance resulting from project activities.
The EX-ACT tool and a broad range of additional information can be found at
http://www.fao.org/tc/exact/en/. The GHG Accounting Help Desk at AGP has prepared
“EX-ACT Quick Guidance for Users,” that provides an overview and explanation of
methodology, results and data needs for the application and final use of EX-ACT. It
complements the more comprehensive EX-ACT User Manual and it is targeted at leading
World Bank users to proficiency in the independent use of the tool. These and other
resources are available at http://ghgaccounting.
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
7
5. IMPLEMENTATION
GHG accounting will become routine and part of the regular project preparation cycle and
will be considered as one of the tasks conducted by the project preparation team. Resources
for the assessment will come from project preparation budgets. Figure 2 depicts the typical
steps of the net emissions calculation process.
Support from GHG Accounting Help Desk at the
Agriculture Global Practice
Figure 2
GHG accounting in project preparation
To implement sustainable agricultural strategies, task team leaders (TTLs), project staff,
and consultants must have ready access to expertise, sound appraisal methodologies (such
as EX-ACT), to evaluate potential GHG impacts, and mitigation strategies for their projects.
The GHG Accounting Help Desk in the Agriculture Global Practice is designed, during the
initial year of the GHG Accounting rollout, as a mandatory resource towards these ends.
Collaboration with the guidance unit in the development of sustainable Bank agricultural
projects will help streamline the understanding of the challenges and opportunities
associated with GHG assessment for World Bank agricultural investments.
The GHG Accounting Help Desk will provide guidance on EX-ACT and other accounting tools
at project preparation, implementation and completion stages, and on other pertinent GHG
related issues that TTLs can apply to their projects. The unit will also provide specific
guidance for other funding sources – such as the GEF – which also have developed specific
GHG evaluation and monitoring requirements for agriculture projects.
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
8
Box 2: The GHG accounting roll-out process at AGP
The GHG Accounting Help Desk of the AGP was set up in FY 14 to support the application and
the mainstreaming of GHG accounting in agriculture operations. In March 2014, a Learning
and Management System, LMS-accredited face-to-face EX-ACT training was held in DC,
followed by another for country staff in Brazil in April 2014. More of such trainings may be
held at other country locations in future. In addition, an e-learning course is being developed
together with the Climate Change Group (CCG). The e-course on EX-ACT will further facilitate
the mainstreaming of the use of the tool and provide an online-forum for peer learning with an
online expert facilitation.
6. REPORTING
The measurement of GHG accounting will be conducted at the project level. However,
whether or not reporting and dissemination will be at corporate level (e.g. specific annual
reports) or at project level (e.g. in PADs) is still to be determined.6, 7 A reporting sample is
found in Annex 3.
7. APPLICATION OF KEY CONCEPTS
Because GHG accounting is being introduced at several IFIs, the institutions have agreed on
a joint approach and terminology to allow coherence across institutions (WB 2012).
However, their consistent application for accounting purposes requires sector-specific
agreement and interpretation on the key concepts. Definitions of these concepts are
provided in the World Bank Group GHG Accounting Guidance Note (WB 2013).
In all GHG accounting, WB guidelines and definitions are applied (WB 2013). Their specific
application to investment projects in agriculture is outlined below.
7.1 Gross vs. Net Emissions
Both gross and net emissions will be calculated. Gross emissions refer to the actual project
emissions; while net emissions denote the change in emissions as a result of the
implementation of a WB investment project. Net emissions are calculated as the difference
between emissions in the project scenario and emissions occurring in the corresponding
baseline scenario. The approach of the WB will focus on net emissions, although gross
calculations are typically identified as well. The reporting of these two types of emissions
will be decided separately (see section 6 above).
There is no decision yet on whether or not GHG footprints are to be disclosed at the project level. It
is not yet [March 2014] clear if some clients would oppose disclosing project specific carbon
accounting results. Until final decisions have been made, project teams need to take this in to
consideration.
7 In the initial stage of GHG reporting, GHG reporting is an interim, offline reporting. GHG reporting
will become part of the Operations Portal at a later stage.
6
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
9
7.2 Baseline
The baseline, also called ‘reference’ or ‘counterfactual’ scenario, is a crucial in GHG
estimation, as the carbon balance of a project (“net emissions”) is given by the difference of
the overall effect of the project and the baseline scenarios. The baseline scenario is
represented by the most plausible scenario and includes the most credible options of land
use, possible land use changes and management practices that could have occurred on the
land within the project boundaries but without the project actually occurring. The baseline
is an extrapolated value of gross GHG emissions as they would have occurred in the absence
of the project. It is thus the scenario that reasonably describes changes over time in carbon
stocks and GHG emissions within the project boundary in the absence of the proposed
project activity.
Estimating the baseline is among the most challenging elements of conducting a GHG
analysis as it requires an understanding of current land use options and management
practices and their evolution, as well as, their extrapolation in a credible scenario. Clearly,
the further out in time a project scenario is projected, the more assumptions are needed for
a baseline projection.
The baseline can be static or dynamic. In contrast to the static elements, which do not
change over time and assume that the pre-project assumptions extend into the future, the
dynamic elements change over the timeframe of the assessment and are more complicated
to develop. Dynamic baseline are typically preferred, but often cannot be achieved due to
the lack of data to assess hypothetical scenarios. If data are lacking for credible projections,
GHG analysis may opt for a simplified description of the baseline corresponding to a
continuation of current land-use or a static scenario (WB 2013).
In EX-ACT, users can choose between, or combine, three approaches to generate a baseline
scenario. These are
i.
No change scenario: is often used in small-scale projects. This is a static scenario as
it assumes no changes in the land use and management practices with respect to the
initial situation.
ii.
Use of past trends: is a dynamic scenario and based on the assumption that
without a project the changes in land use and practices will evolve in the same way
as in the past. In small scale projects, expert consultation could inform these
processes, while in in large scale projects, past trends are often extrapolate from
secondary data.
iii.
Use of future trends: is a dynamic scenario and estimates the future land uses and
management practices based on quantitative data for several or few selected
variables.
The default baseline is the current use of the land.
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
10
7.3 Project Boundaries and Scope
The project area is the discrete site(s) where a project is implemented (i.e., the area under
the control of the project component). The scope of the GHG assessment will encompass
scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, as decided in the IFI harmonized approach to GHG
accounting. It could also include scope 3 emissions attributable to a project, which should
be clearly stated in relevant policies, procedures and results. 8 The project boundaries
should include all activities, facilities or infrastructure that is being financed. This includes
the project area and other components that will be impacted by the project such as inputs
(fertilizers, pesticides, infrastructure, and energy consumption) and leakage, i.e. emissions
occurring outside the project’s boundaries as a result of project activities.9
7.4 Relevant gases
GHG accounting, such as EX-ACT, ideally considers estimated values of all five carbon pools
as well as estimated coefficients of CH4, N2O and selected CO2 emissions. A carbon pool is a
reservoir with the capacity to accumulate (remove) or release (emit) carbon. Five carbon
pools are usually considered in a GHG analysis including: above ground living biomass,
below ground living biomass, dead wood (standing, laying or on ground, or in the soil, e.g.
dead root stocks), leaf litter, and soil carbon. Ideally, all carbon pools should be included.
However, this depends to a large extent on data availability and default values may be
needed.10
The relevant GHG associated with agricultural activities are CO2, CH4, and N2O. As these
gases have different global warming potentials, their flows are converted into one metric
for accounting purposes, Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (tCO2e), based on their global warming
potential (GWP). CO2 has a 100 year GWP of 1, CH4 of 25 and N2O of 298.
The main emission sources in agriculture, which can be accounted for in EX-ACT are:
i.
Fertilized soils emitting nitrous oxide (N2O);
ii.
Cattle enteric fermentation emitting methane (CH4);
Scope 1 includes all direct GHG emissions; scope 2 refers to indirect emission from consumption of
purchased electricity, heat or steam; and scope 3 includes other indirect emission such as the
extraction and production of purchased materials and fuels, transport-related activities in vehicles
not owned or controlled by the reporting entity, electricity-related activities (e.g. T&D losses) not
covered in Scope 2, outsourced activities, waste disposal, etc. (http://www.ghgprotocol.org/).
8
An example of leakage is a project which reduces deforestation in region A by promoting alternative
solutions to wood fuel through e.g. crop intensification, but indirectly results in increasing
deforestation in region B outside the project boundary.
9
Usually the default is that harvested wood products are considered emitted on the date of harvest.
This is reasonable for fuel wood. However, fiber and saw logs/construction wood have much longer
life cycles. Global methodologies are currently being developed e.g. by IPCC. In addition, IFC is
developing an approach for handling wood products in GHG accounting. The approach used in WB
assessments will be aligned with that of IFC to the extent possible.
10
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
11
iii.
Biomass burning (emitting N2O and CH4);
iv.
Rice production (emitting CH4);
v.
Manure (emitting N2O and CH4);
vi.
Fertilizer production (emitting N2O and CO2);
vii.
Irrigation (emitting CO2); and
viii.
Farming machinery (emitting CO2).
7.5 Timeframe
The economic and financial analysis of WB projects often considers 30-year time horizon,
and a similar timeframe is used for the GHG assessment11. EX-ACT can handle projections
for longer time horizons with user modifications. In the case of forestry projects, this allows
ensuring the saturation of carbon sequestration into biomass as plantations progressively
reach maturity is accurately captured.
EX-ACT allows setting two different time periods for the project, denoted as the
implementation phase and the capitalization phase. The implementation phase is analogue
to the investment phase and considered to be the active period of the project. The
capitalization phase is a period where project benefits are still occurring as a consequence
of the activities of the implementation phase.
7.6 Emission Factors
A variety of parameters are critical to estimate carbon stocks and changes in carbon stock.
These include factors relating to biomass growth and changes in land use (e.g.,
deforestation rate). The IPCC provides Tier 1 data for many of these parameters while Tier
2 (and possibly 3) can be obtained from companion documentation to carbon offset
projects, or underlying database of tool. The highest available tier should be used.
Box 3: Tiers 1, 2 and 3 Datasets
“Different methods can be used to estimate emissions or removals from most source and sink categories. The
selection of a particular method will depend on the desired degree of estimation detail, the availability of activity
data and emission factors, and the financial and human resources available to complete the inventory. In IPCC
terminology, the lowest ranking or simplest method is “Tier 1”, while more elaborate methods are “Tier 2” and
“Tier 3.”
Tier 1 methods typically utilize IPCC default emission factors and require the most basic, and least
disaggregated, activity data. Higher tiers usually utilize more elaborate methods and source-specific, technologyspecific, region specific and/or country-specific emission factors, which are often based on measurements, and
normally require more highly disaggregated activity data. Tier 2 and 3 methods require more detailed data
and/or measurements for their application. In cases where a national methodology exists, which is consistent
with the IPCC Guidelines, it is highly advisable to use the national methodology. This methodology should be
fully documented in order to allow the reader to understand why this particular method is better than the
default one proposed by the IPCC.” (UNFCCC 2009 : 9)
UNFCCC resource guide for preparing the national communications of non-annex I parties, module 3: National
For plantation projects this may need to be adjusted based on rotation lengths to avoid misleading
values.
11
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
12
greenhouse gas inventories
(http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide3.pdf)
7.7 Threshold
Usually, a quick ex-ante estimate is conducted to determine whether a project falls over a
preset threshold for analysis. In accordance with other IFIs, a threshold of 20 ktCO2eq per
year (net) is recommended, i.e. projects that generate net GHG emission reductions
(carbon sequestration) greater than 20 ktCO2eq per average year are subject to a further
per hectare analysis.
The impact of this threshold will be assessed during implementation to understand whether
some project types would be systematically excluded from GHG accounting.
7.8 Attribution/cost sharing
In pooled funding, GHG accounting will cover the whole project, irrespective of WB’s
share of the overall project budget.
7.9 Estimate ranges
Often at the project appraisal stage, many issues of the project design and implementation
are still unconfirmed and the data available are often range estimates. As a general rule, the
lower (more conservative) boundary value is used in the GHG assessments. However, if
some other value clearly has a higher probability, the team may use the most likely value.
8. UPDATING AND FURTHER INFORMATION
This approach is subject to refinement and expansion based on testing and feedback during
implementation.
For additional information please visit http://ghgaccounting.
For contacts, please get in touch with:

CPF (GHG accounting at corporate level, collaboration with other IFIs):



Jane Ebinger
Sameer Akbar
Agriculture Global Practice (interpretation at the project level)





Ademola Braimoh
Ijeoma Emenanjo
Maurice Rawlins
Christine Heumesser
Maria Ana de Rijk
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
13

Technical Working Group










Gabriella Izzi
Maurizio Guadagni
Tijen Arin
Lori Ann Conzo (IFC)
Philippe Ambrosi
Maria Amazonas
Grant Milne
Junu Shrethsa (GEF)
Riikka Rajalahti
Abel Lufafa
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
14
9. REFERENCES:
Bernoux, M., et al. (2010): Ex-Ante greenhouse gas balance of agricultural and forestry
development programs. Sci. Agric., 67(1), 31-40
Colomb, V., et al. (2013): Selection of appropriate calculators for landscape-scale
greenhouse gas assessment for agriculture and forestry. Environment Research Letters,
8, 1-10.
IPCC (2003): Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry. Edited
by Jim Penman, et al. IPCC.
IPCC (2006): 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Prepared by
the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa
K., Ngara T., and Tanabe K. (eds). Geneva: IPCC.
IPCC Working Group III Contribution to AR5 (2014): Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of
climate change. Chapter 11. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU).
Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/ (May, 2014)
UNFCC (2009): UNFCCC Resource Guide For Preparing the National Communications of
Non-Annex I Parties: Module 3 National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Available
athttp://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/09_resource_guide3.pdf (May, 2014)
World Bank (2011): Carbon-footprinting of ARD projects: Testing the Ex-Ante Carbon
Balance Appraisal Tool (EX-ACT). Washington, DC.
World Bank (2012): International Financial Institution Framework for Harmonized
Approach
to
Greenhouse
Gas
Accounting.
Available
at:
http://climatechange.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/IFI_Framework_for_Harmoniz
ed_Approach%20to_Greenhouse_Gas_Accounting.pdf (March, 2014)
World Bank (2013): GHG Accounting: Definitions and Key Concepts. Available at:
http://intresources.worldbank.org/INTCC/Resources/VERSION1GhgAccountingGuidan
ceNote.pdf (March, 2014).
WBG GHG Accounting Guidance – Agriculture
Annexes
ANNEX I:
PROJECT ELIGIBILITY AND DECISION-TREE FOR TOOL SELECTION
1. Eligibility for GHG Accounting projects in agriculture:
Annexes
Annex II: Checklist for choosing EX-ACT modules
Carbon-balance Impact
EX-ACT
Main Impact Area
Module(s) to be filled
A
Reduced emissions of carbon dioxide
A1
Reduction in rate of deforestation
Land use change
A2
Reduction in forest degradation
Land degradation
A3
POSITIVE (SINK)
B
C
NEGATIVE (SOURCE)
D
Adoption of improved cropland management
Introduction of renewable energy and energy-saving
A4
technologies
Reduced emissions of methane and nitrous oxide
Crop production
B1
Improved animal production
Livestock
B2
Improved management of livestock waste
Livestock
B3
More efficient management of irrigation water in rice
B4
Improved nutrient management
Crop production
Crop production,
Livestock
Carbon sequestration
C1
Conservation farming practices
Crop production
C2
Improved forest management practices
Land use change
C3
Afforestation and reforestation
Land use change
C4
Adoption of agro-forestry
Crop production
C5
Improved grassland management
Grassland
C6
Restoration of degraded land
Increased emissions of methane, nitrous oxide and carbon
dioxide
D1
Increased livestock production
Land use change
D2
Increased irrigated rice production
Crop production
D3
Inputs
D5
Increased fertilizer use and over-fertilization
Production, transportation, storage and transfer of
agricultural chemicals
Increased electricity consumption
D6
Increased fuel consumption
Investments
D7
Installation of irrigation systems
Investments
D8
Building of infrastructure
Investments
D4
E
Investments
Livestock
Inputs
Investments
Decreased carbon stocks
E1
E3
Increased deforestation & timber logging
Increased land degradation (forests, croplands,
grassland)
Cropland expansion
Land use change
Land degradation,
Grassland
Land use change
E4
Residue burning, deep tillage, ...
Crop production
E2
Project
intervention
YES
NO
Annexes
Annex III a: World Bank Agriculture GHG Inventory Reporting Template
1
2
3
Assumptions
Enter details regarding Land Use Change GHG emissions what
is being included/excluded, why, the duration and estimated
amount.
Baseline
Gross GHG Emissions
Enter details regarding Crop Production GHG emissions what
is being included/excluded, why, the duration and estimated
amount.
Enter details regarding Grassland and Livestock GHG
emissions, what is being included/excluded, why, the duration
and estimated amount.
4
Enter details regarding any Land Degradation GHG emissions
(i.e. Scope 3) what is being included/excluded, why, the
duration and estimated amount.
5
If applicable, enter details on any Input and Investments GHG
emissions what is being included/excluded, why, the duration
and estimated amount.
Annex III b: GHG Value Chain Calculations
Total Emissions in t CO2-eq for the
different phases of the Value Chain
Emissions (tCO2/t product)
Without
PRODUCTION
PROCESSING
TRANSPORT
USE
WASTE
With