An NDC under Article 4 is communicated by Parties every five years (Article 4.9 of the Paris Agreement) and is not subject to review under the ETF.

There is a relationship between the NDC and the ETF as Parties need to provide a description of their NDC in their BTR against which progress made will be tracked (18/CMA.1, para. 64). The information on a Party’s NDC that is required to be provided in the BTR is similar, but not identical, to the information that is necessary for transparency, clarity and understanding in their NDC (4/CMA.1, para. 7).

Although the adequacy and appropriateness of the Party’s NDC (including the adequacy and appropriateness of the description of that NDC in the BTR) and the indicators chosen to track progress made in implementing the NDC are not subject to review under the ETF (18/CMA.1, para.149(b)), the Party’s tracking of progress made in implementing its NDC, including the description of its NDC, and information provided for each selected indicator used for tracking progress is subject to review in accordance with the MPGs (18/CMA.1, paras. 146(a) and 150(b)).

The progress a Party has made in implementing and / or achieving the NDC is summarized in the “structured summary” of the BTR and reviewed by a technical expert review team.

NDCs under Article 4 are self-determined and hence the scope of the NDC is decided by each Party, including any mitigation targets contained therein, recognizing that developed countries should undertake an economy-wide absolute emissions reductions target, while developing countries are encouraged to work towards such a target over time (Article 4.4). LDCs and SIDs may submit low GHG emissions development strategies, plans and actions (4/CMA.1, para.4).

Moreover, the Paris Agreement determines that each Party’s successive NDC will represent a progression beyond the Party’s then current NDC and reflect the highest possible ambition (Article 4.3 of the Paris Agreement).

Furthermore, a Party may at any time adjust its existing NDC with a view to enhancing its level of ambition (Article 4. 11 of the Paris Agreement).

However, once the NDC has been decided by a Party, decision 4/CMA.1 (annex I) outlines the information required to be contained in the NDC, as applicable to the selected NDC. 

All Parties must provide information on the following, as applicable to their NDC:

• Quantifiable information on the reference point;
• Time frame and/or periods for implementation (when is the start and end date of the target? Is it multiple or a single year?
• Scope and coverage of the NDC (e.g. what is the target? Categories and gases covered?)
• National planning processes for developing the NDC, and if available implementation plans, taking into account national circumstances;
• All assumptions and methodological approaches;
• How the Party determines that its NDC is fair and ambitious? and
• How the NDC contributes towards achieving the objective of the Convention.

The information necessary for clarity, transparency and understanding shall be provided for the second and subsequent NDCs and Parties are strongly encouraged to provide this information in relation to their first NDC, including when communicating or updating it by 2020.

When developing the NDC, the Party should clearly think through its NDC and related targets, how it will domestically track implementation and achievement of the NDC, and how it will ensure the availability of information on indicators over time for reporting in subsequent BTRs. This is necessary for a Party to ensure methodological consistency between the NDC it originally communicates and tracking of progress made in implementation through the BTRs (18/CMA.1, annex, para. 76(b)). This consistency in turn will promote a more robust accounting framework.

The MPGs do not replace the NC reporting guidelines for Annex I and non-Annex I Parties under the Convention. Accordingly, developed countries are required to submit an NC every four years (2/CP.17, para. 14) and developing countries should submit an NC every four years (1/CP.16, para. 60(b)).

Once the MPGs are in effect, and taking the mandated timelines into account, Parties to the PA may:

• Continue to report a separate NC every 4 years, following the guidelines in 17/CP.8 or 4/CP.5 (to be updated by 6/CP.25) as appropriate OR
• May choose to submit a single BTR/NC report in the years an NC is submitted, following the guidance in the MPGs for BTRs and including supplemental chapters on research and systematic observations (RSO) and education/training and public awareness following the guidelines in 4/CP.5 (to be updated by 6/CP.25) and 17/CP.8, as appropriate (para. 43 of 1/CP.24). In addition, Parties that have not reported information on adaptation in section IV of the BTR must also include an additional chapter on adaptation, in accordance with the relevant guidelines in 4/CP.5 (to be updated by 6/CP.25) and 17/CP.8, as appropriate (para. 43 of 1/CP.24).

For developed countries, NC9, due in 2026, is expected to be the first submitted with the MPGs in effect.

Consistent with the para. 3 of decision 6/CP.25 NC8 will be due as early as the GHG inventory submission in 2022 but no later than December 31, 2022. The deadline for subsequent NCs (e.g. NC9) was not addressed in this decision. Currently NC9 would be due January 1, 2026 (2/CP.17, para. 14) while BTR2 is due no later than 31 Dec 2026.  In order to operationalize provisions of para. 3 of decision 6/CP.25 when submitting NC9 and any subsequent National Communication, it may be necessary for Parties to consider changing the future submission dates of National Communications.

According to decision 1/CP.16, para. 60(b), National Communications by developing countries are due every four years but without a clear starting date. This is why, for practical reasons and with a view to having a robust overview of trends, it might be helpful for developing countries to strive to submit their National Communication in conjunction with their BTRs, when applicable.

For Parties included in Annex I to the Convention that are also Party to the PA (i.e. developed countries): Review is guided by 18/CMA.1, as well as the relevant guidelines in 13/CP.20 for the additional chapters on RSO, training and public awareness and adaptation (para. 43 of 1/CP.24). The guidelines noted here are relevant regardless of whether the Party submits the NC as a separate report or integrated with the BTR.

For Parties that are not included in Annex I to the Convention and are also Party to the PA (i.e. developing countries), the BTR only will be reviewed per 18/CMA.1. If the BTR/NC is submitted as a single report, the additional chapters in the NC (RSO, education/training/awareness, adaptation) will not be reviewed. If a separate NC is submitted, it will not undergo any review.

All Annex I Parties under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol (including both Parties and non-Parties to the PA) must continue to submit annual GHG inventories. The requirement to submit annual inventories dates to para. 2(b) of decision 3/CP.1, with the 15^th of April deadline reiterated in decisions 3/CP.5 (para. 2) and 24/CP.19 (para. 3). For Parties to the PA, this GHG inventory submission must be made even in years when a BTR is not due (para. 42 of 1/CP.24).

• Parties to the PA must use the MPGs (decision 18/CMA.1) for reporting their GHG inventory information as of the first BTR submitted, at the latest in 2024 (para. 42 of 1/CP.24).
• Decision 18/CMA.1, section VII, will be used for the review of information on the inventory once the inventory is submitted in conjunction with the first BTR (either in Section II of the BTR or as a standalone document).

The 15 April 2024 deadline for the annual GHG inventory submission is applicable. Unless the deadline contained in para. 2(b) of decision 3/CP.1 is amended by a future decision, Parties included in Annex I to the Convention will be required to continue to submit a stand-alone GHG inventory by 15 April every year, including 2024. An Annex I Party under the Convention that is also a Party to the PA could then choose to also submit their complete BTR at this time or wait until closer to the December deadline and submit the BTR with either reference to the stand-alone inventory submitted in April (provided it was prepared using the MPGs) or an updated GHG inventory (18/CMA.1, para. 3).

According to 18/CMA. 1, para. 3, the first BTR must be submitted by all Parties no later than 31 December 2024.

Each Party identifies the relevant indicator(s) it will use to track progress made in implementing and achieving its NDC (decision 18/CMA.1, annex, paras 65–78).

Indicators are self-selected by each country and may be qualitative or quantitative and thus may come in many formats, inter alia, net GHG emissions and removals, percentage reduction of GHG intensity, relevant qualitative indicators for a specific policy or measure, mitigation co-benefits of adaptation actions and/or economic diversification plans.

Parties with an NDC that consists of adaptation actions and/or economic diversification plans resulting in mitigation co-benefits must provide information to track progress on implementation and achievement of the domestic policies and measures implemented, including the sectors and activities associated with the response measures and the social and economic consequences of the response measures (decision 18/CMA.1, annex, para. 78). 

Progress in the implementation and achievement of the NDC is tracked through submission of the BTR, including through a structured summary of information (decision 4/CMA.1, para. 17) and the review of that information (decision 18/CMA.1, para. 150(b)). Specifically, for each selected indicator(s) Parties shall compare the most recent information in the implementation period with the information for the reference point to track progress and to assess whether it has achieved its NDC (decision 18/CMA.1, paras. 67–70).

Developed country Parties are required to report information on FTC support provided and mobilized to developing countries Parties under Articles 9, 10 and 11, in accordance with paras. 118- 129 of the annex to 18/CMA.1, and the CTF tables that are currently under development and to be finalized by CMA 3 (Article 13.9 of the Paris Agreement).

Other Parties that provide support should report information on FTC support provided and mobilized to developing country Parties under Articles 9, 10 and 11. It is important to note that in accordance with para. 118 of the annex to 18/CMA.1, these Parties are encouraged, but not required, to use the MPGs when reporting this information (Article 13.9 of the Paris Agreement).

Developing country Parties should, but are not required to, report information contained in paras. 130-145 of the annex to decision 18/CMA.1 (Article 13.10 of the Paris Agreement).

• It is beneficial for developing country Parties to report information on FTC needed and received in order to help facilitate implementation of their NDC under Article 4 of the Paris Agreement.
• It is also noteworthy that the Paris Agreement specifically encourages these Parties to report on support needed and received for implementing Article 13 of the Paris Agreement (18/CMA.1, annex, paras. 143-145).

The Paris Agreement, and specifically the ETF, refers to “flexibility” under very specific circumstances- flexibility is available to those developing countries that need it in the light of their capacities.

• This flexibility is offered for specific provisions related to the scope, frequency and level of detail of reporting, and in the modalities of the review and of the facilitative multilateral consideration of progress and is to be self-determined by those developing countries who elect to apply it. This flexibility is not automatically granted; rather developing countries that have capacity constraints and apply the flexibility must indicate in their BTR that they have done so, explaining their capacity constraints and their intended timeframe for improvement related to the identified capacity constraint(s) (decision 18/CMA.1, para. 6).
• The technical expert review team cannot review the Party’s determination to apply a flexibility provision, including the estimated time frame for improvement, nor can it assess whether the Party has the capacity to implement the provision without flexibility (decision 18/CMA.1, para. 149(e)). 
• In recognition of the fact that Parties have different starting points, the flexibility provisions allow Parties that need them in light of their capacities a means of adhering to the MPGs now while enabling them to highlight specific capacity building needs.

Developing countries that need flexibility in light of their capacities may only apply flexibilities specifically identified in the MPGs (see Table 1. below).

For each flexibility provided, the Party is required to explain the capacity constraint that does not allow them to apply the full provision and is required to provide its anticipated timeframe for improvements related to the capacity constraint (18/CMA.1, annex, para. 6).

The MPGs provide a choice to LDCs and SIDS, who may choose to participate in the same centralized review as a group (decision 18/CMA.1, para. 157).

Parties may suggest a centralized location for the review other than at the UNFCCC secretariat.

In terms of who initiates such a group review the secretariat may approach a group of countries based on the timing of submissions, and if applicable, results of previous reviews, and seek their interest in a combined review. There will be a need to consider how many countries are to be covered by a single technical expert review team? This number may depend on the overall approach to review, degree of elaboration of the BTR and the size of the technical expert review team. It is also possible that a specific subset of Parties could approach the secretariat requesting such a review.

In addition, LDCs and SIDS may choose to participate as a group during the subsequent working group phase of the facilitative multilateral consideration of progress (decision 18/CMA.1, para. 194).

Under the PA, information on adaptation submitted by developed and developing countries pursuant to section IV of the annex to 18/CMA.1 is not subject to review.

However, if a developed country submits adaptation information as an additional chapter in the BTR to meet its reporting obligations for National Communications under the Convention (decision 4/CP.5 (to be updated by 6/CP.25)), this would be subject to review. 

Such a review for developed countries would be conducted following 13/CP.20 (para. 118 (c)(v)). This is clear in 1/CP.24 para. 43(c) which says that if a Party’s NC is subject to review the review will be conducted in accordance with 18/CMA.1 and shall also include a review of the information submitted under para. 43(b) (which refers to adaptation).

Information on adaptation submitted by developing countries is not subject to a review.

Information reported by a developed country Party in its BTR on FTC support provided and mobilized to developing country Parties under Articles 9, 10 and 11 is subject to review by a technical expert review team.

Other Parties that choose to provide information in their BTR on FTC provided and mobilized as referred to in Article 9, paras 2 and 3 may undergo a technical expert review of this information at their discretion.

Information reported on FTC needed and received by developing country Parties is not subject to a technical expert review. If a developing country Party chooses to report information on support provided, this information may undergo review at the Party’s discretion, as noted above.

According to the MPGs, there is an early role for lead reviewers (LRs) under the PA to develop the initial assessment procedures for simplified reviews of annual GHG inventories (para.155 of annex to 18/CMA.1).

Para. 180 of the annex to decision 18/CMA.1 refers to selecting LRs that have participated as LRs under the Convention when composing technical expert review teams. Experienced LRs who have participated in processes under the Convention will be essential to implementation of the PA in the early years.

In practice, many LRs for BR/NC and technical leads of TA of BURs are the same experts.  Further joint discussions on operationalization of the ETF and the role of the LRs under the ETF are planned among current LRs of BR/NCs and technical leads under the Convention at the LR meetings.

The primary role of the CGE under the Paris Agreement is to support developing countries in implementing the ETF under Article 13, similar to the work undertaken by the group to support developing countries in fulfilling their measurement and reporting obligations under the Convention.

In addition, the CGE will provide technical advice to the secretariat in implementation of the training of the technical expert review teams under the Paris Agreement (18/CMA.1, para. 15), recognizing that the CGE focuses its support on developing countries, while the training programme must be designed to be applicable to all Parties.

Efforts are underway to evaluate and, as necessary, update current procedures for securing GEF funds in order to enhance efficiency.

The GEF, as an operating entity of the Financial Mechanism, upon request, provides financial support to developing countries for the preparation of NCs and BURs. Currently, developing countries can access up to US$352,000 for BUR reporting and US$500,000 for NC reporting. There are currently four options for countries to access GEF resources for preparation of NCs and BURs. In the first option, countries can work with a GEF agency of their choice to develop a project proposal. Secondly, countries can be part of a UNEP umbrella project for NCs and BURs (http://un-gsp.org/). Thirdly, countries can access the set-aside resources via direct access from the GEF Secretariat. Fourthly, those countries that wish to utilize additional resources can use their STAR allocation to complement the set-aside resources. Countries may contact the GEF or its implementing agencies for further information on these access modalities. For more information, see and https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/FTS%20Brochure.pdf.

The GEF submits an annual report to the COP, which also includes information on the status of support accessed for NC and BUR preparation as well as information on progress in implementing the Capacity-building Initiative for Transparency (for e.g., for information communicated by the GEF in 2019, refer to https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/CP2019_05E.pdf).

Under the PA, Parties will have a choice as to whether to submit a separate NC and BTR in the years when submissions coincide, or a single report. Separate NC funding is still possible after 2024.  The GEF has also been requested to support developing country Parties in preparing their first and second BTRs (18/CMA.1, para. 8).

The CMA has requested the GEF to support developing countries in preparing their BTRs and in identifying options to improve the efficiency of the application process for providing support to developing countries (e.g. by encouraging the GEF to fund more than one report at a time and streamlining the process related to applications, implementation plans and signing of agreements (18/CMA.1, paras. 8-10)).

The GEF has initiated consultations on how to meet the support needs for the preparation of BTRs (https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/publications/gef_unfccc_guidance_cops_responses_cop1_cop24_201911.pdf).

The training programme will only be agreed as of CMA 3 (18/CMA.1, para. 12(c)). Ideally development of the training courses should start in 2020 to be ready for experts to enroll in training activities in 2021.

The secretariat continues to explore innovative ways to increase the number of experts that have access to take the training courses. We estimate that the ETF could require up to approximately 1500 qualified and available experts on a biennial basis, depending on the number of BTR submissions received, meaning that a significantly larger number of experts should qualify to become part of a technical expert review team to ensure that a sufficient number are available to support the reviews.

Training of review experts is different from activities related to capacity building for developing countries to enable them to meet the reporting obligations under the Paris Agreement. Yet, there is a clear link between the two processes. Following existing approaches, the expectations are that Parties nominate, to the UNFCCC Roster of Experts, those experts that already have participated in capacity building activities and gained some experience with national reporting. This is with a view to be able to take the training courses, successfully pass the exams and contribute to the review process. Then, the review experts can bring the experience from review back to the national level and help improve the national reporting system.

To the extent possible, the secretariat will start streamlining and transitioning the existing systems, tools and applications under the current MRV system to fit the purpose of the ETF and the continuation of other processes (NDCs, NAMAs, etc.). The secretariat is currently developing and implementing some final enhancements to existing tools (BR common tabular formats (CTF), BR data interface, virtual team rooms, statistical outlier detection tools, CGE, etc.) to ensure the finalization of current MRV requirements.

Most systems and tools under the existing MRV system will continue to be supported in their current forms to enable countries that are not Party to the PA to continue meeting their reporting obligations. This means, in particular that the IT systems will need to be developed and be maintained in parallel to support both countries that are, and are not, Party to the PA. 

To formally submit under the PA, the Parties still need the CTF, common reporting tables and, ideally, the outlines of the BTR and the NID. These outlines/reporting formats are to be agreed at CMA 3. The secretariat will then require time to develop and test the reporting software, ideally starting in 2021.

The secretariat is aware that some developing countries have expressed an interest to submit their first BTR in 2022.