Good Practice Analysis on LEDS, NAMAs and MRV:
Background and Methodology

The International Partnership on Mitigation and MRV was established to support the exchange on mitigation-related activities and MRV between developing and developed countries in order to help close the global ambition gap. To this end, the Partnership activities contribute to the design and effective implementation of Low-Emission Development Strategies (LEDS), Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) and Measuring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) systems.

The Low Emission Capacity Building (LECB) Programme is a joint collaboration between the European Commission (EC), Germany, Australia and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) which aims to strengthen technical and institutional capacities in 25 countries to design and implement low-emission development at the country level through mitigation actions in the public and private sectors.

In order to increase mitigation ambition amongst partner countries and contribute to enhanced action in the relatively new fields of LEDS, NAMAs and MRV plans and systems, the Partnership and the LECB Programme commissioned Ecofys and partners (ECN, INCAE and TERI) to examine a selection of cases which demonstrate how mitigation actions are being effectively designed and implemented across a range of national contexts. The resulting good practice case studies presented here provide rich insights from 21 countries, for how mitigation actions are being effectively designed and implemented worldwide.


 The study was executed in three phases. In the first phase, a checklist for assessing country mitigation architecture (i.e. institutional and policy arrangements and capacity for supporting mitigation action) and sets of good practice criteria in LEDS, NAMA and MRV were drafted, reviewed and revised. In the second phase, based on this checklist, the mitigation architecture of a sample of countries across three focus regions (Asia and the Caucasus, Africa and Middle East/North Africa (MENA), Latin America and the Caribbean) was reviewed.

In the third phase, a selection of good practice examples were identified across 21 countries in the three focus regions and a case-based analysis was undertaken to produce a series of in-depth case studies. These phases will be described in further detail in the following sections:

  1. Criteria and checklist development: Based on a checklist and criteria drafted by the Secretariat of the International Partnership for Mitigation and MRV with input and feedback from the UNDP-LECB Programme, the items included in each were reviewed against relevant literature and through a series of expert interviews and consultations. Amendments were then made based on a final review by the project steering group. The good practice criteria can be found in Annex 4.1.
  2. Review of mitigation architecture: The review was prepared with data sourced from a combination of desk research and expert input from UNDP and GIZ in-country contacts. Rather than a comprehensive in-depth assessment, the review was intended as a snapshot stocktake of conditions across a range of leading countries to identify potential good practice cases for further analysis.
  3. Case analysis: Based on activities identified from the review undertaken in phase two and a further review of literature and expert input, a short list of potential good practice cases was developed. The selection of cases aims at representing a balance of regional and country contexts, and at providing a comprehensive range of practice examples covering LEDS, NAMA and MRV related activities. Further information was sought on a number of cases before a final shortlist of 21 country cases was agreed. Ecofys, together with its regional partners (ECN, INCAE and TERI) then undertook in-country research including interviews with experts and stakeholders across each of these 21 cases. Following review by the project steering group, authors then revised case drafts and verified the final content with interviewees to ensure accuracy.

 A summary of the main success factors identified in the study can be found here.
See individual case studies at:
See criteria for good practice applied in the study here.