Finland, Indonesia Urged to Pilot Carbon Tracking Now, Not Wait for Perfect Science
COP 31 Side Events • United NationsNovember 12, 2026
Locunity is an independent informational service and is not an official government page for this commission. All information is sourced from public footage and an analysis of official agendas with the aid of responsible, fact-checked AI. to report an error or omission.
Finland and Indonesia, each with millions of hectares of drained peatland, heard the same message at a COP31 side event on Nov. 12, 2026: start measuring land-sector carbon together now. Officials and scientists pitched a joint boreal-tropical pilot built on Finland's HICAT monitoring framework. They urged governments to treat uncertainty as a research agenda rather than a reason to wait, though no formal agreement was signed.
- "Don't wait for the perfect solution": Panel closes with a call to pilot, fund and expand monitoring
- Finland pitches HICAT, its integrated carbon-tracking framework, for a joint tropical pilot with Indonesia
- Drained peatlands, about 5 million hectares in Finland and about 7 million in Indonesia, emerge as a shared emissions problem
- Panel splits on whether observation systems can restore trust in voluntary carbon credits
Uncertainty Should Guide Research, Not Delay Action
Why it matters: Countries that claim results-based climate finance must verify their numbers, and that verification depends on uncertainty analysis. This applies especially to REDD+, the U.N. framework for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. How governments handle imperfect data determines whether they act or stall.
Where things stand: The closing panel was the longest stretch of the event, running about 35 minutes. Indonesian and Finnish officials agreed that uncertainty must be understood and quantified. They also agreed it should not become a reason to delay climate action.
Panelists worked through the practical problems:
- Revisions to national greenhouse gas inventories.
- The tension between bottom-up methods, such as ground inventories and emission factors, and top-down methods, such as atmospheric and satellite observation.
- How each method shapes the reporting on land use, land-use change and forestry that countries submit under the climate treaty.
The prescription: The panel's closing recommendations were explicit:
- Launch a pilot.
- Sustain the funding.
- Expand to more countries.
- Educate the public.
- Build practical partnerships.
"Don't wait for the perfect solution first," said a panelist.
Another panelist stressed that money for monitoring must keep flowing after launch. "This is not a one-time investment," said a panelist.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: No vote or formal commitment came out of the session. The recommendations put the burden on finance ministries and research funders. Observation towers and model teams need multiyear operating budgets, not just startup grants. Forest and peatland agencies would gain better data. They could also face scrutiny if new measurements revise their inventories.
What's next: The recommendations set out a sequence: pilot first, then sustained operations, then wider expansion. Panelists named no timeline or funding source.
Finland Pitches HICAT for a Tropical Pilot
The basics: HICAT is a Finnish framework that combines ground measurement towers, satellites and computer models. It aims to produce land-sector carbon balances, meaning the net carbon that forests, peatlands and farmland absorb or release.
Why it matters: Supporters said a joint pilot could improve national climate reporting and investment assessment in both countries.
Where things stand: Finland's minister said the Prime Minister's Office funds HICAT jointly with three institutions:
- The University of Helsinki.
- The Finnish Meteorological Institute.
- Luke, Finland's natural resources institute.
The minister proposed that Finland and Indonesia jointly develop an approach for the tropics. Indonesia's vice minister welcomed cooperation on joint research, observation and capacity development.
Presenters described HICAT's five new flux sites. These are towers that measure carbon exchange between land and atmosphere. Presenters also explained how the project integrates observations with models. They positioned HICAT alongside two larger efforts: the World Meteorological Organization's Global Greenhouse Gas Watch (G3W) and ICOS, Europe's Integrated Carbon Observation System. Presenters described the national and global systems as complementary.
Speakers argued that neither inventories nor satellites suffice on their own. In their view, sustained ground observation is the foundation for reliable national reporting.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The exchange produced expressions of cooperation, not a signed agreement. It still showed both governments publicly backing forest and peatland carbon measurement. Finnish research institutions stand to extend their methods to a new climate zone. Indonesian agencies could gain instruments, data and training through capacity development.
What's next: No pilot design, budget or start date was announced.
Drained Peatlands: A Shared Emissions Problem
Why it matters: Draining peatland for forestry or agriculture releases stored carbon. That makes drainage a major emissions source and a politically sensitive issue in both countries.
Where things stand: Panelists cited roughly 5 million drained hectares in Finland and about 7 million in Indonesia. The two peatland types are very different. Indonesia's tropical peat differs sharply from Finland's boreal peat, so emission factors from one cannot simply be applied to the other. Emission factors are the per-hectare estimates that turn land area into emissions.
A speaker described tropical peat research and the work of the International Tropical Peatland Center. The speaker explained how emission factors feed into Indonesia's forest reference emission level. That level is the baseline against which REDD+ performance is measured.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Country-specific science changes the numbers governments report and potentially the payments they receive. Better data could strengthen Indonesia's REDD+ claims. It could also expose higher drainage emissions than current factors capture. Landowners and plantation operators on drained peat sit at the center of either outcome.
Can Monitoring Rebuild Carbon Credit Trust?
Why it matters: Voluntary carbon market transactions worth billions depend on credible measurement of emissions avoided or removed.
Where things stand: One panelist argued that observation systems underpin the credibility of markets under Article 6, the Paris Agreement provision governing international carbon trading. That view held that markets will always operate on imperfect science, and that the best available science is the right standard.
The other side: A panelist offering a climate-analytics view disagreed on scope. In that view, national-scale observation helps verify country inventories. It cannot resolve the counterfactual problem in project-level voluntary credits: proving what emissions would have occurred without a project.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The split matters for different players:
- Credit buyers and project developers: Better national monitoring may not settle doubts about individual offsets.
- Governments trading under Article 6: The same systems could carry more weight at the country level.
Looking Ahead
The event ended with political goodwill and a clear set of recommendations, but no signed commitment, budget or timeline. The test is whether Finland and Indonesia turn the proposed pilot into a funded program with sustained operating money.