Forest Carbon Standards - a WWF Assessment Guide
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Forest Carbon Standards
a WWF Assessment Guide
Contents Introduction Foreword
WWF has been active in the forest carbon field since 2007.
Foreword
Introduction
WWF has been active in the forest carbon field since 2007. It soon became clear that this work should not only involve WWF
Background undertaking its own credible demonstration activities, but also efforts to improve the quality of forest carbon activities in ge-
neral. Given the incertitude in carbon accounting for forests and the controversies around many offset projects, it was agreed
Purpose of the guide that clear guidance was needed on what constitutes a high quality forest carbon activity in terms of accountability, climate
benefit and social and environmental co-benefits.
Assessment guidance: source material and basic parameters
This resulted in the decision to work with existing and upcoming promising standard systems. In 2008 at the Convention
Contributing elements on Biological Diversity conference in Bonn, the Green Carbon Guidebook was launched as initial WWF guidance on this
subject. At the same time, WWF started to engage in a selected number of forest carbon activities around the globe, at project,
Background guidance documents landscape and national levels, testing different project types, methodologies, and ecosystems for the best suitable forest
carbon approaches. These efforts are ongoing and the lessons learned inform our principles for high quality forest carbon
Assessment framework and principles standards. In 2010, WWF’s engagement has developed further, through the creation of the Forest Carbon Standards Advisory
Committee and the launch of more detailed guidance in the form of this current book.
WWF criteria for assessing forest carbon standards’ requirements
The guide will be useful for three main target audiences: those involved in developing forest carbon standards, those invol-
Module 1 Credible carbon accounting ved in planning forest carbon projects, and investors wishing to sponsor forest carbon projects or buy carbon credits that are
Module 2 Social and environmental impacts credible and low-risk.
Module 3 Validation and registration of project design
Module 4 Social and environmental performance The guidance is based on seven principles that credible forest carbon standards would adhere to. These are:
Module 5 Verification
Module 6 Registration and determination of carbon emission reductions 1. Credible carbon accounting;
2. Assessing social and environmental impacts and avoiding adverse effects on communities and the environment;
WWF general criteria for assessing the design and application of standards 3. Independent validation of the project design and monitoring the work of the validation bodies;
4. Assessing social and environmental performance against globally acceptable principles;
5. Independent verification of the social and environmental project performance and the achieved GHG emission reductions;
6. Registration of carbon emission reductions to avoid double counting; and
7. High quality design and application of the standard itself and its creditation systems.
Notice The process of defining principles and criteria was guided by members of the WWF Forest Carbon Standards Advisory Com-
mittee, an expert panel that has been created to continually review forest carbon standards, and that will be officially launched
alongside with this guide. The committee will further develop the guide based on experience in the field and would welcome
The Green Carbon Guidebook, launched in 2008, can be seen as Vol. I of feedback from third parties based on its use.
the current Assessment Guide. It sets out what an appropriate meta-stan-
dard framework (MSF) must encompass in terms of both technical and Finally, many thanks to all those involved in the development of this guide.
methodological elements and implementation procedures to guide project
developers and investors. Those issues are identified for which adequate
guidance exists and it is pointed out where to find it. Topics are discussed
for which further development is encouraged. Finally, it describes how Guénola Kahlert
WWF is already testing and helping to contribute to this emerging guidance WWF Germany
Green carbon through two field-based pilot forest carbon projects. Frankfurt
guidebook
May 2010
2 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 3
Introduction Background
Similar issues arise in the implementation of both individual
(voluntary) REDD projects and national REDD-plus pro-
grams. The main issues relate to leakage (if the emission re-
duction activities in one place trigger emissions elsewhere),
permanence (as the carbon sequestered can be released later if
the forests are logged, burned or succumb to disease) and ad-
ditionality (if the forest project would have happened anyway,
without the carbon financing). The design and implementa-
tion of REDD activities, whether on an individual or national
level, will need to address these issues and specific safeguards
will be needed to avoid negative social and environmental im-
pacts from these REDD actions and ensure that they yield net
positive reductions of GHG emissions. In the context of the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Forests are now widely recognised as playing a key role in regulating global carbon cycles, comprising as they do the largest (UNFCCC), the proposal for implementing REDD-plus with-
terrestrial store of carbon. Deforestation and forest degradation – mostly in the tropics – are responsible for about 15 per cent of in national programs has been viewed as pivotal in address-
global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.1 Managing forest carbon stocks is therefore a critical component of any comprehen- ing risks of leakage and additionality. Implementation of such
sive approach to keeping the rise in global temperature well below 2 degrees Celsius. programs is vital in the future to ensure that emissions from
deforestation and forest degradation are addressed at scale and
Concerns about the climate change implications of deforestation have led to the development of numerous initiatives to try and to avoid the risks of displacing emissions, or in this case forest
harness the GHG reduction potential of efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing loss, from one place to another.
countries (REDD). Some of these initiatives have focussed on developing projects for the voluntary carbon market. This market
has developed over recent years as more and more companies, governments, organisations and the general public are willing In order to address the potential shortcomings of forest carbon projects and strengthen the credibility of the voluntary forest
to offset their climate footprint through the funding of projects, including forest projects which reduce GHG emissions.2 Even carbon market, a number of different standards has been developed in recent years. These standards set (more or less rigid) rules
the inconclusive results of the United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen do not appear to have negatively for carbon accounting methodologies and for the associated project impacts on rural livelihood and natural ecosystems. As a
impacted the demand for forestry as a voluntary offset option.3 Voluntary carbon offsets bring together the demand for compensa- result, there is a growing need for a generally agreed framework which provides evidence and confidence that carbon benefits
tion of emissions from energy use with investors and project proponents who can deliver carbon emission reduction credits from claimed by different standard initiatives deliver real, additional and permanent reduction of emissions.
forest projects. There is also a range of voluntary forest carbon activities that are aiming to reduce carbon emissions but are not
ultimately seeking crediting or offsetting. These usually take place at a project or landscape level.
A plethora of different carbon standards exists today. A general frame-
Alongside these voluntary carbon projects is an emerging set of national REDD programs and early actions to support the
development of national REDD programs. In the context of the international climate negotiations, the concept of REDD has work needs to be developed, to assess the credibility and effectiveness
been expanded (and renamed REDD-plus) to address not only deforestation and forest degradation, but also the conservation of
forest carbon stocks, the sustainable management of forests, and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks. While the Copenha- of these standards.
gen conference did not produce an international agreement on the post-2012 climate deal, it did move forward on developing
REDD-plus. Through its work on forest carbon standards, WWF aims to ensure that forest carbon activities of all kinds result in climate miti-
gation benefits and are carried out in ways that ensure the integrity of existing forests, protect biodiversity and promote a range
of other environmental and social values, including clean water, poverty alleviation and respect for the rights of indigenous
peoples and other local communities.
1
Estimates vary on this. In the 1990s, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change produced a figure of 20 per cent while more recent estimates by other researchers range
from about 12 to 25 per cent.
2
See ‘State of the Forest Carbon Markets 2009’. www.ecosystemmarketplace.com
3
See ‘The forest carbon offsetting report 2010’. www.ecosecurities.com
4 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 5
Introduction Purpose of this document
This guide has been designed to apply to standard systems for volun- This guide does not present a new forest carbon standard. Rather, it
tary forest carbon projects. It can also be used to inform the develop- draws on a number of existing standards and related initiatives to pro-
ment of rules for compliance-related forest carbon activities. pose a set of minimum requirements for effective standard systems.
This guide presents the WWF framework for assessing forest carbon standards. It represents WWF minimum requirements, The assessment criteria are informed by and consistent with WWF’s body of work on voluntary standards for aquaculture,
drawn from existing positive examples and our own best practice experience. The guidance is intended to apply to standards agriculture, and forest commodities. The advice and criteria set out in this guide, and in the earlier Green Carbon Guidebook,
used to design, validate and verify voluntary activities, such as early action initiatives under REDD-plus and voluntary forest form the basis of decision-making by a new WWF body – the WWF Forest Carbon Standards Advisory Committee. This is an
carbon projects. advisory panel composed of internal and external experts, tasked with evaluating existing and emerging forest carbon standards.
We also expect these guidelines to help inform the develop-
ment of rules for compliance activities (including forest carbon WWF’s Forest Carbon Standards Advisory Committee
activities used to meet international, national or sub-national
GHG reduction objectives). Finally, they can also inform ap- At Carbon Expo in May 2010 WWF launched its Forest Carbon Standards Advisory Committee – an expert forum comprising WWF and external experts
proaches to scale up REDD activities to the national level. on certification, standard systems, and issues related to climate change and forest carbon.
Such programs, however, will be subject to policies, regula-
The committee has been established with the aim of providing independent and reliable guidance to the broader community of practice, as well as to the
tions and legislation that are beyond the scope of this guide.
WWF network itself on existing and emerging standards for forest carbon projects. The committee will assess and evaluate the quality of these standards
on a continuing basis. Another element of its work is to engage with standards initiatives in order to improve their standards. Much of WWF’s expertise and
The guidance in this document builds on a 2008 WWF publi- decision-making results from experience with the growing number of forest carbon demonstration projects around the world.
cation, entitled Green Carbon Guidebook, which set out what
an appropriate forest carbon standard would need to encom- This current document, as well as WWF’s earlier Green Carbon Guidebook, provide the set of principles and criteria against which the standards are being
pass and what kinds of social and environmental safeguards measured.
would need to be in place. This current document now aims
to provide more detailed guidance in terms of a set of criteria For more information on the committee, visit www.panda.org/forestcarbon.
(based on minimum requirements) which would need to be
fulfilled by credible voluntary forest carbon standards. These
criteria are presented in the following chapters together with
the rationale for including them and setting the threshold lev-
els of each one. The guide also provides criteria for processes
to be followed in the development of standards and the govern-
ance procedures of standard initiatives.
The principles and criteria for forest carbon standards described in this document are expected to be of interest to a wide range
of players in the forest carbon market, including:
• Developers of standard initiatives seeking guidance on how to best design or improve a forest carbon standard system and its governance processes to meet
WWF compliant quality criteria;
• Project proponents trying to identify the best standards available for the design of their projects; and
• Investors seeking opportunities to sponsor projects or potential buyers of credits from forest carbon projects with a high level of credibility, and wanting to
avoid damage to their reputation from any negative impacts of these projects on communities or ecosystems.
This document has been developed with these interests in mind and draws on key elements from existing guidance to create an
assessment framework for credible claims from forest carbon activities.
6 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 7
Assessment guidance: source material and basic parameters
Contributing elements Principles for High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF)
NSERVATIONThe High Conservation Resource Network was established to provide guidance on the identification and man-
HIGH
ONSERVATION
ONSERVATION
O CONSERVATION
VALUE
In setting or assessing forest carbon standards, a range of different requirements will need to be considered in order to address RESTSS
REST
RESTS
FORESTS: agement of areas and ecosystems that deliver crucial social and ecological services. This concept aims to
The concept
the multi-faceted aspects of forest carbon projects. This assessment guide therefore incorporates the following elements: in theory
maintain these values and can be used in the design and implementation phases of forest carbon projects. The
and practice
concept is integrated into this guide in order to evaluate if standards include methods to safeguard ecosystems
• General rules for standard-setting which were developed by the International Social and Environmental Labelling Alliance and the International Organization for 30
with high conservation values. 31
Standardization (ISO) in order to achieve compliance with World Trade Organization rules for avoiding technical barriers to international trade;
• Directives available from international standards and best practice experience from the work of validation and verification bodies, including knowledge gained Gold Standard (GS)
over recent years from certification of forest management; UPGRADE The Gold Standard was initiated by WWF in conjunction with a wide range of environmental organisations, busi-
• Credible standards for forest management practices which ensure the social and environmental integrity of forest operations; nesses and governments. The Gold Standard is restricted to renewable energy and energy efficiency projects and
• Guidance for the avoidance of detrimental social and environmental impacts from forest carbon projects developed by a wide range of organisations and insti- does not apply to any land-use projects such as forestry. However, it does incorporate a set of basic principles
tutions including among others the international finance institutions, the High Conservation Value Network and WWF itself; and related rules governing the involvement of interested parties and stakeholders in the project design. These
• Appropriate ways to ensure that the benefits and opportunity costs of forest carbon measures are equitably shared between project proponents, local people, are considered relevant for the development of forest carbon projects and are therefore incorporated in this guide.
investors and other involved parties; and
• Tools and methodologies for ensuring credible carbon accounting. Voluntary Carbon Standard
VCS Guidance for Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use Projects
Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS AFOLU)
The VCS has been developed by The Climate Group, the International Emissions Trading Association, the
Guidance for Agriculture, Forestry
and Other Land Use Projects
World Business Council for Sustainable Development and a range of other business, governmental and non-
Background guidance documents governmental organisations. VCS includes a range of innovative tools to deal with problems of land-use-based
carbon projects (termed Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses (AFOLU)). These tools are therefore incor-
Numerous existing initiatives and instruments already address the issues involved in the design and implementation of forest www.v-c-s.org © VCS Association 1
porated into this current document.
carbon projects and broader activities related to forest conservation, management and enhancement of carbon stocks. WWF
has been participating in many of these initiatives. Since there would be little value in attempting to reinvent the thinking and WWF REDD-plus guiding principles
guidance provided by these initiatives, the assessment criteria set out in this document are based on, or take into account, the Principles such as benefit-sharing, participation, recognition of rights to the land and the carbon stocks, sus-
following guidance documents:4 tainable development benefits, protection of forest biodiversity and ecosystem services provide the basis for
programs and projects under REDD, including government-led programs. These principles advocated by WWF
are considered in this guide and are included in the relevant criteria.
Forest Certification Forest Certification Assessment Guide (FCAG) July 2009
WWF Global Climate Policy
P o s i t i o n Pa P e r WWF policy on forests and climate change mitigation
Assessment Guide (FCAG) Emily Brickell
This document was developed by WWF in close collaboration with the World Bank. It includes the necessary This document focuses on WWF’s position in relation to REDD in the UNFCCC framework, including financ-
Climate & Forests Officer
Forests Programme
WWF-UK
Tel: 0044 (0)1483 412579
E-mail: EBrickell@wwf.org.uk
WWF position
on forests and climate
elements for credible certification of forest management and the rules for standard-setting and governance of change mitigation ing, scale of implementation and safeguards to ensure that REDD delivers on climate, biodiversity and social
certification systems. The principles reflect the values that WWF adheres to in its forest program and are there- benefits.
Contents 3 Executive summary
4 The background
5 Where we are now
5 inclusion of REDD in the post-2012
climate agreement
6 Phasing a national-level
REDD approach
fore central to WWF’s position with regard to forest carbon.
7 Financing of REDD
8 Scope of forest-carbon
activities to be included
A FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING CREDIBLE FOREST 8 Delivering robust climate benefits
CERTIFICATION SYSTEMS / SCHEMES 9 Delivering broader social and
environmental objectives
10 annex a:
Preliminary draft of REDD national phasing
A publication of the WWF/World Bank Global Forest Alliance July 2006
W W F G l O B a l C l i m aT E P O l i C y 1
Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA) IndIgenous PeoPles and ConservatIon:
WWF statement oF PrInCIPles
WWF policy on indigenous peoples
The Climate Community and Biodiversity project design standards have been developed by the Climate, Com- Indigenous peoples are the custodians of many pristine forests but are often the first victims of inappropriate
munity and Biodiversity Alliance, a partnership of research institutions, corporations and NGOs. These stand- development in forest regions. WWF has defined its policy commitments to indigenous peoples and their rights.
Climate, Community and Biodiversity
ards evaluate land-based carbon mitigation projects in the early stages of development against a set of criteria to As forest carbon projects are increasingly planned in regions with indigenous populations, they need to safe-
assess the extent to which the projects are simultaneously addressing climate change, supporting local communi- guard the well-being of these populations. The basic elements of the WWF position paper have been taken into
Project Design Standards
A WWF Position Paper
SECOND EDITION
ties and conserving biodiversity. They are considered here as a reference standard for evaluating the social and consideration in developing this assessment guide.
environmental benefits from forest carbon projects.
Relevant guidance available from UN climate change bodies
A number of key documents have been developed by institutions established under the United Nations Frame-
work Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Relevant documents from these bodies have been used
in the development of this guide.
4
Websites and links to further information on these documents are provided at the end of this guide.
8 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 9
Assessment guidance: source material and basic parameters
Assessment framework and principles
The assessment criteria presented in the following sections are based on an overall set of guiding principles and a series of mod- The standard-setting and assessment modules are set out within a sequential framework (Figure 1), following the typical cycle
ules which were first introduced in the Green Carbon Guidebook. The principles, outlined in Box underneath, incorporate the of a forest carbon project. Forest carbon standard systems, and their assessment, would need to cover this entire cycle, by ap-
different elements required of a forest carbon standard system, and the desired manner in which a credible and effective standard plying the different modules at the appropriate points. The subsequent guidance presented in this document follows the same
system would address these elements. The modules represent the key elements of a forest carbon standard (and therefore the key sequence as outlined here.
elements to look at when assessing these standards).
This guide follows the typical lifecycle of a forest carbon project, and
WWF’s principles for credible forest carbon standards outlines the issues that need to be examined at each stage – whether
Principle 1 Credible carbon accounting for standard-setting or assessment.
The standard system applies best available knowledge and conservative estimates for the calculation of GHG emission reduction
benefits accruing from the project in order to ensure that credits are real, additional and permanent.
Principle 2 Social and environmental impacts
The standard system requires the assessment of social and environmental project impacts and includes a mechanism for avoiding
adverse effects on communities and the environment.
Principle 3 Validation and registration of project design
The standard system requires independent validation of the project design and includes mechanisms for monitoring the work of Fig. 1: Sequence of a forest carbon project and application points of modules that constitute a high quality standard
validation bodies.
Social and Issuance Social and
Principle 4 Social and environmental performance
Idea Design Registration Environmental Verification of Carbon Environmental Verification
The standard system ensures that the social and environmental safeguards included in the project design phase are being follo-
Performance Credits Performance
wed through during project implementation.
Principle 5 Verification Module 1 and 2 Module 3 Module 4 Module 5 Module 6 Module 4 Module 5
The standard system requires independent verification of the social and environmental project performance and the achieved GHG Project Design Phase Project Implementation Phase
emission reductions.
Principle 6 Registration and determination of carbon emission reductions
Registration requirements under the standard system ensure that credits are unique and avoid double counting.
Principle 7 High quality design and application of the standard itself and its creditation systems.
In addition to its requirements for high quality project design, implementation, validation and verification, the standard system and
its creditation systems are themselves designed according to recognised quality criteria, to ensure strong credibility and effective-
Module 1 = Carbon accounting
ness. Module 2 = Social and environmental impacts
Module 3 = Validation and registration of project design
Module 4 = Social and environmental performance
Module 5 = Verification
Module 6 = Registration and determination of carbon credits
Notes:
Green steps = those activities carried out by the project proponents.
Brown steps = those activities carried out by the surveillance and registration bodies
10 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 11
WWF criteria for assessing forest carbon standards’ requirements Module 1 Credible Carbon accounting
• The standard should apply a conservative approach for the selection of default values, inventory methodologies and assumptions made for baseline and project
This section sets out what a good standard should look like – and what it scenarios.
should look for in a forest carbon project before stamping it with approval. • As a minimum requirement for all values and methods used, the standard system should require adherence to the guidance included in IPCC publications for
land-use projects. 5
Reliable methods for measuring, calculating and monitoring the emission reductions achieved by forest-related activities
are critical in assessing the credibility of claims from forest carbon projects. Uncertainties still exist in these fields and the fig- Definition of baselines
ures produced by the currently available methods are still estimates of the real amount of carbon stored or GHG released from
forest ecosystems. The determination of baseline scenarios is a crucial element for credible carbon accounting. Baseline scenarios are therefore
required by many standards as they provide the entry point for calculating additional GHG benefits over and above the ‘business
Inventory methods for the measurement of carbon pools are steadily improving and further progress is expected to fill the as usual scenario’. When baseline scenarios underestimate the carbon stored or emitted, the amount of emissions reductions or
remaining gaps in these methods. removals achievable in the project scenario is overestimated. Therefore, in order to correctly evaluate the additionality of the an-
ticipated and achieved GHG benefits, the baseline scenario should be set on the basis of conservative assumptions and estimates.
The guidance in this document takes into account the methodological achievements made but also considers the still prevailing
deficits for a number of issues related to GHG reduction estimates. • The standard should require the use of a conservative approach for the assumptions and estimation of parameters in the baseline scenario.
As with all estimation techniques, there is a need to find a balance between accuracy and cost. Obtaining precise figures will
entail costly measurements and calculations. Standard systems for forest carbon projects therefore have to set out the level of Carbon pools
accuracy and the level of cost and effort required from project proponents for carbon measurement and calculation. This guide
outlines what is possible and what should be expected from standard systems, taking into account the currently existing ap- There is considerable difference between the accuracy of measurements and estimates of different carbon pools in the forest
proaches and methodologies for GHG accounting. Given the uncertainties that still exist, it is crucial that the standards use the ecosystem. Therefore, the standard should define which carbon pools should be measured for the baseline scenario and for the
best available knowledge for their estimates and apply a conservative approach for all values. A conservative approach ensures calculation of GHG benefits accruing from the project. Only pools which can be measured with sufficient confidence levels
that carbon benefits are not overestimated. should be included in the GHG calculations. Suggested carbon pools to be considered are:
Accurate estimates of the real amount of GHG require consideration of a large number of issues which are further outlined be- • Aboveground biomass
low. The rationale for the choices made in this guide on each of these issues is given below together with the minimum require- • Dead wood
ments which should be met by the standard systems. As noted, this guide is designed to be used for voluntary projects; rules for • Litter
compliance credits are likely to be different in some cases. • Belowground biomass
• Soil carbon
Project-type-specific methodologies Soil carbon increases or decreases will depend to a large extent on soil type and management regime. It is conservative to exclude
soil carbon for mineral soils, as gains most likely exist but are slow. For organic soils such as peat swamps, the amount of car-
No universally applicable method exists that would allow accurate GHG calculations for all project types and all project situ- bon saved from release or sequestered can be enormous and should therefore be accounted for. The measurement of soil carbon
ations. Projects designed to result in voluntary carbon credits would have more rigorous requirements than projects that don’t, should be based on sound inventory methodologies as no reliable default value exists as yet for the carbon stored in these soils.
and compliance credits (outside the scope of this guide) would have even more rigorous requirements. Consequently, the meth-
odologies need to be tailored to either clearly described project types or to individual projects. Based on the general rules for Discussions are currently ongoing about whether it is feasible and how to credibly account for another carbon pool – harvested
carbon accounting, many standards such as the VCS AFOLU or the CDM require project proponents to develop methodologies wood products – and their end-of-life emissions. There is also the question of whether to assign ownership of credits to pro-
for specific project types. These provide the necessary detail on the level of accuracy to be applied in inventory of carbon stocks, ducers or consumers. Until these issues are adequately addressed at the project level we recommend that the harvested wood
the pools to be considered in baseline and project scenario or the applicable default values per project type. product pool not be accounted for.
This should be covered by the standard through the following more specific criteria: • The standard should apply a conservative approach to the exclusion or inclusion of carbon pools in the baseline scenario and project scenario. This would requi-
re estimation of all sources of carbon emissions resulting from the project.
• The standard should have criteria for the development of project-type-specific or project-specific methodologies; criteria should include a peer review and ap-
proval process for new methodologies. • The standard should only consider carbon pools in project scenarios which can be measured or for which scientifically-based estimates exist.
• Methodologies approved by the standard system should specify as a minimum the procedures for the inventory of carbon stocks before and after project imple-
mentation, applicable default values, methodology for the determination of the baseline scenario and the eligible carbon pools.
5
2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Volume 4 Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use
12 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 13
WWF Criteria for the Assessment of forest carbon projects Module 1 Credible Carbon accounting
Project boundaries and project duration Additionality
The delivery of carbon credits by forest projects is limited in space and time. Project area is normally defined as the area occu- The estimation of additionality is an important component of project quality and environmental integrity. Most standard systems
pied by the forest delivering the carbon credits. However a project can have influence beyond this area and these off-site impacts rely on the tool developed by the CDM.6 This is the most broadly accepted instrument for evaluating additionality and should
have to be accounted for. This is often solved by spatially defining a leakage belt. therefore be applied by standard systems. Other methodologies that meet a similar level of credibility and precision may be
considered in the future.
A special and widely discussed feature of forest projects is the timeframe in which the carbon used for offsetting emissions can
be realistically stored in the forest ecosystem. As a permanent storage is hardly achievable, forest projects should at least ensure • Standard systems should ensure that additionality of projects is evaluated according to the additionality tool of the CDM.
storage over the foreseeable future.
Some standards, such as the VCS AFOLU, require project durations of up to 100 years, depending on the project type. Others, Permanence
such as the CDM, issue temporary credits which have to be replaced after the end of the project. The duration of forest carbon
projects should therefore be realistically set to allow sufficient time for strong carbon sequestration and climate benefits on the With regards to permanence, a distinction needs to be made between planned and unplanned losses of carbon.
one hand, yet with a limited timeframe for transactions between sellers and buyers, on the other hand. A timeframe of 30 years
is considered to strike a good balance between these conflicting requirements for forest projects. Normally, the carbon losses due to harvest of wood (planned losses) are taken into account either by averaging the carbon stock
over various rotation cycles or by including the wood product pool in accounting (using Harvested Wood Products accounting).
• The standard should include criteria for the definition of project boundaries and the area where off-site impacts may occur. Measured off-site impacts should Another approach is applied by the CDM, which uses a system of temporary credits that have to be replaced after the project is
include social, environmental and emissions leakage. terminated. As the calculation of the wood product pool is still problematic and thus not recommended by WWF, and the CDM
concept proved unattractive for investors and buyers, it is recommended to adhere to the rotation-based model for the inclusion
• Project timeframes should be defined in the standard and under no circumstances should project duration be less than 30 years. of management-induced carbon losses – meaning that only the average level of stored carbon is accounted for. This model is
used by the Carbon Fix Standard, for example.
Leakage There are also various ways to address the problems of unplanned carbon losses in forest projects. Among these, buffer systems
are the most commonly used. Some standard systems apply a default value of about 20 per cent which has to be booked as
In calculating the GHG balance of forest carbon projects, off-site increases in GHG emissions need to be considered. If the insurance for unforeseen losses. The VCS AFOLU standard applies a risk-based buffer system which sets the buffer level in
project is responsible for increased GHG emissions beyond its boundaries, this will significantly reduce the net GHG benefits the reserve account on the basis of defined risk factors. In any case, permanence should be dealt with in a conservative manner,
of the projects. making sure that carbon benefits are not overestimated.
• The standard system should account for increases of GHG emissions stimulated by the project in areas outside the project boundaries. • The standard system should be able to account for regular losses through harvest of timber.
• Conservative estimates and assumptions should be applied when calculating off-site emissions of GHG caused by project activities. • The standard should provide for an insurance system allowing the compensation of random losses of carbon through fire, storm, pest outbreaks or other events.
Land eligibility for afforestation and reforestation (A/R) projects
In the worst case, afforestation and reforestation projects could be implemented on land that was cleared of forest prior to the
project, in anticipation of the funding available on the carbon market. Rules for the eligibility of land for A/R projects are there-
fore indispensable. Standards should include appropriate provisions for setting these time limits. CDM applies the 1989 rule to
all its A/R projects, which stipulates that no forest can have been present within the project boundaries between 31 December
1989 and the start of the project activity. The timeframe of business planning rarely exceeds ten years, so this requirement can
normally be considered an adequate safeguard against misuse.
• The standard should have rules to ensure that there are no perverse incentives for proponents to carry out A/R carbon projects on lands they have previously
deforested.
6
CDM – Executive Board, August 2008: Methodological Tool “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” (Version 05.2)
14 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 15
WWF Criteria for the Assessment of forest carbon projects Module 2 Social and environmental impacts
A number of safeguards need to be considered in the design of forest carbon projects in order to avoid negative social and en-
vironmental impacts. This requires close and intensive consultation with all those whose rights and interests are affected by the
activities of the project. It therefore follows that standard systems need to be able to effectively assess whether these safeguards
are in place and are being adequately implemented.
Assessment of social and environmental impacts
Forest carbon projects generally operate in environments of high ecological and social complexity. It is therefore important that
the project activities do not negatively impact rural livelihoods or the environment within the project’s area of influence.
Existing standards have taken different approaches to evaluating and classifying the social and environmental impacts of forest
carbon projects. The Gold Standard, for example, applies a classification system with five grades from -2 (for serious negative
impacts) to +2 (for considerable positive impacts). Beyond this, other systems such as the CCBA require forest carbon projects
to result in net positive impacts; this is the approach that is recommended by WWF.
Voluntary carbon activities (the focus of this guide) can be expected
to go beyond what is required by law, and beyond a ‘do-no-harm’ ap-
proach, to ensure that they result in net positive impacts on local liveli-
hoods and ecosystems.
There is a particular need for safeguards to be in place to respect the rights of indigenous peoples. There should be no inherent
conflict between the project objectives and activities and the rights of indigenous and other traditional peoples within and out-
side the project boundaries. Project activities should be carried out in line with ILO Convention 169 and UNDRIP.7
The standard system should:
• Have criteria that ensure that the project has a net positive social and environmental impact.
• Require project proponents to carry out an assessment of the potential social impacts resulting from project activities, both negative and beneficial, particularly
taking into account statutory and customary rights to land, territories and resources, quality and quantity of employment, access to goods and services, social
well-being and distribution of benefits accruing from the project.
• Require project proponents to carry out an assessment of the potential positive and adverse impacts on the environment particularly taking into account water
regime, soil conditions and biodiversity.
• Require project proponents to mitigate risks and impacts which may occur as a result of project activities.
• Include drop-out criteria established that ensure that the project is not approved in the case of severe negative social and environmental impacts.
• Include drop-out criteria when there is no free, prior and informed consent from indigenous peoples to projects affecting their land, territory or livelihoods.
• Require project proponents to establish a monitoring plan for social and environmental impacts over the project duration.
7
See International Labour Organization (1989). Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention. Convention No. 169. www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C169 and United Nations
(2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/declaration.html
16 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 17
WWF Criteria for the Assessment of forest carbon projects Module 2 Social and environmental impacts
Consultation, grievance mechanism, transparency Identification of High Conservation Values
The relevance, effectiveness and sustainability of forest carbon projects can be considerably improved by ensuring adequate WWF strongly supports the application of the High Conservation Value (HCV) concept over the lifecycle of forest carbon
consultation with rights holders and stakeholders. Input from this consultation process should contribute to: projects. This would entail the development of safeguards to ensure that implementation does not destroy or threaten to destroy
important natural ecosystems.
• Enhancing knowledge on the social and environmental situation in the project area during project design;
The standard should:
• Providing information on potential negative impacts of the project activities on social and environmental High Conservation Values;
• Require project proponents to identify HCV areas and provide an analysis of potential project impacts on HCVs inside the project area or beyond (as a result of
• Identifying possible approaches for avoiding, mitigating or compensating for negative impacts induced by project activities; leakage).
• Avoiding or significantly reducing conflicts arising from the project activities; and • Set rules for the determination of a management regime appropriate to maintain or enhance any identified High Conservation Values inside the project’s area of
influence.
• Ensuring the free, prior and informed consent from indigenous peoples to projects affecting them.
Due to the conflictual nature of many forest carbon projects, standard systems should set criteria to ensure that the results of Long-term viability
consultations with rights holders and stakeholders are taken into account throughout the project design phase.
Project cycles for forest projects differ from other sectors as the planning horizon can extend into several decades. In order to
Participation from interested parties requires that relevant information is available in the public domain and that rights holders achieve sustainable forest management, forest conservation or enhancement of carbon stocks, and the anticipated climate, social
and stakeholders are actively made aware of when and where they have access to this information. and environmental benefits, sufficient resources need to be available as a guarantee for the long-term project viability.
Throughout the project design phase the project proponent should maintain the opportunity for rights holders and stakeholders • The standard system should require project proponents to demonstrate long-term financial viability.
to raise concerns or provide comments. The grievance mechanism to be established by the project should allow for the impartial
handling of complaints. The grievance mechanism should be independent from the project proponent organisation. • The standard should require that sufficient financial resources are available for the disbursement of funds to local people for compensation or mitigation mea-
sures for the project duration.
The standard should:
• The standard system should have criteria to ensure that sufficient human and technical resources are available for the project duration.
• Include guidance about how to go about identifying legitimate and appropriate representatives and should have provisions that consultation is carried out with
appropriate representatives of rights holder and stakeholder groups. • Criteria should be set by the standard system to ensure that the management or conservation regime is viable and sustainable for the duration of the project.
• Require that the project’s consultation process address the needs of indigenous peoples and be designed r to ensure that activities are based on the free, prior
and informed consent of affected indigenous peoples. Legal compliance
• Require project proponents to undertake proactive and culturally appropriate consultation with rights holders and stakeholders. Meetings should be held with Standard systems need to ensure that project proponent organisations have all the necessary legal rights of the land and/or the
these groups commensurate with the scale, intensity and complexity of the project. resources on the land to pursue the activities outlined in the project design. More important still is the ownership of rights to the
carbon stocks on the land to which the project proponents should have undeniable rights.
• Require project proponents to provide the public with, at a minimum, the project design document translated into the local language(s), a map with the delinea-
tion of the project area and information on project impacts on the identified High Conservation Values. In addition, the project should be compliant with all applicable laws of the country where the project is located.
• Ensure that rights holders’ and stakeholders’ comments are considered in the project design. • The standard system should require compliance with all applicable laws, the availability of all necessary approvals from local authorities before the project be-
gins, and measures to prevent illegal activities in the project zone.
• Require project proponents to establish a grievance mechanism which allows affected rights holders and stakeholders to bring forward their case to an inde-
pendent third party. • The standard system should include criteria to ensure that the project proponents have legal rights to the land and the carbon on the land which is covered by
the project activities.
• Ensure that comments and complaints are answered in a timely way and within a defined timeframe.
• The standard system should require project proponents to enter into a legally enforceable agreement with affected groups or individuals on measures for miti-
gation or compensation, if any.
18 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 19WWF Criteria for the Assessment of forest carbon projects Module 3 Validation and registration of project design
Validation of the project design and anticipated emission reductions Registration requirements for the project design
It is good practice for standard systems to validate a project’s anticipated GHG benefits prior to the start of the project activities. Normally the certification/validation process leads to a registration of the project with the certification/validation bodies. In
This can ensure that the project is not based on unrealistic assumptions which could jeopardise the financial basis of the project. the case of climate standards this task is often performed by the standard systems themselves after successful validation. This
is at least meaningful for all standard systems which issue credits, as registration is the basis for the issuance of carbon credits
Standards also need to validate, via independent third parties, the social and environmental impacts assumed by the project through the system.
proponents, in order to avoid the implementation of any activities that would have detrimental effects on local ecology and/or
communities. The standard system should therefore employ rigorous third-party control of all the elements of the project design • The standard system should have clear rules for the registration of projects after successful validation.
phase. The bodies involved in the validation of project design should follow clear standards which ensure their independence
and the quality of their work.
Accreditation of validation bodies
• The standard system should require independent third-party validation of the project design against the requirements for carbon accounting and social and
environmental impact assessment in the standard. Accreditation is a key instrument applied in many fields including certification of forest management, to supervise the work
of validation bodies and provide an additional level of assurance that the requirements for independence and performance of
• Validation procedures under the standard system should require field visits to the project area under evaluation. validation bodies are met. It is critical that accreditation is granted for the specific standard against which the validation takes
place. Only in this case accreditation bodies carry out surveillance against the specific requirements of the standard system.
• The standard system should set criteria to ensure that validation bodies undertake proactive and culturally appropriate external consultation as part of the vali-
dation process. • Validation bodies should be accredited for the respective standard system.
• The standard system should require validation bodies to make key results of their assessments publicly available, preferably by posting information on the Inter- • Accreditation of validation bodies should follow ISO standard 14065.
net and making the information available locally in an easily accessible form.
• The accreditation body should be affiliated with the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) and the International Social and Environmental Accreditation and
• The validation bodies should also use appropriate procedures to take rights holders’ and stakeholders’ comments into account in the decision-making process Labelling Alliance (ISEAL). Accreditation requirements should specify the evaluation and surveillance intensity to be applied by validation bodies.
for validation of project design.
20 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 21WWF Criteria for the Assessment of forest carbon projects Module 4 Social and environmental performance
This module emphasises the need to ensure that the social and environmental safeguards included in the project design phase are
being followed through during project implementation. Standards should cover the principles of regular performance monitor-
ing, corrective action notices and procedures for suspension.
Adherence to social and environmental performance standards (see Module 2) Compliance with legal and customary rights of operations
Forest carbon projects are operational over long timeframes. It is therefore essential that these projects adhere to a set of princi- Legal compliance is a basic requirement included in all standards. The legal framework should therefore be respected in both
ples for the ongoing management or conservation practices. WWF together with the World Bank in the framework of the Global the planning and implementation phases of forest carbon projects.
Forest Alliance developed a Forest Certification Assessment Guide (FCAG) which includes a set of principles for forest man-
agement standards. These principles (outlined in the bullet points below) reflect the basic elements needed to ensure the social The standard system should require the following:
and environmental integrity of forest management in a wide range of forest projects.
• Compliance with all relevant laws. The standard system should require that forest management or conservation respect all applicable laws in the country in which
• The standard system explicitly requires management systems that encourage the efficient use of the multiple products and services of the forest to enhance operations occur and international treaties and agreements to which the country is signatory.
economic viability and foster a wide range of environmental and social services.
• Respect for tenure and use rights. The standard system should require respect for any legally documented or customary land tenure and use rights.
• The standard system explicitly requires that management systems assess and manage environmental impacts to conserve biological diversity and its associated
values, water resources, soils, and unique and fragile ecosystems and landscapes. • Respect for indigenous peoples’ rights. The standard system should explicitly require respect for rights of indigenous peoples to lands, territories, and resources
they have traditionally owned, occupied or used.
• The standard system requires effective forest management planning through the maintenance of a comprehensive and up-to-date management plan appropri-
ate to the scale and intensity of the operation concerned. • Respect for workers’ rights. The standard system should explicitly require recognition and respect for the rights of workers.
• The standard system explicitly requires these management plans to have clearly articulated goals for continual improvement and descriptions of the means for
achieving these goals.
• The standard system explicitly requires the use of monitoring systems appropriate to the scale and intensity of the operation to assess the condition of the forest,
yields of forest products, management activities, and the performance against safeguards for social and environmental impacts.
22 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 23WWF Criteria for the Assessment of forest carbon projects Module 5 Verification
Credible claims on the achieved GHG benefits and the social and environmental Verification of the social and environmental performance
benefits rely on their independent, third-party verification. Verification is also an im-
portant means of guaranteeing that the implementation of project activities follows It is essential to evaluate if the social and environmental goals set in the project design phase have really been achieved by the
the lines defined in the project design. project. There is also a need to assess the performance of the project management, particularly because of the relatively the long
implementation period compared to other project types.
In order to avoid unnecessary costs, verification should be limited to a clearly set
time interval, which should be determined on the basis of an estimation of the Established mechanisms do exist within certification systems for forest management, which can be applied to other forest
project’s risk factors. carbon project types. However, these mechanisms are so far applicable only to situations where forest resources are being ex-
tracted; they do not cover forest conservation projects. In the absence of a generally applicable system for the verification of
Some of the rules for validation (Module 3) apply also to the verification process. forest protection projects, the standard system should provide mechanisms which ensure the periodic monitoring of social and
These are: environmental performance of these project types.
• The standard system should require independent third-party verification of the achieved GHG benefits, Here again, the criteria are similar to some of those relating to validation (Module 3):
and of the social and environmental performance of the operation.
• The standard system should include procedures for the periodic verification of social and environmental performance.
• Verification procedures under the standard system should require field visits to the project area under
evaluation. • The standard system should set criteria to ensure that verification bodies undertake proactive and culturally appropriate external consultation as part of the
verification process.
• The standard system should ensure that verification is carried out to examine the correct implementation
of the project according to the project design. • The standard system should require verification bodies to make key results of assessment publicly available.
• The standard system should have provisions for ensuring that the validation and verification processes • Appropriate procedures should exist to take rights holders’ and stakeholders’ comments into account regarding the operation of the project.
are carried out by different bodies.
Accreditation of bodies for verification of GHG benefits and social and environmental performance
Verification of achieved GHG benefits
The criteria for accreditation bodies (in Module 3) are also relevant here:
It is essential to evaluate if the GHG reduction or sequestration goals set out in the
project design phase have really been achieved by the project. Given the uncer- • Verification bodies should be accredited to the respective standard or standard system.
tainties of carbon measurement and calculation, verification should involve an as-
sessment of the monitoring plans applied by the project proponent organisation and • Accreditation of verification bodies for GHG benefits should follow ISO standard 14065.
should take into account ongoing improvements in these methods.
• The standard system should specify that accreditation of verification bodies follow ISO Guide 65 or ISO standard 17021.
• The standard system should set the verification schedule according to project type and risk factors.
Verification should be required, as a minimum, in a five-year interval after initial verification. Less frequent • The accreditation body should be affiliated with the International Accreditation Forum and the International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling
verification should be clearly justified by a low project risk. Alliance.
• The standard system should ensure that verification bodies review the accuracy, efficiency and scope of • Accreditation requirements under the standard system should specify the evaluation and surveillance intensity to be applied by verification bodies.
the monitoring carried out by the project management, by applying an appropriate sampling system.
24 a WWF guide for assessing forest carbon standards 25You can also read
