Research: crediting from REDD+ projects systematically robust

The study compared the baseline forest loss projections of 45 REDD+ projects (developed before the projects began) to the actual forest loss that took place in the jurisdictions surrounding the projects after the projects began, over a twenty-year period (2002-2022). Together, the projects encompass 71% of the total area and 63% of the projected emissions reductions from all avoided unplanned deforestation (AUD) projects currently registered under Verra’s Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) program.

Researchers found:

REDD+ project baseline forest loss predictions closely matched actual jurisdictional forest loss 

When aggregated globally and integrated over the twenty-year study period, REDD+ project baseline predictions of forest loss closely matched the actual forest loss which took place in the jurisdictions surrounding the projects. Using jurisdictional forest loss as a benchmark for the reasonable accuracy of project baselines (see Notes below), this result indicates that historical carbon crediting has been robust at a system level.

Forest loss rates in REDD+ project areas were ten times lower than in their surrounding jurisdictions 

Forest loss rates in REDD+ project areas were ten times lower than in their surrounding jurisdictions, even though the analysis assumed a high rate of leakage and incorporated that assumption into project area forest loss calculations.

At a system level, historical project-level REDD+ crediting was essentially identical to what it would have been under a jurisdictional approach 

Project-level REDD+ crediting at a system level over the period of this study was essentially the same as it would have been had the projects been credited on the basis of actual forest loss in their surrounding jurisdictions (i.e., “nested ex post” crediting). This result indicates that historical REDD+ crediting under Verra’s Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) was effectively the same as it would have been under a highly accurate jurisdictional forest reference emissions level (FREL), allocated to projects on the basis of area.

Everland CEO Joshua Tosteson said of these results: “This comprehensive analysis provides clear evidence that the REDD+ mechanism has been systemically robust over its lifetime to date. As the REDD+ market transitions toward new crediting methodologies, this research strongly argues that the “crisis of integrity” surrounding REDD+ carbon crediting has largely been one of perception, not reality: The REDD+ mechanism has been remarkably effective, and REDD+ climate finance has delivered on its promise – even as it evolves to deliver on its full potential. This should help rebuild market confidence and inspire urgently-needed action now to make conservation a viable, dependable development path for forest communities around the world.”

Full paper available here

REDD+ project baselines are “business-as-usual” scenarios projecting the deforestation that would have occurred in the absence of a REDD+ project, against which a project’s reductions in deforestation are assessed for carbon crediting.

In this analysis, researchers compared the baseline projections of 45 REDD+ projects (developed before the projects began) to the actual forest loss that took place in the jurisdictions surrounding the projects after the projects began, over a twenty-year period (2002-2022). They then looked at the actual forest loss rates of the projects, as provided in third party-verified monitoring reports, and aggregated the findings globally. The projects included in the analysis cover a total of 10.2 million hectares of forest in six countries. Together, this represents 71% of the total area and 63% of the projected verified emissions reductions from all avoided unplanned deforestation (AUD) projects registered under Verra’s VCS program.

Building on original research

The paper published today is the second in an ongoing research initiative assessing the carbon crediting baselines of voluntary REDD+ projects.

The first paper (published in the journal Environmental Research Letter) introduced the “zone of reasonable accuracy” (or ZORA) as a new holistic method for evaluating REDD+ project baselines – by comparing a baseline to actual forest loss rates from a range of control sites in the landscape surrounding a REDD+ project site. The paper also established jurisdictional forest loss as a good proxy for ZORA, providing a globally-applicable benchmark to assess the reasonableness of baselines.

Troubling peer review process

Today’s study in an earlier form was originally submitted for journal publication. However, due to prolonged delays in the peer review process, the authors decided to withdraw the manuscript and release the study as a white paper in the belief that the science provides a clear case for immediate action. For transparency, all the reviewers’ feedback is included in the paper.

These comments were addressed through successive drafts of the manuscript, however some reviewers raised concerns over the political implications of the study’s findings rather than reviewing its scientific merits. For example, at least one reviewer refused to endorse the paper because of concern that the study could “be used to misguide climate change policies around the world.”

The authors of the white paper respectfully but firmly disagree and maintain that this study provides clear evidence of how misguided some perceptions of REDD+ are.

About Everland
Everland is a specialised conservation marketing organisation in the climate change mitigation business that exclusively represents the Voluntary Carbon Market’s largest portfolio of high-impact, community-centered, forest conservation (REDD+) projects. Through these projects, Everland brings together communities and corporations in common cause to protect some of the world’s most important and vulnerable forests.

About Space Intelligence
Space Intelligence is a NatureTech company enabling zero deforestation and mass restoration of biodiverse forests globally by providing the highest quality nature mapping data.

We combine our extensive expertise in satellite data analytics, ecology, and machine learning to provide highly accurate and comprehensive data and insight products that are trusted to support the development and review of forest carbon projects, as well as compliance with nature impact disclosures & legislation, including EUDR. Our approach to mapping the world’s forest is rooted in science, with our co-founders leveraging nearly 40 years of combined research experience to develop our team and products, which are trusted by major organizations in nature conservation and restoration. To learn more about Space Intelligence, visit www.space-intelligence.com