Create Content

Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

A. Examples

...

  • Practice-based planning or reporting is a preferred approach for many projects, e.g. “eligible practice” or “green lists.”  How far does this go in accounting?
  • Soil and other environmental data are often not available. Models for the tropics are often poor.

...

  • Aim for what is minimally necessary rather than waiting for perfection (Martin N’s recommendation).

...

  • Projects usually report annually, so how do they report if changes are only detected after 3-5 years? What if an initial decline occurs, as is common?

...

 

...

Finance Community Needs Presentation, excerpts from Chandra Shekhar Sinha, Adviser, Climate Change Group, World Bank.csinha@worldbank.org

  1. Buyers/ investors in the carbon markets are looking for:

...

Growing interest in natural climate (nature based) solutions to meet the global goal a net zero planet by 2050
Soil organic carbon removals can play a very important role in being part of the measures for sequestration/ removal of greenhouse gasses
For this to happen, soil organic measures need to gain the visibility of the global community though credible accounting methodologies and MRV systems that is implementable in a cost-effective manner:
§Scalable and designed to catalyze and drive systemic change
§Accurate for capturing the results impact
§Methodology and MRV should evolve in accuracy
Fit-for-purpose methodologies and MRV systems should could start with the purpose of encouraging investment, result based finance and evolve to “market grade” accounting methodologies and associated MRV systems.
There is a need to consider a sequenced approach for result based payments to evolve into carbon market linked incentives


CB. Day 1 breakout group  finance community commentary 

...

On the last point: besides direct carbon financing in VCS, is there no option for activity-based financing that we know will only provide directional (--/-/o/+/++) support (e.g. prevent carbon loss, maintain healthy soils) for now. So, not making carbon quantity claim,  because still have too many uncertainties to deal with for the next 5-10 years in most tropical smallholder systems? The environmental and economic benefits (e.g. yield increase, less erosion, reduced NOx, plant/insect diversity, fertilizer response) of such directional support for soil carbon are likely many times higher than the VCS carbon value – you did mention these co-benefits. Would it not be a pity if we would miss out on the directional support (i.e. activity based) if we know it’s the good thing to do, but we just have too much uncertainty about the exact number and therefore can’t have this supported by the C-market place?


C. Other points on scope and practicability

  1. What investors want to account for:
    • Scope of emission:  soil C only, or also other agricultural emissions, landscape level emissions (e.g. forest conversion) or the value chain lifecycle? 
  2. Methods that are affordable and practical:
    • Practice-based planning or reporting is a preferred approach for many projects, e.g. “eligible practice” or “green lists.”  How far does this go in accounting?
    • Soil and other environmental data are often not available. Models for the tropics are often poor.
  3. Robustness needs:
    • Aim for what is minimally necessary rather than waiting for perfection (Martin N’s recommendation).
  4. Accounting time and spatial scales:
    • Projects usually report annually, so how do they report if changes are only detected after 3-5 years? What if an initial decline occurs, as is common?