Background

The "4 per 1000 Initiative: Soils for Food Security and Climate" is part of the Global Climate Action Plan. The initiative promotes the development of an international, science-based action plan to increase Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) sequestration to improve food security and mitigate and adapt to climate change. The overarching goal of the initiative is to support partner countries and organizations in developing evidence-based projects, policies, and programs that promote actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by protecting and increasing SOC stocks. Increasing SOC by 4/1000 (0.4%) per year is an ambitious and inspiring goal.

To this end, the initiative's Scientific and Technical Committee (STC) provides a service for the Formative Assessment of Soil Projects (FASP). FASP aims to increase the positive impact and visibility of proposed, planned, and ongoing projects and thus make them more attractive to investors. It centers on a set of reference criteria, indicators, methods, and metrics developed by the STC, referred to as the "Reference Criteria and Indicators". They are used to check whether a project complies with the principles and objectives of the initiative and the relevant United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with a particular focus on SDG 2 "Zero Hunger", SDG 13 "Climate Action" and SDG 15 "Land Conservation and Restoration".

Overview of Criteria and their links to the SDGs

Table 1 shows the list of 13 reference criteria and their mains links with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Table 1: Assessment steps, reference criteria types, criteria and their links with the SDGs

StepCriteriaCriterionMain links with SDGs (#) 
1Safeguards 1.1 Human rights1 Poverty, 5 Gender equality & 16 Justice


1.2 Land tenure rights1 Poverty & 16 Justice


1.3 Poverty alleviation1 Poverty
2Direct2.1 Soil conservation/improvement and land restoration15 Life on land


2.2 Soil organic carbon stock increase or maintenance15 Life on land


2.3 Climate change mitigation13 Climate change


2.4 Climate change adaptation13 Climate change


2.5 Food security2 Zero hunger
3Indirect3.1 Biodiversity15 Life on land


3.2 Water resources6 Clean water and sanitation


3.3 Welfare and well being3 Good health and quality of life, 8 Decent work and economic growth
 & 12 Responsible consumption and production
4Cross-cutting 4.1 Inclusive and participatory approach12 Responsible consumption and production & 17 Partnerships for the goals


4.2 Training and capacity building4 Quality education & 17 Partnerships for the goals

Criteria, Indicators and Methods

Safeguard Criteria

Safeguard criteria are used to identify proposed SOC projects that have the potential to negatively affect human rights, land rights and poverty alleviation, in Step 1 of a SOC project assessment.

The assessment is bound by the Unified Declaration of Intent of the 4 per 1000 Initiative which ‘recalls the necessity of protecting existing legitimate land rights, including informal rights, and their holders, in coherence with the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (CFS 2012) and the Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems (CFS 2014)’. Major aspects of Safeguard Criteria to be assessed for SOC projects include:

Safeguard criterionMajor aspects to be coveredDefault indicatorDefault method

1.1 Human rights

  • Children
  • Gender
  • Minority groups
  • Forced, unpaid or underpaid work
  • Extent of negative, neutral or positive effects on local people and communities.
  • The project holder’s assessment for each Safeguard criterion must be justified with evidence.
  • The project holder should discuss the risks and benefits relating to relevant aspects of each Safeguard Criterion (including those listed above) and how any risks will be mitigated  before the project start and provide a plan of how these risks will be monitored or surveyed during the project

1.2 Land tenure
rights

  • Land property and land tenure system
  • Land grabbing
  • Conflicts
  • Population displacement
  • Litigation equity

1.1 Poverty
alleviation

  • Farmer income and distribution
  • Subsidies/taxes and their  distribution (income support policies, rural development policies)
  • Other income sources and revenue distribution
  • Employment rates and opportunities

The following resources and references may be used to develop project indicators and methods for the Safeguard Criteria:

Human rights (UN):

Local tenure rights:

Soils and the SDGs:

Direct Criteria

Direct criteria are used to assess the direct effects of projects on I) soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks and land degradation neutrality (SDG 15), II) climate change adaptation and, III) climate change mitigation (SDG 13), and IV) food security (SDG 2) in Step 2 of a project assessment.

Major aspects of Direct Criteria to be assessed for SOC projects include:

Direct criterionMajor aspects to be coveredDefault indicatorDefault method

2.1 Soil conservation/improvement; land restoration

  • Risks of land degradation/ opportunities to restore degraded land
  • Agricultural practices
  • Forestry practices
  • Fraction of land area in the project maintained or restored using recognised conservation/restoration practices;
  • Agriculture or forestry areas with regenerative practices.
  • Land use and management survey results;
  • Records of the implementation of good practice and the nature and duration of these practices;
  • Measures of improved land condition and soil health
2.2 Soil organic carbon stock increased/maintained
  • Baseline conditions e.g. SOC stocks, soil stability, management practices
  • Soil health e.g. depth, erosion, organic matter content, nutrient levels, biodiversity
  • SOC monitoring e.g. SOC stock change by indirect accounting or direct measurement
  • Best: (1) SOC stock change relative to baseline (change per year to a depth of at least 30cm); (2) Monitoring plan that ensures (to the  extent possible) permanence, no leakage, additionality of improved practices.
  • Minimum: Soil carbon content (% C) monitoring of change in soil condition e.g. structure
  • Best: Full description of the method of quantifying SOC stock change e.g. sampling and analysis for measurement; use of validated models; other standardized with MRV methods; monitoring plan e.g. periodic re-measurement or model verification (e.g. every 5 years); record keeping protocol.
  • Minimum: Description of measurements and records of observations; justification for use of other recognized and validated MRV methods e.g. IPCC Tier 1-3; and (if possible) plans to upgrade.
2.3 Climate change mitigation
  • Nitrous oxide and methane emissions
  • Reduction in fossil energy use; predicted renewable energy use
  • Life cycle assessment studies
  • Increase in N2O, CH4 and fossil energy emissions in units of CO2 equivalents per unit land (and per unit production) and evidence that these emissions are not greater than the CO2e increase in SOC stocks.
  • No production leakage caused by a reduction in productivity.
  • Predicted new renewable energy use.
  • Description of MRV methods for GHG emissions associated with the project using standardized IPCC Tier 1-3 or other recognized and validated MRV methods
2.4 Climate change adaptation
  • Production stability
  • Resilience to extreme events
  • Reduction in the inter-annual variability of yield in agricultural/ forest production compared to baseline management.
  • Reduced production losses under extreme droughts/floods/ heatwaves compared to baseline management.
  • Reduced irrigation needs.
  • Area covered under water-saving techniques; deficit irrigation.
  • Institutional aspects.
  • Early warning programs and actions.
  • Space for time: documented examples showing how similar changes in land use/ management have reduced climate variability and increased resilience;
  • Documented improved/ introduced nature-based measures 
2.5 Food security
  • Supply and procurement
  • Access
  • Safety and quality including nutrition aspects
  • Increase (or, at a minimum no decrease) on average in yields and agricultural productivity.
  • Micro-nutrients content and food safety of plant and animal products are preserved or improved.
  • Appropriate polices to ensure fair distribution of income to farmers and improved access to foodstuff for all people.
  • New high yield and climate tolerant species introduced
  • Space for time measurements: documented examples showing how similar changes in land use/management have preserved or increased agricultural productivity, micro-nutrients contents and food safety of plant and animal products.
  • Direct field surveys of yields and livestock production;
  • Number of people with access to safe and healthy foodstuff compared to the total population at various stages of project to be recorded;
  • Measures that have been taken in the project to improve food storage, supply or procurement (reduced food loss).

The following resources and references may be considered in developing project indicators and methods for direct criteria:

Indirect Criteria

Indirect criteria are used to assess indirect effects of SOC projects on a range of economic, social and environmental dimensions in Step 3 of a SOC project assessment. Major aspects of Indirect Criteria to be assessed for SOC projects include:

Indirect criterionMajor aspects to be coveredDefault indicatorDefault method
3.1 Biodiversity
  • Landscape beta diversity
  • Plant functional diversity (especially endemic species)
  • Protected patrimonial and endangered species
  • Crop and animal genetic diversity
  • Shannon diversity indices.
  • Protected/endangered/patrimonial species habitats conserved
  • Before the project: space for time;
  • During the project: surveys of habitats and wildlife, field survey recording (describe random or stratified sampling techniques) 
3.2 Water resources
  • Soil infiltration; resilience to low rainfall /drought
  • Annual evapotranspiration; water access
  • Irrigation technologies for increased water use efficiency
  • Development of IWRM, IWLRM
  • Water policies; instruments for water management
  • Water quality; nitrogen, phosphorus losses ; pesticide losses; water bodies in good ecological condition
  • Tree cover fraction ; riparian vegetation
  • Water balance for aquifers and streams
  • Crop water requirements
  • Irrigation needs
  • N and P loads to water bodies
  • Before the project: Baseline Hydrological and nutrient measures (water use efficiency; water quality), space for time measures;
  • During the project: Periodic monitoring (repeat hydrological and nutrients surveys)
3.3 Welfare, livelihoods and well-being
  • Access to education
  • Access to healthcare
  • Access to sanitation
  • Access to communications
  • Livelihood security
  • Potential changes compared to business as usual
  • Expected benefits due to the project
  • Degree of involvement of relevant stakeholders in the access to education and health services
  • Describe expected benefits and a plan for surveys during the project (reference to be provided by project holder)

The following resources and references may be considered in developing project indicators and methods for indirect criteria:

Cross-Cutting Criteria

Crosscutting criteria for SOC projects include training and capacity building, participatory and socially inclusive approaches. The project holder should describe the effects of the project activities on these criteria for assessment in Step 4, noting that for the long-term sustainability of a project cross social, economic and environmental aspects both cross-cutting criteria are important.

Major aspects of Cross-cutting Criteria to be assessed for SOC projects include:

Cross-Cutting CriterionMajor aspects to be coveredDefault indicatorDefault method
4.1 Inclusive and participatory approach
  • Participatory approach
  • Inclusiveness
  • Stakeholders engaged in the project as a fraction of the local community
  • Inclusiveness of participants
  • Representativeness of the stakeholders involved in the project
  • Surveys across local communities (reference to be provided by project holder)
  • Description of plan or framework for periodic surveys to be provided by project holder.
4.2 Training and capacity building
  • Technical training
  • Socio-economic building
  • Fraction of stakeholders trained or provided opportunities for capacity building
  • Surveys across local communities (reference to be provided by project holder)
  • Description of plan or framework for periodic surveys to be provided by project holder

The following resources and references may be considered in developing project indicators and methods for cross-cuting criteria:

Download

Click here to download the full version approved by the consortium of the "4 per 1000 - Initiative". 


  • No labels