A holistic approach to assessing REDD+ forest loss baselines through ex post analysis

Maren Pauly, William Crosse, Colin Moore, Kevin Brown, Oliver Griffin, Thom Brade, E. Mitchard, Jeremy Freund, Sarah Appleby, Joshue Tosteson
{"title":"A holistic approach to assessing REDD+ forest loss baselines through ex post analysis","authors":"Maren Pauly, William Crosse, Colin Moore, Kevin Brown, Oliver Griffin, Thom Brade, E. Mitchard, Jeremy Freund, Sarah Appleby, Joshue Tosteson","doi":"10.1088/1748-9326/ad616c","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The implementation of REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) projects has become a key Nature Based Solutions (NBS) strategy to protect at-risk forests using the sale of verified emission reductions (carbon credits) as financing, generated by reducing forest loss against counterfactual baseline scenarios. Controversy over the reasonableness of such baseline scenarios has thrown this nascent market mechanism into disarray. While new technical approaches to baseline-setting that promise wider market acceptance are set to roll out in the coming years, existing projects are becoming unviable, as carbon credit buyers reduce investment due to lost confidence in the integrity of emissions reduction claims. Transparent, reproducible methods to assess existing REDD+ project baselines are needed in order to provide a clearer picture of the real impact of projects, and provide an objective basis on which investment decisions can be made today. Here we introduce such a method. .. In contrast to existing studies which utilize only one method to create a single “control,” we integrate actual forest loss rates from a variety of control sites to establish a “zone of reasonable accuracy (or ZORA)”. Application of our method in Cambodia, using two geospatial datasets (one global and one locally calibrated), shows that all three project baselines fall within or below ZORA. This approach is fully reproducible, and provides a transparent way for analysts to assess REDD+ baselines during this critical time when investment in forest protection must increase dramatically and without delay.","PeriodicalId":507917,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Research Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Research Letters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad616c","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The implementation of REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) projects has become a key Nature Based Solutions (NBS) strategy to protect at-risk forests using the sale of verified emission reductions (carbon credits) as financing, generated by reducing forest loss against counterfactual baseline scenarios. Controversy over the reasonableness of such baseline scenarios has thrown this nascent market mechanism into disarray. While new technical approaches to baseline-setting that promise wider market acceptance are set to roll out in the coming years, existing projects are becoming unviable, as carbon credit buyers reduce investment due to lost confidence in the integrity of emissions reduction claims. Transparent, reproducible methods to assess existing REDD+ project baselines are needed in order to provide a clearer picture of the real impact of projects, and provide an objective basis on which investment decisions can be made today. Here we introduce such a method. .. In contrast to existing studies which utilize only one method to create a single “control,” we integrate actual forest loss rates from a variety of control sites to establish a “zone of reasonable accuracy (or ZORA)”. Application of our method in Cambodia, using two geospatial datasets (one global and one locally calibrated), shows that all three project baselines fall within or below ZORA. This approach is fully reproducible, and provides a transparent way for analysts to assess REDD+ baselines during this critical time when investment in forest protection must increase dramatically and without delay.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过事后分析评估 REDD+ 森林损失基线的整体方法
实施 REDD+(降低因森林砍伐和退化所产生的排放)项目已成为一项重要的自然解决方案(NBS)战略,该战略利用出售经核实的减排量(碳信用额)作为融资手段,通过在反事实基线情景下减少森林损失来保护濒危森林。关于此类基线情景是否合理的争议使这一新生的市场机制陷入混乱。未来几年,有望获得更广泛市场认可的新基线设定技术方法将陆续推出,但由于碳信用购买者对减排主张的完整性失去信心而减少投资,现有项目正变得不可行。我们需要透明、可重复的方法来评估现有的 REDD+ 项目基线,以便更清晰地了解项目的实际影响,并为现在的投资决策提供客观依据。我们在此介绍这样一种方法。现有的研究仅使用一种方法来创建单一的 "对照",与之不同的是,我们整合了来自不同对照地点的实际森林损失率,从而建立了一个 "合理精确区(或 ZORA)"。在柬埔寨,我们使用两个地理空间数据集(一个全球数据集和一个本地校准数据集)来应用我们的方法,结果表明所有三个项目基线都在 ZORA 范围内或低于 ZORA。这种方法具有完全的可重复性,并为分析人员提供了一种透明的方法,以便在必须立即大幅增加森林保护投资的关键时刻评估 REDD+ 基线。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Responsible carbon dioxide removals and the EU’s 2040 climate target State-of-the-art bias correction of climate models misrepresent climate science and misinform adaptation Conceptualising global cultural transformation – Developing deep institutional scenarios for whole of society change Reliability and resilience of environmental flows under uncertainty: reconsidering water year types and inconsistent flow requirements in California Unequal economic consequences of coastal hazards: Hurricane impacts on North Carolina
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1