Standards — requested by industry and informed by research centers — identify high-quality forest projects that really deliver carbon and other benefits

Forests are enlisted in the struggle against global warming both through the planting of trees to soak up or sequester carbon dioxide ( CO₂) and by preventing the deforestation and forest degradation that release carbon into the atmosphere. Projects to manage forests in ways that mitigate climate change can also deliver significant benefits for communities and wildlife. The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) has helped the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA) to devise standards to assess the quality of projects like these.

The CCBA arose in response to a challenge to conservationists from John Browne, then chief executive of the London-headquartered oil company BP. Browne suggested to Conservation International and The Nature Conservancy that they work together to develop standards to help investors and buyers of carbon identify high-quality forest projects that deliver multiple benefits. In 2003, the CCBA emerged as a partnership of five nongovernmental organizations (NGOs); six companies, including BP; and three centers involved in tropical forestry research, namely CIFOR, the World Agroforestry Centre and the Center for Research and Higher Learning in Tropical Agriculture (CATIE, its acronym in Spanish).

The CCBA’s first task was to devise standards for evaluating the impact of forest activities on the climate, local communities and biodiversity. An early draft was field tested in 2004, with public consultations following. The CCBA launched the first edition of the standards in May 2005.

“With their expertise in all matters related to tropical forests and forest communities, research organizations played an extremely important role in devising the standards,” says CCBA Director Joanna Durbin.

By the end of 2008, the CCBA had approved six forest carbon projects. These ranged in size from 750,000 hectares of avoided deforestation in Aceh, Indonesia, to 12 hectares of reforestation in Lincolnshire, England. The Aceh scheme has an estimated annual carbon sequestering potential of 3.4 million tons of CO2 equivalent, and Lincolnshire has 172 tons. Another 21 projects were, at the end of 2008, pending approval while under evaluation by third-party auditors. Together they will cover 1.6 million hectares and have the potential to sequester almost 5 million tons of carbon per year. This is equivalent to the annual emissions of the average US coal-fired power station or 480,000 US households.

“The CCB Standards increase the value of projects by creating real benefits for the climate, local communities and overall environmental quality,” comments Browne.

Relatively quickly, observes Durbin, the CCB Standards have been recognized as among the best tools for measuring the quality of carbon forest projects. They have proved especially useful in the design of projects. By early 2009, the alliance had received enquiries about using the standards from over 170 project developers, representing the majority of existing or planned forest carbon projects.

“The original project developers were largely NGOs,” says Durbin. “But the private sector is now getting involved in the trade, and we get organizations telling us, ‘We’ve got a great project, and we’ve found a buyer, but the buyer is insisting that we have CCB Standards.’”

Many investors and buyers are attracted by the standards because they help demonstrate their green credentials. Project developers have found that they improve their access to markets, and the standards have enabled some to gain a premium for their carbon.

The first edition of the standards reflected the Kyoto Protocol’s stipulation that forest carbon projects under the Clean Development Mechanism could involve reforestation and afforestation, but not avoided deforestation. The second edition recognizes the importance of projects that reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation. The new standards were launched in December 2008 at Forest Day 2, a side event co-organized by CIFOR at the 14th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Under the first set of standards, five projects were awarded gold rating, which recognizes projects that target the poorest and most vulnerable communities, conserve biodiversity at sites of global significance and provide significant support to help communities adapt to climate change. The second edition of CCB Standards introduced stricter criteria for gold rating.

The CCBA now plans to assist in the development of national standards in countries as far afield as Ecuador, Madagascar and Nepal, which have expressed an interest in piloting them. The standards could help governments to determine the contribution carbon projects make to their sustainable development. They will be devised in partnership with civil society, groups representing indigenous peoples, and local and international research agencies, including CIFOR, World Agroforestry, and the Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center.

Further information on the CCB Standards is available at
http://www.climate-standards.org/.