Carbon Standard of Verra

1. Verified Carbon Standard
(VCS)

2. About the Verified Carbon Standard
 standard developed by Verra, a non-profit organization
focused on sustainable development.
 leading program for certifying greenhouse gas (GHG)
emission reductions and removals
 provides a framework for companies and organizations to
develop projects that reduce or remove greenhouse gas
emissions
 provides a framework for projects to measure, report and
verify their greenhouse gas emissions reductions or removals
in a transparent and credible way

3. VCS Project Cycle

4. Verra’s Project Developer Standards
 provides a framework for project developers to implement projects that deliver real and sustainable benefits in terms of
climate change mitigation, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable development
 includes a set of methodologies that project developers can use to assess and verify their projects' impacts.
1. Additionality: The additionality methodology provides a framework for assessing whether a project is additional,
meaning that the project would not have happened without the financial support generated by the sale of carbon
credits.
2. Baseline and monitoring: The baseline and monitoring methodology provides a framework for measuring and
monitoring emissions reductions and other project impacts against a baseline scenario that represents what would have
happened in the absence of the project.
3. Permanence: The permanence methodology provides a framework for assessing the risks associated with the potential
reversal of project benefits over time, such as due to forest fires, disease outbreaks, or natural disasters.
4. Leakage: The leakage methodology provides a framework for assessing the potential for emissions reductions in one
area to be offset by increased emissions elsewhere, due to changes in market or economic conditions.
5. Biodiversity: The biodiversity methodology provides a framework for assessing the impact of a project on biodiversity
and ecosystem services, and for developing measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate those impacts.
6. Community and social impacts: The community and social impacts methodology provides a framework for assessing
the social and economic impacts of a project on local communities, and for developing measures to maximize benefits
and minimize negative impacts.
7. GHG accounting: The GHG accounting methodology provides a framework for measuring and reporting greenhouse
gas emissions reductions, in accordance with international standards such as the GHG Protocol and IPCC Guidelines.

5. Additionality Assessment Tools for VCS
 Tool for the Demonstration and Assessment of Additionality (VT-0001) is used to
assess the additionality of GHG emission reduction projects, which is a key
requirement for VCS certification.
 Sustainable Development Additionality Tool (SD-Tool) is also used in the VCS to
assess whether a project contributes to sustainable development in addition to its
GHG emission reduction benefits.
 Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (JNR) Additionality Tool is used in VCS for the
development of REDD+ programs to reduce emissions from deforestation and
forest degradation.
 Small-Scale Methodology Templates (SSC) are used in VCS for small-scale GHG
emission reduction projects.

6. Aspect VCS Gold Standard Plan Vivo CCB
Scope
GHG reduction
projects
GHG reduction and
Sustainable
Development projects
Community-led
forestry projects
Forest carbon projects
Additionality
Assessment
VCS Additionality Tool
Gold Standard
Additionality Tool
Plan Vivo Social and
Environmental
Standards
CCB Standards
Baseline Setting Project specific Project specific Country-specific Project specific
Monitoring and
Verification
Verra's VCS Program
Gold Standard's
Registry System
Plan Vivo's Monitoring
and Verification
System
CCB's Third-party
Auditors
Co-benefits
SDVista, AFOLU Non-
Permanence Risk Tool,
Biodiversity
Assessment
Methodology
Sustainable
Development Tool,
Social and
Environmental
Standards
SDVista
Social and
Environmental
Standards
Similarities and differences - Additionality

7. Permanence in VCS
 Permanence refers to the ability of GHG emission reduction projects to maintain their
emissions reductions or removals over time.
 To assess permanence, Verra uses several tools, including:
1. AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool: developed by Verra to address the risk of non-
permanence in AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use) projects certified
under the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). Non-permanence refers to the risk that
emissions reductions achieved by a project may be reversed in the future, leading to a
net increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
2. Buffer Pool Tool: This tool is used to manage the risk of reversals of GHG emission
reduction projects. Reversals can occur due to natural disasters, policy changes, or other
factors that may cause the emissions reductions achieved by the project to be reversed.
The Buffer Pool Tool sets aside a portion of the project's carbon credits to cover any
potential reversals, thereby ensuring that the project's emissions reductions are
permanent.
3. Long-term Risk Tool: This tool is used to assess the long-term risk of reversals for
forestry and other land use projects. It considers risks such as natural disasters, disease,
and pests, and helps to ensure that the emissions reductions achieved by these projects
are permanent over the long term.

8. Similarities and differences - Permanence
Aspect VCS Gold Standard Plan Vivo CCB
Permanence definition
The carbon
sequestered or
emissions reduced
must be maintained
over the long term
Same as VCS
The carbon stored
must be maintained
over the long term
Same as VCS and Gold
Standard
Leakage assessment VCS Leakage Tool
Gold Standard Leakage
Tool
Plan Vivo Leakage Tool
Same as VCS and Gold
Standard
Buffer pool Yes Yes No No
Risk management
Reserve pool and
insurance
Reserve pool and
insurance
Same as VCS
Same as VCS and Gold
Standard
Crediting period
20-30 years, with the
possibility of extension
10-30 years, with the
possibility of extension
30-100 years
20-30 years, with the
possibility of extension
Monitoring and
verification
Verra's VCS program
Gold Standard's
Registry System
Plan Vivo's Monitoring
and Verification System
Third-party Auditors
Co-benefits
assessment
SDVista, AFOLU Non-
Permanence Risk Tool,
Biodiversity
Assessment
Methodology
Sustainable
Development Tool,
Social and
Environmental
Standards
SDVista
Social and
Environmental
Standards

9. Similarities in Leakage
Assessment
Criteria VCS Gold Standard Plan Vivo CCB
Focus on avoiding
negative
environmental impacts
and ensuring project
sustainability
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Use of baseline
scenario to estimate
emissions or
environmental impacts
without the project
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Require identification
and quantification of
potential leakage
impacts
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

10. Differences in Leakage
Differences VCS Gold Standard Plan Vivo CCB
Leakage categories
assessed
Leakage into non-project
sectors (activity shifting
leakage) and ecological
leakage
Leakage into non-project
sectors (activity shifting
leakage) and leakage
from the displacement of
pre-project agricultural
activities
Leakage into non-project
sectors (activity shifting
leakage)
Leakage into non-project
sectors (activity shifting
leakage) and externalities
Methodologies used to
estimate leakage
VMD0032 Estimation of
Emissions from Activity-
Shifting Leakage and
VMD0044 Estimation of
Emissions from Ecological
Leakage
Gold Standard's Leakage
Tool
Leakage risk assessment
using Plan Vivo's Guidelines
for Leakage Risk
Assessment
CCB's Leakage and
Externalities Tool
Verification requirements
Leakage assessments are
subject to validation and
verification by an approved
third-party
Leakage assessments are
subject to validation and
verification by a Gold
Standard-approved third-
party
Leakage assessments are
subject to verification by an
approved third-party
Leakage assessments are
subject to verification by an
approved third-party

11. 1. Biodiversity Assessment Methodology (BAM): This methodology is used to assess the
potential impact of GHG emission reduction projects on biodiversity, particularly in
projects involving land use change or forestry activities. The methodology assesses the
impacts of the project on various components of biodiversity, such as habitat, species,
and ecosystem processes. It also provides guidance on how to design projects to
minimize negative impacts and maximize positive impacts on biodiversity.
2. SD Vista: This tool is used to assess the impact of GHG emission reduction projects on
sustainable development, including impacts on biodiversity. It uses a set of indicators to
assess the impact of the project on various dimensions of sustainable development,
such as social, economic, and environmental factors. The tool can be used to identify
potential negative impacts on biodiversity and to design measures to mitigate these
impacts.
3. Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (JNR) Biodiversity Assessment Tool: This tool is used to
assess the impact of REDD+ programs on biodiversity at the jurisdictional and nested
levels. It assesses the impacts of the program on key biodiversity values, such as
threatened species, critical habitats, and ecosystem services. The tool also provides
guidance on how to design programs to maximize positive impacts on biodiversity.
Standards for Assessing Biodiversity

12. Similarities and Differences in Assessing Biodiversity
Similarities Differences
VCS
• Requires identification and assessment of
potential impacts on biodiversity and
ecosystems.
• Provides guidance on incorporating biodiversity
and ecosystem services into project design and
monitoring.
• Requires assessment of potential impacts on
biodiversity from land-use change activities.
• Requires monitoring and reporting on the status
of key biodiversity indicators.
• Allows for the use of third-party standards for
biodiversity assessment if they meet certain
criteria.
• Does not have specific
requirements for the use of
biodiversity offsets or the
establishment of biodiversity
conservation areas.

13. Standards for Assessing Human and
Community Rights
1. Social and Environmental Standards (SES): This standard sets out a framework for assessing
the social and environmental impacts of GHG emission reduction projects. It includes a set of
principles and criteria for ensuring that projects respect human and community rights, such
as the right to free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), the right to participate in decision-
making, and the right to a healthy environment.
2. Community, Climate, and Biodiversity (CCB) Standards: These standards provide a framework
for assessing the impact of GHG emission reduction projects on local communities,
biodiversity, and climate change. They include a set of indicators for assessing the impact of
the project on various dimensions of social and environmental sustainability, including
impacts on human and community rights.
3. Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (JNR) Social and Environmental Safeguards Standard: This
standard provides a framework for ensuring that REDD+ programs respect social and
environmental safeguards, including human and community rights. It includes a set of
principles and criteria for ensuring that programs respect the rights of indigenous peoples,
local communities, and other stakeholders.

14. Similarities and Differences in Assessing Human and Community Rights
Similarities Differences
VCS
• Requires projects to respect human
and community rights, including the
rights of indigenous peoples, local
communities, and workers.
• Requires project proponents to
conduct a social impact assessment,
including the identification of
potential impacts on human and
community rights, but does not
provide a specific methodology for
doing so.
• Projects must comply with relevant
national and international laws and
regulations.
• Requires the establishment of a
grievance mechanism.

15.  Verra's stakeholder consultation process typically involves several stages, including:
1. Scoping: This stage involves identifying the scope of the consultation process, including the topics to be
covered, the stakeholders to be engaged, and the methods to be used.
2. Design: This stage involves designing the consultation process, including developing a consultation plan,
identifying key stakeholders, and determining the appropriate methods and tools to use.
3. Consultation: This stage involves conducting the consultation process, which may include a range of activities
such as workshops, surveys, interviews, and online consultations. Verra also encourages stakeholders to
provide feedback through its online consultation platform.
4. Analysis: This stage involves analyzing the feedback received from stakeholders, identifying key themes and
issues, and developing recommendations for improving Verra's standards and programs.
5. Reporting: This stage involves reporting on the consultation process, including providing feedback to
stakeholders on how their input was used, and publishing a summary report of the consultation process.
Verra’s Stakeholder Consultation Process

16. Differences in Assessing Stakeholder Consultation
VCS Gold Standard Plan Vivo CCB
• VCS has its own
Stakeholder Consultation
Process (SCP) standard that
outlines specific
requirements for
stakeholder engagement
and consultation
• VCS requires that projects
demonstrate how they
have responded to
stakeholder feedback
• VCS also requires that
projects address any
negative impacts on
stakeholder communities
and demonstrate that they
have developed plans to
avoid or mitigate these
impacts
• Gold Standard has its own
Stakeholder Engagement
and Consultation Standard
that outlines specific
requirements for
stakeholder engagement
and consultation
• Gold Standard requires that
projects have a stakeholder
engagement plan that is
developed in collaboration
with stakeholders
• Gold Standard requires
projects to undergo an
independent stakeholder
consultation and feedback
process
• Plan Vivo requires that
projects have a
stakeholder
engagement plan that
outlines how
stakeholders will be
involved throughout
the project lifecycle
• Plan Vivo requires that
projects have a
grievance mechanism
in place for
stakeholders to raise
concerns
• Plan Vivo requires
projects to
demonstrate how they
have responded to
stakeholder feedback
• CCB has its own Climate,
Community and Biodiversity
Standards that include
specific requirements for
stakeholder engagement and
consultation
• CCB requires projects to
demonstrate how they have
incorporated stakeholder
feedback into project design
and implementation
• CCB requires projects to
establish a mechanism for
receiving and addressing
complaints or grievances from
stakeholders

17. END
Thank you!

18. Baseline Measurements
 The project's emissions baseline is established to determine
the amount of emissions that would have occurred without
the project.
 This baseline is necessary to establish the project's
additionality, which means that the project must result in
emissions reductions or removals that would not have
occurred otherwise.

19. Additionality in VCS
 additionality means that a project activity that results in GHG
emission reductions or removals must be additional to what would
have occurred in the absence of the project.
 In other words, the project must demonstrate that it is not just
doing what is required by law or what would happen anyway.
 Instead, it must prove that the project is making an additional effort
or investment beyond the baseline scenario, to achieve GHG
reductions.