Methodology Overview: VM0047 Afforestation, Reforestation and Revegetation

This webinar provides an overview of Verra’s new methodology for Afforestation, Reforestation, and Revegetation (VM0047). This methodology enables the generation of high-quality nature-based removal credits from activities that increase the density of trees or other types of woody vegetation. It is the first forestry methodology in the voluntary carbon market that allows for the use of a dynamic performance benchmark approach and relies on remote-sensing data to establish a project’s baselines and test its additionality.

[@TheCountciano]

extremely complex system of verification communicated in a very complex way.

[@stansantegoeds4380]

It's not entirely clear to me, is the 10year no deforestation requirement still there for VM0047 area based approach?
Or has it become a timber plantation methodology?

[@marcellomaggioli]

I was wondering the same. It seems like it disappeared from the requirements, and there is a paragraph "Pre-existing woody biomass" that adds info on the matter, explaining how to quantify any deforestation happended in the 10 years previous the project . However, in the VCS Standard 4.5 there is still the requirements for 10 years without clearing native ecosystem

[@romangross6451]

Hello..

[@romangross6451]

Do you Speak Spanish?

[@nikvel4674]

This methodology is a misguided attempt to exclude non-additional timber plantations. If VCM takes off as predicted in the years to 2050, we will see a massive increase in reforestation. Like all other industries, reforestation projects tend to cluster in the same region. With this methodology, you are trying to account for landscape-level increases in biomass (as has happened in Costa Rica over the past 30 years) that are attributed to national policies rather than the reforestation project. I understand that. But you are also forcing carbon projects to be discounted by the activities of other carbon projects happening in the same region. If anything, what you are suggesting with this methodology is that carbon projects must now focus on regions where it is most unlikely that an increase in landscape level biomass will occur. What a strange incentive. Just force projects to have 50% native species to be considered a carbon project or force timber plantations to submit their cash flows to prove that without the added benefit of carbon they wouldnt be considered financially viable.