This report summarizes recent trends in large-scale tropical forest clearing identified by FORMA (Forest Monitoring for Action). Our analysis includes 27 countries that accounted for 94 percent of clearing during the period 2000–2005. We highlight countries with relatively large changes since 2005, both declines and increases. FORMA produces indicators that track monthly changes in the number of 1-sq.-km. tropical forest parcels that have experienced clearing with high probability.

Measuring forest degradation and related forest carbon stock changes is more challenging than measuring deforestation since degradation implies changes in the structure of the forest and does not entail a change in land use, making it less easily detectable through remote sensing. Although we anticipate the use of the IPCC guidance under the United Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), there is no one single method for monitoring forest degradation for the case of REDD+ policy. In this review paper we highlight that the choice depends upon a number of factors including the type of degradation, available historical data, capacities and resources, and the potentials and limitations of various measurement and monitoring approaches. Current degradation rates can be measured through field data (i.e. multi-date national forest inventories and permanent sample plot data, commercial forestry data sets, proxy data from domestic markets) and/or remote sensing data (i.e. direct mapping of canopy and forest structural changes or indirect mapping through modelling approaches), with the combination of techniques providing the best options. Developing countries frequently lack consistent historical field data for assessing past forest degradation, and so must rely more on remote sensing approaches mixed with current field assessments of carbon stock changes. Historical degradation estimates will have larger uncertainties as it will be difficult to determine their accuracy. However improving monitoring capacities for systematic forest degradation estimates today will help reduce uncertainties even for historical estimates.

The purpose of this guidebook is to assist project developers in evaluating and selecting those VCS approved methodology(ies) that are best suited to account for the greenhouse gas benefits of their proposed REDD project activities. It contains a summary of VCS requirements applicable to all REDD projects and a detailed review of those REDD methodologies approved under the VCS at the time of writing. It also provides a number of tools for developers to compare the applicability conditions, accounting approaches, and resource requirements associated with each methodology, and suggestions for applying these methodologies in practice.
This guidebook is intended to be a living document that will be updated periodically to include new methodologies that are approved by the VCS.

In recent years, the voluntary over-the-counter (OTC) carbon market has reached a significant market volume. It is particularly interesting for forest mitigation projects which are either ineligible in compliance markets or confronted with a plethora of technical and financial hurdles and lacking market demand. As the OTC market is not regulated, voluntary standards have been created to secure the social and environmental integrity of the traded mitigation projects and thus to ensure the quality of the resulting carbon credits. Building on a theoretical efficiency-legitimacy framework, this study aims to identify and analyse the characteristics and indicators that determine the efficiency and organisational legitimacy of standards for afforestation/reforestation carbon projects.

The BioCarbon Fund has released a report documenting lessons learned for financing Afforestation and Reforestation projects registered under the Clean Development Mechanism

The Bank Information Center and Forest Peoples Programme have provided comments on the Revised R-PP Template, SESA and ESMF Guidelines.

Our objective was to compare and evaluate the practical applicability to REDD+ of ten forest management, social, environmental and carbon standards that are currently active worldwide: Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB), CCB REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (CCBA REDD+ S&E), CarbonFix Standard (CFS), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Global Conservation Standard (GCS), ISO 14064:2006, Plan Vivo Standard, Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), SOCIALCARBON Standard and the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS). We developed a framework for evaluation of these standards relative to each other using four substantive criteria: (1) poverty alleviation, (2) sustainable management of forests (SMF), (3) biodiversity protection, (4) quantification and assessment of net greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits; and two procedural criteria: (5) monitoring and reporting, and (6) certification procedures. REDD programs require assessment of GHG benefits, monitoring, reporting and certification. Our analysis shows that only the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) treats these three criteria comprehensively. No standard provides comprehensive coverage of the social and other environmental criteria. FSC, PEFC and CarbonFix provide comprehensive assessments of the sustainable forest management criterion. CCBA REDD+ S&E, CCB, and GCS provide comprehensive coverage of the biodiversity and poverty alleviation criteria. Experience in using these standards in pilot projects shows that projects are currently combining several standards as part of their strategy to improve their ability to attract investment, but costs of implementing several certification schemes is a concern. We conclude that voluntary certification provides useful practical experience that should feed into the design of the international REDD+ regime.

On 1 March 2011 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and the Center for People and Forests (RECOFTC) launched a Guidebook on “Free, prior and informed consent in REDD+: Principles and Approaches for Policy and Project Development” at a regional GIZ conference in Bangkok. The publication has been developed jointly by the GIZ Sector Network Natural Resources and Rural Development – Asia and RECOFTC’s Grassroots Capacity Building Program for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) in the Asia-Pacific Region with the involvement of a consortium of NGOs and CSOs working on REDD+ projects or on indigenous rights in the region.

In November 2010, Plan Vivo Stakeholders gathered in Edinburgh to discuss and shape the future of Plan Vivo.

Access the documents here