Understanding Discord NSFW Servers A Guide for Responsible Users.pdf
Carbon management and rural livelihoods | Elaine Muir
1. Plan Vivo – Carbon management and rural livelihoods
• The Voluntary Forest Carbon market
• Voluntary Carbon Standards
• The Plan Vivo Standard
• Applicability of The Plan Vivo Standard to forestry in Scotland
Contact
Elaine Muir
email: elaine@planvivofoundation.org
Tel: 0131 672 3782 | Fax: 0131 672 9299
Tower Mains Studios
18b Liberton Brae
Edinburgh EH16 6AE
www.planvivo.org
1
2. The Voluntary Carbon market
• Not required by the law, not regulated by overarching authority
• Credits known as VERs
• Companies and individuals offset their emissions on a voluntary
basis to claim climate or carbon neutrality
• Standards have been developed to provide transparency and
quality assurance
• Voluntary carbon market transacted about 131 million tCO₂ in
2010
• Largest share of sales = REDD (29%), A/R (around 8%)
• Innovation and experimentation for future compliance schemes
2
3. Why voluntary markets for forest carbon?
• Compliance markets NOT working for land-use
• Costly, complex and bureaucratic
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/MapApp/index.html
3
4. Voluntary forest carbon standards
• Increase transparency
• Provide quality assurance
CAR
2% CCB + VCS
2%
CCB Other
3% 6%
SGS
4%
ISO 14064
37%
Plan Vivo
10%
VCS + ACR
35%
4
5. The Plan Vivo System and Standards
Plan Vivo: a standard and system
• Tailored for projects working with
rural communities to conserve
and restore ecosystems and build
sustainable livelihoods
History of Plan Vivo
Stems from a 1994 DFID funded
research project in Mexico
Objective: to assess whether rural
communities can access carbon
finance
5
6. How does it work? What is a plan vivo?
• Range of activities: Afforestation/reforestation, agroforestry, forest
conservation and restoration
• Participatory planning: Participants draw up plan vivos (management plans)
• Individual (smallholder) or group (e.g. community forest)
6
7. How are carbon services quantified?
The project generates technical specifications for each land-use.
• Additionality
• Baseline (absence of project)
• Project scenario
• Leakage
• Risks to sustainability e.g. fire
(determine risk buffer level 10-30%)
7
8. Carbon benefits of different land-use activities over time
Avoided deforestation Afforestation / agroforestry
Project
Project
Carbon stock
Baseline
Baseline
20-40 years
Approximate carbon benefits Approximate carbon benefits
• 40 tC/ha miombo woodland • 15 tC/ha agroforestry systems
• 120 tC/ha secondary tropical forest • 60 tC/ha mixed use plantations
• 200 tC/ha primary tropical forest • 100 tC/ha tropical hardwoods
Multiply by 3.67 for
CO2e
8
9. Transacting carbon services (PES agreements)
• Project enters into agreements with individual
producers or community groups for their carbon
services
• E.g. farmer, 1ha afforestation, agrees to sell 300 tCO₂ at
$3.60/ tonne
Community banker in Kiyanga
issuing a PES payment to a
producer, TFGB project
9
10. How are results monitored?
Monitoring and further
extension support
provided by local staff,
with assistance and
oversight
(emphasis on transfer
of technical capacity,
gradual
decentralisation of
roles)
10
11. Conditional payments for ecosystem services
Year Target/milestone Payment
1 33% plot established $/ local
currency
2 66% plot established
3 100% established
5 85% survival + average dbh
7
10…
15…
11
12. Achievements so far
• Projects under development or
operational in 14 countries
• >4500 participants with plan vivos
• >20,000 hectares under
management
• ~$6 million channelled to
developing countries
• 1,000,000 tCO2 certified to date
12
13. The Markit Environmental Registry
• Ensuring transparency and traceability
• Example serial number
PV-PVC-UG-100000000000171-01012010-31122010-1539717-1569716-MER-0-A
13
16. How is finance shared?
Certification $0.35
Verification,
marketing?
$0.65
Admin’
monitoring, etc
Example
price: $1.40
$6 / tCO2
Staged
payment to
• Producers must receive an communities/
equitable share producers
$3.60
16
17. Project example: Trees for Global Benefits
• Set up in 2003
• Coordinated by Ecotrust
• Scaling-up from 30 to 700
over 7 years
• Expansion to new activities
• Further expansion to
REDD+
• Socio-economic impact
study showing poverty
reduction
• Links to microfinance
17
18. The Plan Vivo Standard: applicability to the Woodland Carbon
Code
Similarities Differences
• Both set out robust • Focus on developing
requirements for voluntary countries
carbon projects, enabling • Focus on communities and
consistent measurement of benefit sharing, to break
carbon uptake cycle of poverty and
• Both have a system of environmental degradation.
independent quality
assurance
18
