Menu
FR
search
Publications

Key elements and challenges in monitoring, certifying and financing forestry carbon projects

7 November 2018 - Climate Brief - By :

The amount of finance for forest carbon projects has never been as high as in 2015 when it reached USD 888 million (Goldstein & Ruef, 2016). In most cases, a reliable monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) of carbon removals or emissions reductions is necessary to access most carbon payments.

After an overview of forest carbon finance, this Climate Brief presents the different options and challenges associated with forest carbon MRV.

First, projects developers face three key choices:

  • The definition of th project scope (carbon pools to be considered, geographical perimeter and the related leakages),
  • The different techniques and tools for forest carbon monitoring (field measurements, modeling or) remote sensing)
  • The baseline definition and additionality demonstration.

Despite the different tools and guidelines available to help projects developers trigger impactful mitigation action, six main technical and political challenges are identified:

  • The non-permanence risk and carbon debt: while standards provide tools (eg. buffer account, ex-ante credits) to deal with this challenge, finding the right balance between environmental integrity and project profitability remains delicate.
  • Monitoring uncertainty is often put forward as a barrier to the implementation of carbon pricing in the forestry sector. Reduce uncertainty is costly and the interest of doing so depends on whether carbon pricing is voluntary, on the importance of information asymmetry and on projects profitability.
  • The risk of windfall effects: additionnality can never 100% guaranteed. There again, striking the right balance between avoiding both the “false positives” (non-additional projects getting registered) and the “false negatives” (additional projects that are shut out by the cost and risk of the additionnality demonstration) is delicate.
  • Verification costs: verification can weight up to half the MRV costs and cannot usually be internalized.
  • Low carbon prices: typical MRV costs for forestry projects are around 0.15-1.4 € per tCO2e which is substantial when carbon prices average around 3 € per tCO2e on voluntary markets. How to combine a robust certification with the financial viability of carbon projects in this context is challenging.
  • The double-claiming of climate action issue: the Kyoto Protocol safeguards against double-counting between countries have been adapted by some voluntary carbon standards to prevent that a private entity and a country claim the same emission reduction. This has slowed down projects implementation in Annex I countries, but several standards, including the Gold Standard, are moving towards a new paradigm for voluntary carbon markets.

Key elements and challenges in monitoring, certifying and financing forestry carbon projects Download
To learn more
  • 11/05/2025 Blog post
    From Pledges to Progress: Climate Finance a Decade After Paris

    Nearly a decade has passed since the Paris Agreement elevated finance to the heart of the climate agenda, embedding in Article 2.1(c) the ambitious goal of aligning global financial flows with low-emission, climate-resilient development. But for all the talk of “shifting the trillions,” we remain far from course. 

  • 10/31/2025 Foreword of the week
    A Paris Climate & Nature Week with a touch of ‘green budget’

    We were proud to contribute to the inaugural Paris Climate & Nature Week hosted by Sciences Po from 27 to 29 October, marking the 10 years of the Paris Agreement. I4CE weighed in on some of our core topics– lessons learnt over the past decade of climate action which can accelerate the  transition; the links between climate and development finance; as well as adaptation and the cost of inaction.

  • 10/28/2025
    From targets to action: the climate finance agenda needs a new impetus in Belèm

    Ten years after the adoption of the Paris Agreement, what progress has been made to make financial flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development (the ambition set out in Article 2.1(c) of the Agreement)? And what is needed going forward? Although we still lack a comprehensive assessment of progress, this article draws on existing analysis of what can help align financial flows and examines the efforts made by governments and the financial sector to this end. It highlights a development in the debate towards a country-driven approach and a focus on real investment needs. It explores ways to overcome existing barriers to action despite a challenging global context. The article advocates that Article 2.1(c) should be viewed not as a stand-alone provision, but as something that requires full implementation of all the provisions of the Paris Agreement. It also calls for a shift from a target-focused to an action-focused finance agenda and discusses how the COP30 in Belém can contribute to this.

See all publications
Press contact Amélie FRITZ Head of Communication and press relations Email
Subscribe to our mailing list :
I register !
Subscribe to our newsletter
Once a week, receive all the information on climate economics
I register !
Fermer