Evaluating protocols and standards for forest carbon-offset programs, Part A: additionality, baselines and permanence

With an influx of individuals, businesses and government bodies investing in carbon offsets, quality control in this multimillion dollar market is increasing in importance. To protect environmental integrity and public interests, it is critical that estimates of offset projects emissions reductions and removals reflect actual contributions. Forest carbon offsets may provide some of the greatest evaluation challenges. In the first of a two-part series, we review ten prominent standards and protocols for how they address two key issues: reference case selection (additionality and baselines) and permanence. On both dimensions and across all programs we find problems that call into question the credibility of the programs’ certified projects and offset credits. In a companion article we find similar problems with respect to leakage, wood products and validation/verification. The pervasive nature of the flaws calls into question the feasibility of designing a forest carbon-offset protocol that provides both reasonable credibility and low transaction costs.