Upload
icarb
View
444
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Plan Vivo Foundationwww.planvivo.org
Citation preview
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: [email protected] Tel: 0131 672 3782 | Fax: 0131 672 9299
Tower Mains Studios 18b Liberton Brae Edinburgh EH16 6AE
www.planvivo.org
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
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/MapApp/index.html
Why voluntary markets for forest carbon?
• Compliance markets NOT working for land-use
• Costly, complex and bureaucratic
4
ISO 14064 37%
VCS + ACR 35%
Plan Vivo 10%
SGS 4%
CCB 3%
CAR 2% CCB + VCS
2% Other
6%
Voluntary forest carbon standards
• Increase transparency
• Provide quality assurance
5
The Plan Vivo System and Standards
• Tailored for projects working with rural communities to conserve and restore ecosystems and build sustainable livelihoods
Plan Vivo: a standard and system
History of Plan Vivo
Stems from a 1994 DFID funded research project in Mexico
Objective: to assess whether rural communities can access carbon finance
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)
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
Baseline
Project
Project
Baseline
Approximate carbon benefits
• 40 tC/ha miombo woodland
• 120 tC/ha secondary tropical forest
• 200 tC/ha primary tropical forest
Approximate carbon benefits
• 15 tC/ha agroforestry systems
• 60 tC/ha mixed use plantations
• 100 tC/ha tropical hardwoods
Multiply by 3.67 for
CO2e
Ca
rbo
n s
toc
k
20-40 years
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
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
Conditional payments for ecosystem services
11
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…
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
The Markit Environmental Registry
• Ensuring transparency and traceability
• Example serial number
PV-PVC-UG-100000000000171-01012010-31122010-1539717-1569716-MER-0-A
13
How is PES financed?
14
Certificate Issuance history
15
16
How is finance shared?
Staged
payment to
communities/
producers
$3.60
Admin’
monitoring, etc
$1.40
Verification,
marketing?
$0.65
Certification $0.35
Example
price:
$6 / tCO2
• Producers must receive an equitable share
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
The Plan Vivo Standard: applicability to the Woodland Carbon Code
Similarities
• Both set out robust requirements for voluntary carbon projects, enabling consistent measurement of carbon uptake
• Both have a system of independent quality assurance
Differences
• Focus on developing countries
• Focus on communities and benefit sharing, to break cycle of poverty and environmental degradation.
18
19
Contact
Elaine Muir
[email protected] Tel: 0131 672 3782 | Fax: 0131 672 9299
Tower Mains Studios 18b Liberton Brae Edinburgh EH16 6AE
www.planvivo.org