Avoided deforestation and reforestation with native tree species were rated the most desirable forestry projects for generating offset credits, in a survey of potential buyers in the voluntary carbon market.
The survey, The forest carbon offsetting survey 2009, was conducted by EcoSecurities, Conservation International, ClimateBiz and the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA). It collated responses from 141 large and small organisations in financial services, professional services, transport and aviation, energy & utilities and IT, mainly in Europe and North America. The survey providers say these sectors are home to the most active buyers in the voluntary carbon market. Companies in these sectors purchase offsets to voluntarily balance their own emissions or to offer carbon neutral products and services to their customers.
The survey found there was a 91 per cent acceptance of carbon offsets from activities to prevent deforestation, also known as
REDD. But close behind was reforestation which enjoyed 89 per cent support, as long as native species were used. Agro-forestry was also well regarded, 81 per cent of respondents rating it desirable or highly desirable, as was peatland conservation at 76 per cent. Commercial non-native plantations for large scale timber harvest attracted a desirable rating from only 39 per cent of respondents with 48 per cent declaring it undesirable or highly so.
"This survey demonstrates the growing understanding among offset buyers of the potential of forestry activities to generate high-quality, cost-effective emissions reductions,” said Joanna Durbin, director of the CCBA. At the same time, buyers recognise the importance of additional advantages like conserving species and supporting local communities, Durbin said.
Not surprisingly, South America (78 per cent), Africa (71 per cent) and South East Asia (69 per cent) emerged as the most desirable regions to purchase forest carbon credits. These regions are home to the world’s most significant tracts of tropical rainforest.
Survey results also underscored the current disconnect between Europe and North America on forest carbon. Only 36 per cent of European respondents rated forestry projects as in any way desirable. Among respondents across the Atlantic the proportion was more than double at 74 per cent.
Verifying forest carbon projects to an acceptable independent third-party standard is a crucial factor in ensuring real and measurable carbon benefits are generated, as well as demonstrating other social and environmental sustainability impacts are addressed. The survey bore this out with 91 per cent rating the use of a carbon standard as important or highly important. Delivering biodiversity and community benefits on top of climate benefits were also highly rated, at 74 and 69 per cent respectively.
Of the standards themselves, the most desirable for forestry project verification were the UN
CDM (64 per cent) and the Voluntary Carbon Standard (60 per cent). These are also the most widely known, however. Significant numbers of respondents said they did not know enough about the standards to choose.
Interestingly, despite the importance placed on biodiversity and social benefits, respondents favoured the carbon-only VCS standard over using both the VCS and the social/environmental-focused CCB Standard. While the survey providers suggest this may be due to a lack of understanding of a combined standards approach, it may also reflect a desire by buyers to avoid the complication and higher cost of dual verification.
The survey providers acknowledge the methodology used means the firms surveyed may not be fully representative of their industry sectors as they were organisations already somewhat disposed to voluntary climate action.
Download:
The forest carbon offsetting survey 2009More:
Carbon Positive's Forest Carbon Resource Centre