00:24:01 Johan Kieft: Asian redd supplies impacted by policies of the by then moef on vcm, halting all trasacyion by 20921 00:25:17 Johan Kieft: how does it compared to removals 00:26:06 Genevieve Bennett: Hi James, yes! We'll email a link to a recording today 00:29:11 Joseph Badevokila: Hi Dear PanelitsClean cookstove have lost credibility mainly because the non-fungible portion of biomass was merely ignored or dismissed by project developers 00:29:19 Charlotte Barber: Hello everyone, if you're interested in exploring Ecosystem Marketplace VCM data (average prices, volumes and project info) check out our Global Carbon Markets Hub: https://hub.ecosystemmarketplace.com/landing If you're interested in reporting your 2024 VCM trade data to Ecosystem Marketplaces for our 2025 State of the VCM report, reach out to our team: info@ecosystemmarketplace.com 00:29:38 Md Zafar Alam Bhuiyan: Hi, could you send the presentation as PDF or slide form, pls? 00:39:00 Dan Kwiatkowski: What do you think is missing in getting the message across to potential buyers about the value that REDD+ projects bring to climate and communities? Are REDD+ projects held to higher standards than any other development instrument? 00:39:41 Roy Manuell: Integrity aside, would the selling point of REDD not improve if local people got more of the credit money - most only get 30% or much lower... 00:40:07 Phivo Artemides: hi everyone, looking for a project developer to help us with developing projects for a carbon credit program with the transport industry. If anybody has any leads please email me at michael@unitree.earth 00:40:11 Benedict Irwin: Could one of the reasons for low pricing of REDD carbon credits be the preoccupation with technical verification of CCs coupled a lack of market smart carbon credit product development - i think this aligns with what Roselyn is saying. 00:40:40 Daniel Soeiro: integrity in REDD credits involves 100% transparency in the distribution of benefits, the commercialization of credits, tokenization, and compulsory retirement - Daniel Soeiro (BNDES Brazil) 00:40:41 Leo Rubert: Have we not seen carbon credit buyers willing to pay a premium for better-quality credits? What would you say will be the role of additional certifications (e.g., CORSIA, CCP) and rating agencies for the restauration of trust for REDD+? 00:42:26 Will Gochberg: Ex-post verification is a reasonable idea, but hard to actually do in practice. Some of the academic and ratings agency studies that have done so are not very convincing, though of course the approach can be improved. One problem is that a favored statistical tool to do this, synthetic controls, will become less appropriate (as far as I can tell) with the spread of jurisdictional programs. Hard to find "control" pixels when the whole jurisdiction is "trated" by REDD+ activities of some sort. 00:43:03 Subash Pandey: Are there any peer-reviewed/non-peer reviewed analysis on "cost to maintain that one ton intact" in different HJs/geographical context? I would really appreciate if any of have read any such analysis and share the links. 00:43:12 Rodrigo Sales: Carbon credits price of REDD+ does not factor in the costs of domestic reduction in developed countries which should be implemented as part of the global efforts to mitigage climate change. This is part of the original discussions on the use of Market mechanisms under the UNFCCC and lately in the voluntary Market. . Low prices for REDD+ credits is simply largely a result of Market Power from buyers in acquiring credits for very low prices to offset domestic reudctions. Could you please elaborate. Thank you. 00:44:17 Julia Jones: Hi Gabriel I agree 100% with the importance of REDD+ and greatly appreciate the efforts of ICVCM to improve integrity. What are your thoughts about the recent resignations (specifically the issues with ex ante baselines which VM48 does not resolve-see figure in the resignation blog). https://www.oeko.de/en/blog/the-icvcm-approval-of-three-redd-methodologies-presents-risks-to-the-integrity-of-the-initiative Is the solution moving to credits only being issued ex post, once they have been validated against a credible counterfactual ex post? Some have argued for this (eg the 4C team in Cambridge). Of course there are challenges with this too. It would be valuable to hear your reflections. Julia P G Jones 00:44:36 Sergio Molina-Murillo: Hello. I´m professor on forest economics and member of the Costa Rica´s REDD+ National Committe. Several reasons explain the prices, often the lack of demand, but at this point from our experience, is that developing countries with forest cover are just price takers, $5-10 dollars are better than nothing, despite the carbon and all other co-benefits forest and its ecosystem serves provide. I would add that there a strong corporate-political interest worldwide to move the funding to other more costly sectors. Some food for thought! 00:46:04 Johan Kieft: the point made above makes perfect sense 00:47:54 Roy Manuell: yeah, and 70% or more of the credit money goes to the developers (often in the US) while the local people get very little - that is not attractive to sell. 00:48:25 Esther Val: Can you provide a link to the report Gabriel just quoted? 00:48:55 Daniel Soeiro: A Project approach for reduce deforestation only make sense for private lands. For public lands its completely misleading, almost a intelectual scam. thats the starting point, reconigze the limits 00:50:53 Roy Manuell: revenue share has been agreed on a percentage basis....so in some cases project set up when credit price was $2-3 .....developers took lion's share of the percentage deal because they took the risk.....but that means they get extremely rich if the credit price jumps to $15 or more.....and that makes REDD unattractive 00:51:00 Kate Long: So interesting to see a world view. From the UK we are just catching up on the carbon credits market. The expertise and analysis is limited. The best proposals recently I have seen is to provide vehicle's through Local Nature Recovery Strategies but Im hoping to understand the differences between credit markets and the mechanisms to bring better technical discussion forums forward in the UK and advice delivery at local levels. Are projects best driven through statute, NGO, or financial markets how does this mix effect deliverability. Please any insights would be super helpful. 00:53:41 Gabriel Labbate: to Esther, please check the ICVCM website. The Board decision and supporting documentation is there. 00:54:11 Thi Thi Phyo Oo: "Hello everyone!" I am joining from Yangon, Myanmar (Burma). I'm excited to be here today for this important discussion. 00:55:44 Matthew Aruch: The credit prices are one thing, but what about financing mechanisms to support communities in the project development phase? We are supporting Kayapo Indigenous communities and associations (kayapo.org) in of REDD+ project development and the costs to get the credits to market are considerable if we want to keep negotiating power in the hands of the communities themselves vs. the project developers or buyers. Any suggestions here? 00:55:58 Rodrigo Sales: Should this Market continue to be a totally unregulated Market driven only by purê "Market forces"? Or some coordinated policy among credit supplier/Project hostc countries should be implemented to demand a Minimum credit price or some form of factoring in (i) the opportunity costs faced by host communities and (ii) the real costs that buyer countries are avoding (with all cumplicity of their governments) simply by exerting Market power and paying so little to carbon credits. Including the coordinated efforts of huge coallitions suach as LEAF. Could you elaborate on that? Thank you 00:56:18 Heather Conejo: Is there a link to the report that quotes $30? Thanks 00:56:18 Roy Manuell: The selling price of REDD should be saving the forest ---- it is not if 70% of the credit money goes to the developer 00:56:26 Gabriel Labbate: Hola Sergio, you are right in that countries and communities have been price takers. Also, part of the disparity observed in benefit distribution reflects the low prices and that implementation costs end up taking an important share of income from sales. 00:56:37 Peter Graham: In addition to those mentioned, one of the reasons for relatively low prices for REDD credits was the fact that donor governments (Norway, etc) originally set the payment for results at $5/tCO2. This made sense at a “pilot” stage of the FCPF Carbon Fund. That was the only reference price for many years. With LEAF coalition of buyers, Norway’s gov’t was able to offer a floor price of $10 (for jurisdictional ART-TREES credits). As Roselyn is articulating, the price determination needs to better reflect the costs of achieving a sustainable transition of the forest and land use sectors. 00:57:19 Roy Manuell: REDD will hit $30 if the article 6 credit can be used in a compliance market 00:58:03 Subash Pandey: I wish I could save all the questions and comments asked in this chat for future look. Seem very important. 00:58:35 Steve Zwick: Historically, measuring, monitoring, and other start-up costs have consumed a disproportionate share of capital due to low prices. Will the new methodologies help address this imbalance? Also, could you comment on how this might impact revenue sharing, which typically directs more funds to on-the-ground activities as prices rise above break-even? 00:58:41 Katrina Borromeo: Hi everyone, this is the link to the UNEP report on pricing forest carbon, citing 30-50 USD per tonne https://www.unep.org/resources/publication/pricing-forest-carbon 00:58:41 Gabriel Labbate: to Roy: it would be great news for countries and IPLCs if high-integrity REDD+ credits make it into compliance markets. It would be definitely have an impact on prices 00:59:11 Rodrigo Sales: In my view, Peter Graham´s information above confirms my assumptions. Is there any Market player willing to pay $ 50 to 100 a tone in relation to a State of the art Project in indigenous communities land and set a example to the "Market"? 00:59:12 Anita Aondona: i agree with Roselyn. The conversation should involve the countries that own these forests. 00:59:15 Alicia Lopez: Now some jurisdictions are experiencing that the “floor price” of $10 offered at the beginning by LEAF is now becoming in most cases the ceiling price 00:59:19 Alison Smith: Agree with Subash, please can you save the chat and circulate later? 00:59:31 Juan Antonio Merino Romero: Payments are directly related to the integrity of the product being sold. How much do you think a methodological approach to MRV based on satellite LiDAR can improve the integrity of both Baselines and the Results presented? This technology could be usefull to adress quantification issues and also be more cost effective 01:00:18 Farhah Rosli: I also concur, this chat discussion is very informative 01:00:40 Steve Zwick: The cost of borrowing is upward of 25 percent. 01:01:33 Roy Manuell: Yes, deevlopers took the risk and deserve to make money - but the structure of the deal is wrong - it should not be percentage 01:01:34 Gabriel Labbate: To Juan Antonio: agreed. That technology is having an impact already by decreasing uncertainty and MRV costs 01:01:57 Robin Chazdon: Roselyn for President! 01:02:05 Eak Rana: Buyers generally raise methodological and integrity concern in REDD+ such as additionality, permanence, displacement, and leakage to make their claim for lower price of carbon credits. 01:02:14 Alison Smith: I heard recently that deforestation has increased since Verra disqualified four REDD+ projects in Brazil. Do you have any comments on this? 01:02:50 Anita Aondona: well said Roselyn. 01:02:55 Genevieve Bennett: Everyone! We'll save the chat and find a way to share it. 01:02:59 Andrew Fang: Who were the buyers of REDD+ credits in 2023 vs. say, 2020? 01:03:45 Gabriel Labbate: TO Alison: my reading from that situation is that REDD+ projects can provide real emission reductions. 01:03:56 Dr Manjunatha M: Hello Everyone, joining from College of Forestry, Ponnampet, Karnataka, India. Excited to hear political movements on Carbon Credit. I am working on a project "Carbon Credit generation in Bamboo plantation" in connection with the REDD+. 01:03:57 Rodrigo Sales: If buyers were pushed domestically to change their behaviour locally or, alternatively, use offsets from good REDD+ projects , the relative costs for buying REDD+ costs would appear to be very diferent in the mind of buyers. And many do not need to borrow any Money to address it. 01:04:01 Amber Baker: The Plan Vivo Standard is the ONLY that ensures that AT LEAST 60% of project income goes to communities - this has to be reported transparently https://www.planvivo.org/news/plan-vivo-assessment-in-progress-for-icvcm-ccp-eligibility#:~:text=It%20is%20the%20only%20Carbon,and%20smallholders%20on%20the%20ground. 01:04:07 Heather Conejo: Interesting point on the floor price becoming the ceiling price for LEAF, Alicia. Is there any information/data on why the floor price was set at $10? 01:04:20 Isaac Andoh: I support Roselyn perfectly on the fact that without communities having a sense of ownership to the forests, there cannot be Sustainability 01:04:21 Roy Manuell: the REDD projects that have collapsed in price have collapsed because of bad press - and that was often about baselines, but it was also about the money 01:04:52 Rodrigo Sales: Who is running the bad press mentioned above? 01:05:04 Roy Manuell: when people became aware how little money actually was going to local people 01:06:14 Alex Procton: I think that all of these things - the benefit-sharing, MMRV, integrity in methodological and implementation - need to be addressed simultaneously. It will require a concentrated initiative that brings together buyers, project developers, VVBs, and communities, and all of these stakeholders will need to be ready to make hard decisions to communicate when projects do not meet acceptable standards. Otherwise it is very easy to point to one instance of poor governance and paint the entire sector in a negative light. 01:07:10 Agustin Matteri: Is REDD+ capable of taking the conversation to the next level in terms of whole of ecosystem services payments in a context where biodiversity credits and other innovative financial mechanisms are growing? Are disclosure frameworks such as TNFD expected to make an increase in the demand for this in the near future? 01:07:47 Kate Long: And air pollution controls 01:07:58 Steve Zwick: @Augustin, REDD+ started as an effort to bring water and biodiversity into the mainstream by attaching them to carbon. 01:08:13 Nyunt Wynn: Hello to everyone from Green&Blue VCM Carbon Initiative Myanmar( Burma) 01:09:14 Robin Chazdon: Such a great group of panelists! Thanks so much for discussing the key issues. Now it’s all about telling the story in the right way and being bold. 01:09:14 Eak Rana: Theresia -Tell more about complexity - pathways transitioning REDD+ from FCPF, ART-TREES, or VCS to Art 6.2 or 6.4? 01:09:24 Sergio Molina-Murillo: Probably the opportunity cost of those activities that compete with forest should set a price floor either at the national or regional level. Some might argue this should be the price ceiling, but I disagree given the negative externalities of those alternatives, or the positive externalities provided by forest. 01:09:53 Andrew Fang: Article 6.2 may be a better option for REDD+ credits than 6.4? 01:09:53 Alicia Lopez: @heather I heard it directly from people I know are in the negotiations with LEAF and it’s being hard to get more than $10 01:10:40 Agustin Matteri: @Steve however it seems to be stuck in discussing carbon price when sustainable development needs a price for nature and natural capital 01:10:55 Steve Zwick: Ninety percent of the coverage claiming that money isn't going to people on the ground aren't taking activities and financing costs into account. Did some projects make "more than they should"? Perhaps, but even the most profitable developers made a lot less than they would have if they just put money into low-risk mutual funds -- let alone lucrative logging licenses. 01:11:20 Leo Rubert: The forest risk maps and baselines of Verra's new VM0048 methodology will generally lead to project issuing much less. How is this challenge expected to impact prices? 01:11:21 Roy Manuell: good question Nathan - as the Guardian shows us, the press will go after juicy low hanging fruit stories - greedy developers inflating baselines to sell credits to gullible companies while very little money goes to the local people --- it is a story every time! 01:11:22 Heloisa Brenha Ribeiro: Hello, everyone! Thanks for the panel. I would like to hear the panelists about 2 aspects often criticized about REDD+ to understand better the mechanism. 1) REDD+ seems to offer a solution in cases where impoverished local communities cause deforestation. But what happens in cases where these communities are not the main drivers of deforestation? What if the main drive is private agents wealthy enough to buy tractors, set large fires, build landing strips for helicopters etc. for the purposes of land grabbing, farming, mining? What if the deforestation in a REDD+-Project area has both communities and these criminals as drivers? 01:12:01 Michael Ozulu: Are we gonna ignore the political economics? Many forest landscapes are in developing countries and that demand for perfection is a remnant of colonial tendencies. 01:12:26 Agustin Matteri: @Sergio totally agree 01:13:16 Heloisa Brenha Ribeiro: 2) What ensures that reforestation projects in REDD+ have high ecological quality, rather than being a fast-growth plantations? Is there a thrid-party in loco verification? or verification is only based in documents made by the Project developer? 01:14:17 Genevieve Bennett: I'd suggest any time you've got a market based on the logic of compensation, people are going to (realistically or not) expect perfection. New technologies or infrastructure - people are comfortable with less than 100% performance 01:14:17 Gabriel Labbate: To Heloisa, there are methodologies that will take care of those risks. 01:14:30 Steve Zwick: The Guardian shows us tabloids will make stuff up and ignore counterveiling evidence if there is a juicy story in it for them. The most credible estimates show that baselines were overall about 50 percent higher than actual deforestation risk but also ignored positive externalities, regrowth and other offsetting mechanisms. And both the Guardian and die Zeit knew that but chose to ignore it. That's journalistic malpractice. Sick and wrong. 01:15:20 Gabriel Labbate: Yes 01:15:56 Kate Long: Don't see this as a sticking plaster for bad management and carbon use. Reduction of emissions should be the first action but we need to support business to change there ways. 01:16:00 Roy Manuell: there is no point shooting the messenger steve ....you have to stop the messenger sending out the message 01:16:04 Juan Antonio Merino Romero: There needs to be synergies to increase the reveneu coming from this kind of activities and incentivize investing. for example, the new methodology by Verra to provide Nature Credits from Biodiversity outcomes considers key indicators a lot of structural forest metrics that are also captured durin REDD+ development... 01:16:06 Steve Zwick: Thanks, Everyone!!! 01:16:09 Jill MacKeith: Thank you very much - an excellent and informative discussion. 01:16:10 Sergio Molina-Murillo: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GREAT PRESENTS!!! 01:16:11 Kate Long: Thank-you so much for your insights :) 01:16:13 Anita Aondona: thank you for a very interesting and enlightening conversation 01:16:14 Sophia George: Thank you! 01:16:16 Matthew Aruch: Thank you! 01:16:16 Samuel Ngei: 👏 01:16:19 Emmanuella Doreen Kwofie: 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 01:16:20 Rodrigo Sales: Thank you very much. 01:16:22 Dr Manjunatha M: Due to REDD project, we have conserved one precise thick forest at Western Ghats of India, but please let us know how to go about in Carbon Credit process 01:16:23 Daisy Payne: Thank you! 01:16:24 Eak Rana: Thank you. 01:16:27 Alison Smith: ❤️ 01:16:27 Vanessa Jimenez: Thank you 01:16:28 Renato Camargo: Thank you all! 01:16:28 Nilam Sari: Thank you very much everyone! 01:16:28 Basanta Gautam: 👍 01:16:28 Lorena Munoz: Thank you very much for the insight 01:16:30 Chloe Haynes: Thanks all, great presentation! 01:16:30 Esther Nyambura: thank you so much 01:16:31 Ellyn Damayanti: 👏 01:16:31 Mike Greenwood: THANK YOU! 01:16:32 Dr Manjunatha M: Thank you 01:16:33 KC Cheang: 👏🏻 01:16:35 Nicia Coutinho: Thank you 01:16:35 Heather Conejo: thankyou! 01:16:36 Lawrence Connell: Thanks! 01:16:37 Dr. Kakha NADIRADZE: Thanks 01:16:38 Derrick Rukundo: thanks 01:16:42 Rosa Rivas: thank you 01:16:42 Rudy Valdivia: 👏 01:16:42 David Ndungu: Thank you all 01:16:52 Sixto Palacios: thank you