Nature-based
Soil carbon
Soil carbon CDR involves adoption of new conservation practices, regenerative agricultural management, or soil microbiology management to increase the amount of carbon stored in soil. Agriculture both contributes to GHG emissions and is especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Soil carbon projects can minimize these adverse climate change impacts by improving the long-term sustainability of agricultural operations and increasing their resilience to climate change. While scientists have a good understanding of how on-farm management practices that sequester carbon in soils are implemented, the precise impact of these practices on soil carbon stocks is dependent on site-specific considerations, such as soil type, crop, and climate. Soil carbon scalability depends on a complex set of factors that include producer behaviors and preferences, cultural context, and access to technical assistance.
Nature-based
Soil carbon
Soil carbon CDR involves adoption of new conservation practices, regenerative agricultural management, or soil microbiology management to increase the amount of carbon stored in soil. Agriculture both contributes to GHG emissions and is especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Soil carbon projects can minimize these adverse climate change impacts by improving the long-term sustainability of agricultural operations and increasing their resilience to climate change. While scientists have a good understanding of how on-farm management practices that sequester carbon in soils are implemented, the precise impact of these practices on soil carbon stocks is dependent on site-specific considerations, such as soil type, crop, and climate. Soil carbon scalability depends on a complex set of factors that include producer behaviors and preferences, cultural context, and access to technical assistance.
Nature-based
Soil carbon
Soil carbon CDR involves adoption of new conservation practices, regenerative agricultural management, or soil microbiology management to increase the amount of carbon stored in soil. Agriculture both contributes to GHG emissions and is especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Soil carbon projects can minimize these adverse climate change impacts by improving the long-term sustainability of agricultural operations and increasing their resilience to climate change. While scientists have a good understanding of how on-farm management practices that sequester carbon in soils are implemented, the precise impact of these practices on soil carbon stocks is dependent on site-specific considerations, such as soil type, crop, and climate. Soil carbon scalability depends on a complex set of factors that include producer behaviors and preferences, cultural context, and access to technical assistance.
Soil carbon
Social harms, benefits, and environmental justice
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of community health impacts from changing agricultural practices and inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.), including the health and welfare of agricultural producers (e.g., farmers and ranchers).
Articulate and, if necessary, implement a strategy for mitigating negative economic impacts on producers resulting from changes in crop yields or management costs.
Project developers should
Allow flexibility in producer practices given variable climate, environmental, and market conditions.
Ensure contracts allow flexibility so producers are not locked into inadvisable practices.
Design projects to accommodate participants who both own and lease land. This should include provisions to ensure that lessees do not inadvertently experience adverse financial effects as a result of improving soil health through regenerative practices (i.e., being charged higher rent for more desirable land).
Actively promote long-term sustainable livelihoods and economic opportunities for local communities.
Specify the percentage of project revenues or profits that are paid to producers.
Identify how project labor will be distributed and compensated, considering that agricultural operations often rely on migrant labor.
Social harms, benefits, and environmental justice
Social harms, benefits, and environmental justice
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of community health impacts from changing agricultural practices and inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.), including the health and welfare of agricultural producers (e.g., farmers and ranchers).
Articulate and, if necessary, implement a strategy for mitigating negative economic impacts on producers resulting from changes in crop yields or management costs.
Project developers should
Allow flexibility in producer practices given variable climate, environmental, and market conditions.
Ensure contracts allow flexibility so producers are not locked into inadvisable practices.
Design projects to accommodate participants who both own and lease land. This should include provisions to ensure that lessees do not inadvertently experience adverse financial effects as a result of improving soil health through regenerative practices (i.e., being charged higher rent for more desirable land).
Actively promote long-term sustainable livelihoods and economic opportunities for local communities.
Specify the percentage of project revenues or profits that are paid to producers.
Identify how project labor will be distributed and compensated, considering that agricultural operations often rely on migrant labor.
Social harms, benefits, and environmental justice
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of community health impacts from changing agricultural practices and inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.), including the health and welfare of agricultural producers (e.g., farmers and ranchers).
Articulate and, if necessary, implement a strategy for mitigating negative economic impacts on producers resulting from changes in crop yields or management costs.
Project developers should
Allow flexibility in producer practices given variable climate, environmental, and market conditions.
Ensure contracts allow flexibility so producers are not locked into inadvisable practices.
Design projects to accommodate participants who both own and lease land. This should include provisions to ensure that lessees do not inadvertently experience adverse financial effects as a result of improving soil health through regenerative practices (i.e., being charged higher rent for more desirable land).
Actively promote long-term sustainable livelihoods and economic opportunities for local communities.
Specify the percentage of project revenues or profits that are paid to producers.
Identify how project labor will be distributed and compensated, considering that agricultural operations often rely on migrant labor.
Social harms, benefits, and environmental justice
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of community health impacts from changing agricultural practices and inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.), including the health and welfare of agricultural producers (e.g., farmers and ranchers).
Articulate and, if necessary, implement a strategy for mitigating negative economic impacts on producers resulting from changes in crop yields or management costs.
Project developers should
Allow flexibility in producer practices given variable climate, environmental, and market conditions.
Ensure contracts allow flexibility so producers are not locked into inadvisable practices.
Design projects to accommodate participants who both own and lease land. This should include provisions to ensure that lessees do not inadvertently experience adverse financial effects as a result of improving soil health through regenerative practices (i.e., being charged higher rent for more desirable land).
Actively promote long-term sustainable livelihoods and economic opportunities for local communities.
Specify the percentage of project revenues or profits that are paid to producers.
Identify how project labor will be distributed and compensated, considering that agricultural operations often rely on migrant labor.
Soil carbon
Environmental harms and benefits
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of negative ecosystem impacts from changing agricultural practices, including from changes in inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.). Negative ecosystem impacts can include, but are not limited to, lower air quality, reduced water quality, land degradation, downstream waterway pollution, and sound pollution.
Project developers should
Monitor and quantify ecosystem co-benefits, where possible. Ecosystem co-benefits can include, but are not limited to, improved soil health, erosion control, increased biodiversity, improved water quality, and higher air quality.
Environmental harms and benefits
Environmental harms and benefits
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of negative ecosystem impacts from changing agricultural practices, including from changes in inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.). Negative ecosystem impacts can include, but are not limited to, lower air quality, reduced water quality, land degradation, downstream waterway pollution, and sound pollution.
Project developers should
Monitor and quantify ecosystem co-benefits, where possible. Ecosystem co-benefits can include, but are not limited to, improved soil health, erosion control, increased biodiversity, improved water quality, and higher air quality.
Environmental harms and benefits
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of negative ecosystem impacts from changing agricultural practices, including from changes in inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.). Negative ecosystem impacts can include, but are not limited to, lower air quality, reduced water quality, land degradation, downstream waterway pollution, and sound pollution.
Project developers should
Monitor and quantify ecosystem co-benefits, where possible. Ecosystem co-benefits can include, but are not limited to, improved soil health, erosion control, increased biodiversity, improved water quality, and higher air quality.
Environmental harms and benefits
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of negative ecosystem impacts from changing agricultural practices, including from changes in inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.). Negative ecosystem impacts can include, but are not limited to, lower air quality, reduced water quality, land degradation, downstream waterway pollution, and sound pollution.
Project developers should
Monitor and quantify ecosystem co-benefits, where possible. Ecosystem co-benefits can include, but are not limited to, improved soil health, erosion control, increased biodiversity, improved water quality, and higher air quality.
Soil carbon
Additionality and baselines
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Document dynamic baseline emissions from business-as-usual management either by: (1) using control plots to directly measure baseline fluctuations in soil carbon due to climate variability or other non-management drivers, or (2) using a model to estimate baseline fluctuations in soil carbon based on records of historical management practices and soil carbon measurements from a pre-project time period encompassing at least one full crop rotation or three years, whichever is longer.
Gather management history to demonstrate that any new practice is not already a common management practice across the farm or ranch.
Use baselines that are specific to the project region and agricultural system to quantify the change in soil carbon resulting from new management practices.
Assess the barriers that prevent farmers from implementing planned project practices. These may include financial barriers, lack of available equipment, knowledge gaps, or other barriers.
Additionality and baselines
Additionality and baselines
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Document dynamic baseline emissions from business-as-usual management either by: (1) using control plots to directly measure baseline fluctuations in soil carbon due to climate variability or other non-management drivers, or (2) using a model to estimate baseline fluctuations in soil carbon based on records of historical management practices and soil carbon measurements from a pre-project time period encompassing at least one full crop rotation or three years, whichever is longer.
Gather management history to demonstrate that any new practice is not already a common management practice across the farm or ranch.
Use baselines that are specific to the project region and agricultural system to quantify the change in soil carbon resulting from new management practices.
Assess the barriers that prevent farmers from implementing planned project practices. These may include financial barriers, lack of available equipment, knowledge gaps, or other barriers.
Additionality and baselines
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Document dynamic baseline emissions from business-as-usual management either by: (1) using control plots to directly measure baseline fluctuations in soil carbon due to climate variability or other non-management drivers, or (2) using a model to estimate baseline fluctuations in soil carbon based on records of historical management practices and soil carbon measurements from a pre-project time period encompassing at least one full crop rotation or three years, whichever is longer.
Gather management history to demonstrate that any new practice is not already a common management practice across the farm or ranch.
Use baselines that are specific to the project region and agricultural system to quantify the change in soil carbon resulting from new management practices.
Assess the barriers that prevent farmers from implementing planned project practices. These may include financial barriers, lack of available equipment, knowledge gaps, or other barriers.
Additionality and baselines
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Document dynamic baseline emissions from business-as-usual management either by: (1) using control plots to directly measure baseline fluctuations in soil carbon due to climate variability or other non-management drivers, or (2) using a model to estimate baseline fluctuations in soil carbon based on records of historical management practices and soil carbon measurements from a pre-project time period encompassing at least one full crop rotation or three years, whichever is longer.
Gather management history to demonstrate that any new practice is not already a common management practice across the farm or ranch.
Use baselines that are specific to the project region and agricultural system to quantify the change in soil carbon resulting from new management practices.
Assess the barriers that prevent farmers from implementing planned project practices. These may include financial barriers, lack of available equipment, knowledge gaps, or other barriers.
Soil carbon
Measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Show that projects have a low risk of community health impacts from changing agricultural practices and inputs (e.g., fertilizer, herbicides, etc.), including the health and welfare of agricultural producers (e.g., farmers and ranchers).
Articulate and, if necessary, implement a strategy for mitigating negative economic impacts on producers resulting from changes in crop yields or management costs.
Project developers should
Allow flexibility in producer practices given variable climate, environmental, and market conditions.
Ensure contracts allow flexibility so producers are not locked into inadvisable practices.
Design projects to accommodate participants who both own and lease land. This should include provisions to ensure that lessees do not inadvertently experience adverse financial effects as a result of improving soil health through regenerative practices (i.e., being charged higher rent for more desirable land).
Actively promote long-term sustainable livelihoods and economic opportunities for local communities.
Specify the percentage of project revenues or profits that are paid to producers.
Identify how project labor will be distributed and compensated, considering that agricultural operations often rely on migrant labor.
Measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification
Measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Quantify net project carbon removals including any material emissions increases (e.g., from increased fertilizer applications).
Document sampling design, including any stratification by practice, soil type, crop, and other relevant environmental factors.
Document the analytical and calculation methods used to quantify changes in soil carbon stocks, including the mass/depth basis and any correction applied.
When using modeling to estimate soil carbon changes, implement project-specific direct soil sampling at project outset, and at least once every five years, to validate modeled estimates of soil organic carbon levels.
Take soil cores to a sufficient depth to represent the impact of the implemented practice (e.g., a minimum of 30 cm depth below the organic layer for cover crops, a minimum of one meter of soil depth for some types of tillage change).
Use the best available laboratory analysis practices to measure carbon, such as dry combustion in a carbon and nitrogen analyzer.
Project developers may use novel technological approaches to measure soil carbon directly if such approaches have been validated against more established methods in the specific setting where they will be applied.
Calculate carbon content using appropriate methods for bulk density measurement or an equivalent soil mass basis.
Use models that have been developed and published in peer-reviewed literature for a specific soil, climate, or management context.
Use modeling best practices, including appropriate calibration and validation with region- and practice-appropriate independent datasets, and comprehensively assess model prediction uncertainty.
Document model procedures and sources of validation data.
Quantify and account for sampling error and error associated with lab processing, instrumentation, carbon quantification method, and model prediction uncertainty. Make appropriate adjustments to credit volumes prior to issuing credits to account for error.
Project developers should
Take soil cores as deeply as possible, ideally to one meter.
Provide comprehensive documentation of all soil carbon quantification methods that have been reviewed by a qualified third party.
Identify a plan to share soil carbon data in a public repository, which could be used to improve model-based quantification approaches. This is particularly relevant for projects in areas with limited soil carbon data availability.
Measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Quantify net project carbon removals including any material emissions increases (e.g., from increased fertilizer applications).
Document sampling design, including any stratification by practice, soil type, crop, and other relevant environmental factors.
Document the analytical and calculation methods used to quantify changes in soil carbon stocks, including the mass/depth basis and any correction applied.
When using modeling to estimate soil carbon changes, implement project-specific direct soil sampling at project outset, and at least once every five years, to validate modeled estimates of soil organic carbon levels.
Take soil cores to a sufficient depth to represent the impact of the implemented practice (e.g., a minimum of 30 cm depth below the organic layer for cover crops, a minimum of one meter of soil depth for some types of tillage change).
Use the best available laboratory analysis practices to measure carbon, such as dry combustion in a carbon and nitrogen analyzer.
Project developers may use novel technological approaches to measure soil carbon directly if such approaches have been validated against more established methods in the specific setting where they will be applied.
Calculate carbon content using appropriate methods for bulk density measurement or an equivalent soil mass basis.
Use models that have been developed and published in peer-reviewed literature for a specific soil, climate, or management context.
Use modeling best practices, including appropriate calibration and validation with region- and practice-appropriate independent datasets, and comprehensively assess model prediction uncertainty.
Document model procedures and sources of validation data.
Quantify and account for sampling error and error associated with lab processing, instrumentation, carbon quantification method, and model prediction uncertainty. Make appropriate adjustments to credit volumes prior to issuing credits to account for error.
Project developers should
Take soil cores as deeply as possible, ideally to one meter.
Provide comprehensive documentation of all soil carbon quantification methods that have been reviewed by a qualified third party.
Identify a plan to share soil carbon data in a public repository, which could be used to improve model-based quantification approaches. This is particularly relevant for projects in areas with limited soil carbon data availability.
Measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Quantify net project carbon removals including any material emissions increases (e.g., from increased fertilizer applications).
Document sampling design, including any stratification by practice, soil type, crop, and other relevant environmental factors.
Document the analytical and calculation methods used to quantify changes in soil carbon stocks, including the mass/depth basis and any correction applied.
When using modeling to estimate soil carbon changes, implement project-specific direct soil sampling at project outset, and at least once every five years, to validate modeled estimates of soil organic carbon levels.
Take soil cores to a sufficient depth to represent the impact of the implemented practice (e.g., a minimum of 30 cm depth below the organic layer for cover crops, a minimum of one meter of soil depth for some types of tillage change).
Use the best available laboratory analysis practices to measure carbon, such as dry combustion in a carbon and nitrogen analyzer.
Project developers may use novel technological approaches to measure soil carbon directly if such approaches have been validated against more established methods in the specific setting where they will be applied.
Calculate carbon content using appropriate methods for bulk density measurement or an equivalent soil mass basis.
Use models that have been developed and published in peer-reviewed literature for a specific soil, climate, or management context.
Use modeling best practices, including appropriate calibration and validation with region- and practice-appropriate independent datasets, and comprehensively assess model prediction uncertainty.
Document model procedures and sources of validation data.
Quantify and account for sampling error and error associated with lab processing, instrumentation, carbon quantification method, and model prediction uncertainty. Make appropriate adjustments to credit volumes prior to issuing credits to account for error.
Project developers should
Take soil cores as deeply as possible, ideally to one meter.
Provide comprehensive documentation of all soil carbon quantification methods that have been reviewed by a qualified third party.
Identify a plan to share soil carbon data in a public repository, which could be used to improve model-based quantification approaches. This is particularly relevant for projects in areas with limited soil carbon data availability.
Soil carbon
Durability
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Provide a durability term supported by a detailed monitoring and verification plan. The plan should monitor changes in management practices and subsequent reversals across the entire project area and for the full duration of the project.
Use verification methods and contracting mechanisms that maximize the likelihood that new practices will be implemented and maintained for the full durability term.
Document robust strategies to monitor and mitigate reversal risks, both during and beyond the project crediting period. This must include appropriate buffer or risk pool contributions that can mitigate reversals due to changes in land management or ownership, changes in management practices, and impacts of natural hazards.
Project developers should
Identify mechanisms (e.g., incentives, agronomic support) to minimize producer attrition prior to the fulfillment of the durability term.
Estimate the economic burden that participating producers will take on when adopting new agricultural practices (e.g., purchasing new machinery) to inform the risk that producers will leave programs for economic reasons.
Support the generation of commercial-scale, long-term data to better understand biophysical reversal rates that occur when project practice changes revert.
Seek and support implementation of policy incentives that promote durability, where possible.
Durability
Durability
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Provide a durability term supported by a detailed monitoring and verification plan. The plan should monitor changes in management practices and subsequent reversals across the entire project area and for the full duration of the project.
Use verification methods and contracting mechanisms that maximize the likelihood that new practices will be implemented and maintained for the full durability term.
Document robust strategies to monitor and mitigate reversal risks, both during and beyond the project crediting period. This must include appropriate buffer or risk pool contributions that can mitigate reversals due to changes in land management or ownership, changes in management practices, and impacts of natural hazards.
Project developers should
Identify mechanisms (e.g., incentives, agronomic support) to minimize producer attrition prior to the fulfillment of the durability term.
Estimate the economic burden that participating producers will take on when adopting new agricultural practices (e.g., purchasing new machinery) to inform the risk that producers will leave programs for economic reasons.
Support the generation of commercial-scale, long-term data to better understand biophysical reversal rates that occur when project practice changes revert.
Seek and support implementation of policy incentives that promote durability, where possible.
Durability
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Provide a durability term supported by a detailed monitoring and verification plan. The plan should monitor changes in management practices and subsequent reversals across the entire project area and for the full duration of the project.
Use verification methods and contracting mechanisms that maximize the likelihood that new practices will be implemented and maintained for the full durability term.
Document robust strategies to monitor and mitigate reversal risks, both during and beyond the project crediting period. This must include appropriate buffer or risk pool contributions that can mitigate reversals due to changes in land management or ownership, changes in management practices, and impacts of natural hazards.
Project developers should
Identify mechanisms (e.g., incentives, agronomic support) to minimize producer attrition prior to the fulfillment of the durability term.
Estimate the economic burden that participating producers will take on when adopting new agricultural practices (e.g., purchasing new machinery) to inform the risk that producers will leave programs for economic reasons.
Support the generation of commercial-scale, long-term data to better understand biophysical reversal rates that occur when project practice changes revert.
Seek and support implementation of policy incentives that promote durability, where possible.
Durability
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Provide a durability term supported by a detailed monitoring and verification plan. The plan should monitor changes in management practices and subsequent reversals across the entire project area and for the full duration of the project.
Use verification methods and contracting mechanisms that maximize the likelihood that new practices will be implemented and maintained for the full durability term.
Document robust strategies to monitor and mitigate reversal risks, both during and beyond the project crediting period. This must include appropriate buffer or risk pool contributions that can mitigate reversals due to changes in land management or ownership, changes in management practices, and impacts of natural hazards.
Project developers should
Identify mechanisms (e.g., incentives, agronomic support) to minimize producer attrition prior to the fulfillment of the durability term.
Estimate the economic burden that participating producers will take on when adopting new agricultural practices (e.g., purchasing new machinery) to inform the risk that producers will leave programs for economic reasons.
Support the generation of commercial-scale, long-term data to better understand biophysical reversal rates that occur when project practice changes revert.
Seek and support implementation of policy incentives that promote durability, where possible.
Soil carbon
Leakage
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Conservatively quantify leakage risks, including the impacts of reduced herd numbers or crop yields following implementation of new practices.
Leakage
Leakage
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Conservatively quantify leakage risks, including the impacts of reduced herd numbers or crop yields following implementation of new practices.
Leakage
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Conservatively quantify leakage risks, including the impacts of reduced herd numbers or crop yields following implementation of new practices.
Leakage
Soil carbon
These criteria build on and extend the considerations included under the essential principles for high-quality CDR.
Project developers must
Conservatively quantify leakage risks, including the impacts of reduced herd numbers or crop yields following implementation of new practices.
The information on this page represents the current view of Microsoft and Carbon Direct on the content. It is for informational purposes only. MICROSOFT AND CARBON DIRECT MAKE NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE.