Specific methodological considerations for a wetland carbon project Technical issues

20

4.2 Specific methodological considerations for a wetland carbon project

in Ghana Following, some potential issues and advantages of using the aforementioned standards to a potential carbon project in wetlands in Senegal are presented. The analysis is done first by technical issue and then by potential project type.

4.3 Technical issues

4.3.1 Forest definition and wetlands

• CDM defines forest as a portion of land with an area of at least 0.1ha, a tree crown cover of at least 15 of the area and a minimum tree height at maturity in situ of 5m 13 ; VCS and GS also accept this definition. A forest may consist either of closed forest formations where trees of various stories and undergrowth cover a high por- tion of the ground or open forest. Young natural stands and all plantations which have yet to reach these limits are included under forest. The low limits for area and crown cover have several effects in potential restoration activities in wetlands: while small patches without trees can be considered non forest such as small crop areas, a small group of trees in the middle of pastures could be considered as forest. Also the low area limit requires more refined remote sensing analysis for assessing eligible areas. VCS also accepts FAO forest definition minimum area of 0.5ha, minimum 10 tree crown cover and 5m mature tree height, which may also re- quire detailed remote sensing analysis. • PV defines forest with a minimum area of 0.5ha, 10 of minimum tree crown cov- er and 2m of height of mature trees. As eligible rules for PV do not require areas to be non-forest at the start of the project, forest definition does not poses any re- striction for designing projects and most restoration activities would easily reach the forest definition. It is worth to notice that some mangroves may not reach the height parameter of Ghana’s forest definition. Also, the definition of forest is a two-edged sword. While a minimum area of 0.1 ha implies that small land interventions such as planting a few scattered trees could be eligible for crediting, the presence of a few trees e.g. from natural regeneration in a landscape creates a “forest.”

4.3.2 Eligibility

In order to be eligible for a carbon sequestration project, lands must meet a set of specific conditions, as explained below for considered standards. • CDM eligible areas are those that: where deforested before January 01, 1990, are not forest at project start and would not be forest without project activities. This rule poses a considerable restriction for developing a carbon sequestration project in de- graded wetlands in Western Ghana since in most cases in visited areas, wetlands: a 13 According to Ghana’s forest definition for CDM AR projects. Palms and bamboos are excluded. 21 where deforested before 1990 and then became forest again -either as coconut or rubber plantation or as secondary forest- or were deforested after 1990. • Eligible areas for VCS are those that have not been forests within 10 years prior to the project start, or it can be proven that there is no relationship of project partici- pants with the cause of deforestation. Rules for defining eligible areas under VCS are less restrictive than CDM rules, but they still represent a limitation since local communities would in most cases be project participants and could have the caused deforestation. • GS has not yet defined eligibility rules under V.3, but in CarbonFix, eligible areas are: 1 non-forest at project start and 2 there is no relationship of land owners with previous cause of deforestation. Although in this case it is not required to proof former land cover, being local communities as the usual cause of deforesta- tion, this rule also restricts the use of this standard in the case of Western Ghana’s wetlands. • For PV, eligible areas are: small-holder owned or leased farmland, community owned land or land for which communities have agreed use rights with the owner. In this case, eligibility rules are the most flexible and adequate for developing a wetland carbon project in Western Ghana. For all the standards, it must be demonstrated that project participants have control over the areas included in the project.

4.3.3 Additionality

AR activities must be additional to those that would have occurred in the absence of such activities. Projects must demonstrate than they are not viable without the support of the carbon markets: • CDM and VCS are very strict regarding additionality and both apply the same specific tool for proving it. Additionality for a carbon sequestration project in Western Ghana’s wetlands could be proven, using the argument of “first of its kind”. • Additionality for a GS forestry activity would be automatically granted in the case of Ghana’s wetlands, since projects developed in countries with Human Develop- ment Index below 0.5 are considered additional. • Also, for PV, additionality would not be an issue, since eligibility rules ensure ad- ditionality.

4.3.4 Project scale, grouping and expansion

Regarding project scale: • CDM makes a distinction between small scale SSC and regular scale projects. Small scale forestry projects are those developed or implemented by low-income 14 communities and individuals, resulting in net removal of less than 16 Kt CO2year; otherwise, projects are Regular scale projects. There is a specific methodology for 14 Host party to define “low-income”. 22 small scale wetlands projects which could be applied to Ghana’s wetlands comply- ing with eligibility conditions. CDM allows grouping SSC projects bundling for the purpose of validation provided that each component does not lose its distinctive characteristics. CDM grouping allows some flexibility for project expansion but strict rules must be followed, including a careful design of the bundled project be- fore its implementation. Each added unit must be validated separately, requiring additional costs and efforts. • VCS does not distinguish between Small Scale and Large Scale, but considers meg- aprojects those greater than 1,000,000 tCO2e per year. VCS allows the use of CDM AR methodologies for using AR Small Scale methodologies, the project must be compliant with the CDM Small Scale limit. VCS grouping allows more flexibility, requiring a list of new areas to be reported on each verification. • GS does not distinguish projects based on scale, nor sets rules for project expansion. However, Version 3 of the standard is not ready and its full text is not yet known. • For PV, there is no minimum or maximum size limitation for Plan Vivo projects. Projects generally expand in size over a number of years as the project makes more sales and more smallholders or communities engage in the project, learn more about the notion of selling carbon as a commodity, and see it working in practice.

4.3.5 Project start date

Since there are no on-going initiatives that already started implementing activities, there are no specific issues regarding project start date under analyzed standards . 23 5 Types of projects Although the main objective of the mission was to evaluate the feasibility for a carbon res- toration project in wetlands in Western Ghana, a broader analysis of other types of forest carbon projects is required to assess the potential for taking actions to improve wetlands based carbon mitigation activities. The following sections analyze the advantagesissues of implementing AR, REDD+ or Landscape-level initiatives.

5.1 Pure AR project