Great clarification of the differences between Voluntary Carbon Markets and those sanctioned and under the guidance of the Paris Treaty and the UNFCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change).
Last year, REDD+ was at the forefront of environmental discussions, raising questions and sparking debate. Originating from the Coalition for Rainforest Nations (CfRN) in 2005, REDD+ aimed to bolster national efforts towards mitigating tropical deforestation under the UNFCCC, aligning with Article 5.2 of the Paris Agreement. Despite its critical role, REDD+ has been caught in a whirlwind of controversy, particularly within the voluntary carbon markets (VCM). Reports by reputable sources like The Guardian, Science Journal, and Bloomberg have highlighted issues of environmental integrity and financial irregularities within the VCM. It's crucial to note that these voluntary forestry carbon projects, though they use the name "REDD+," lack any methodological or legal ties to the Paris Agreement's REDD+ framework and the UNFCCC. These projects, often private sector initiatives, cover only small areas of rainforest, leading to questions about their actual impact. Furthermore, they frequently operate without the necessary oversight and approval from the host governments of rainforest nations, diverging significantly from the structured and accountable approach of the UNFCCC REDD+ framework. As discussions around environmental integrity and carbon market reform continue, it's essential to distinguish between the pioneering work of CfRN and the unrelated practices within the voluntary carbon markets. Our commitment remains unwavering: to support rainforest nations in their efforts to slow, stop, and reverse deforestation, driving meaningful environmental progress under the robust framework of UNFCCC REDD+.