The agricultural sector urgently needs to close an 11-gigaton greenhouse gas
emissions gap to limit global warming to below 2°C, whilst feeding three
billion more people by 2050. Financing this transition won’t come cheap; but
there are high hopes that carbon
markets
will help to mobilise much needed finance to drive this.
However, while hopes are high, this has not happened. One major reason is that
measuring soil organic carbon (SOC) is the predominant approach used
by corporations; but due to the nature of soil, SOC is highly variable, hard to
measure and easy to lose.
To drive action at scale, new approaches must be introduced — while also
ensuring that the carbon-farming ‘gold rush’ we are witnessing won’t lead to
temptations to cut corners or invest in solutions that fail to deliver.
The good news is that there are other ways to unlock climate finance — at
SustainCERT, we are trying and testing and want
to scale them.
I want to offer project developers and companies looking to make a difference a
four-step framework that includes guidance on SOC, as well as highlighting new
solutions which provide an alternative to offsets:
1. Choose a well-recognised carbon offset standard
Many new entrants selling carbon
offsets
are using quantification approaches that simply weren’t designed to measure
carbon at the level of detail required for offsets. Their argument is that
issuing offsets from agriculture is too hard under legacy standards; and their
proposed solution is to cut corners to democratise carbon markets.
We cannot let this happen. Working in this way will lead to questionable
projects and expose companies to potential accusations of greenwashing. My
advice for companies seeking to buy carbon offsets is to always choose an
established
standard
that’s verified by an independent third party. The combination of a credible
standard and an independent verification body will allow you to make sure all
the relevant risks were properly mitigated — including, for example, the risk
that carbon is re-released into the
atmosphere
or that the same offset is used twice.
2. Go beyond soil organic carbon
Issuing offsets from SOC intervention is the ‘highest-hanging fruit,’ which
means it comes with challenges; there is no easy solution available to measure
SOC changes over short periods of time and over relatively small locations.
This sequestration of carbon in the
soil
is slow and volatile, making it hard to ensure that a given plot has sequestered
a material amount of carbon over a limited period of time (say, a year).
Furthermore, the impacts claimed by soil carbon sequestration can be reversed at
any time without you even knowing it, making this approach ill-suited for
compensation claims.
Before jumping into SOC head-on, I therefore highly encourage you to look at
other interventions that are less complex to monitor and can yield significant
mitigation outcomes. There are many alternatives that unlock reductions that
are, by nature, permanent — such as reducing enteric methane emissions from
dairy and meat production, reducing fertiliser use, investing in the roll-out
of renewable energy on
farms,
or even partnering with the growing number of innovators who can create new
products from greenhouse gas
emissions.
3. If you go for SOC, do it at scale to increase accuracy
We need a race to the top, not a race to the bottom — which means investing in
projects that are producing real offsets, not hot air!
One simple way to achieve this is to design large-scale projects. To drive real
impact at scale, we need to incentivize greater data accuracy that can be
achieved through large-scale monitoring and technology-enabled verification.
Large-scale, direct measurement reduces the level of uncertainty of the data
collected; and models generally work better at scale.
4. Choose scope 3 units as an alternative to offsets
There is significant untapped potential to drive finance towards climate-smart
agriculture
through the issuance of Scope 3 units, rather than offsets. Scope 3 units
represent the carbon intensity of the agri-commodity and are used by
corporations to report on their scope 3
emissions
and the progress they are making towards their science-based targets. There are
three simple reasons why you may want to consider scope 3 units, rather than
offsets:
-
A scope 3 unit can reward past and existing good practices. Offsets, by
definition, should be limited to new practices that could not happen
otherwise (so-called “additionality”). Scope 3 units go beyond this,
allowing for early adopters to gain the recognition they deserve for moving
forward ahead of their peers.
-
A scope 3 unit allows you to measure changes in emissions during a
calendar year. This means that you don’t have to ensure permanence over
100 years, as is required with high-quality
offsets.
Instead, you need to commit to measuring changes in the SOC content
year-on-year and be accountable for any reversals that may occur.
-
A scope 3 unit creates shared responsibility and benefits for all players
in the value chain. That’s because scope 3 emissions and reductions are
accounted for by all players up and down the value chain. Hence, with the
issuance of scope 3 units, it is possible to create incentives for all
players to co-invest and claim the same mitigation outcomes.
Conclusion
What we need to achieve within the agricultural sector is no simple feat. This
transition will require unprecedented mobilisation across policy makers, food
companies
and
farmers,
but it is possible.
Carbon markets are there to offset emissions; you need to make sure these assets
meet verified criteria — otherwise you expose yourself to
greenwashing.
The beauty of Scope 3 units is that they can channel finance to low-carbon
interventions, whilst providing much-needed flexibility to incentivise action at
scale without cutting corners.
This approach works — we have just launched a
partnership
that confirms verified Scope 3 units can drive finance at scale towards
low-carbon interventions in agriculture value chains.
Ultimately, we will need all tools in the toolbox to reach net zero — including
offsets,
scope 3 units and much more; and it will be critical going forward to make sure
we use the right tool for the right
purpose.
Get the latest insights, trends, and innovations to help position yourself at the forefront of sustainable business leadership—delivered straight to your inbox.
Marion Verles is CEO of SustainCERT, a global carbon impact verification organization developing digital verification solutions to bring credibility to corporate climate action.
Published Apr 28, 2022 8am EDT / 5am PDT / 1pm BST / 2pm CEST