setting the baseline

There is no way of predicting the future so project baselines are usually set by taking historic trends of land-use and habitat change and projecting them into the future, taking account of any foreseeable circumstances. This is the ‘no-project scenario’.

Great Sapphirewing, Ecuador.
© Andrew Smiley

The ‘with-project scenario’ however, differs between a ‘Kyoto compliant’ and ‘Kyoto non-compliant’ approach.

• A ‘Kyoto compliant’ project component essentially involves reforesting an open field cleared 20 years ago or more. The assumption is that the land would remain cleared for the foreseeable future, giving a level baseline of the carbon held in the crops and/or grassy cover. The gain is in the carbon sequestered in the additional biomass as the forest grows, measured as tonnes of CO2 absorbed. Carbon may also be stocked in the soil but World Land Trust considers this an unquantified extra benefit.
• A ‘Kyoto non-compliant’ project component deals with an area where clearance is in progress. The historic deforestation trend is projected forward and shows a steadily decreasing carbon stock as standing forest is transformed into arable or grazing land, either directly or through progressive degradation. The gain can come from three sources:
• Forest growth on land cleared since 1989.
• Arresting the loss of standing forest and release of its carbon as CO2. The annual rate of avoided emission is equivalent to the historic annual rate of deforestation.
• Recovery of degraded woodland which has not only been protected but also allowed to regain biomass.

The benefits from avoided deforestation tend to be high as they prevent the release of carbon stocked over centuries in mature stands. They are also measured against a declining, not a level, baseline.