Vai al contenuto principale
GS removal Vintage 2023, 2024, 2025 Registry: Certified & crediting Documentazione completa General Methodology v2.0

BaumInvest Mixed Reforestation in Costa Rica

GS-1795 ↗

5.7 / 10
Integrity
6.1
Transparency
5.4
Claim Safety
5.2
Documentation
5.8

Score Breakdown

Integrity

verified Additionality was confirmed by TÜV SÜD South Asia Pvt. Ltd. using a combined test, which is stronger than an unverified claim.

missing The monitoring record describes tree harvest after bark beetle infestation and says reversal events were not addressed; the verification report also lists several corrective actions.

Transparency

verified The project has a named VVB, a defined monitoring period from 2021-02-25 to 2025-06-15, and 13,308 verified emission removals.

missing The record does not state claimed versus verified issuance, and key monitoring details such as usage monitoring method are not found in the extracted documents.

Claim Safety

verified The project is marked not eligible for CORSIA, which reduces dual-market claim risk.

missing Baseline and leakage evidence are mixed: the baseline is project-based, leakage is only described as negligible, and the documents conflict on whether additionality was framed as combined or investment-based.

Documentation

verified The evidence set includes multiple official document types, 32 documents were used, and extraction confidence is medium rather than low.

missing Several items remain incomplete or inconsistent, including the crediting period conflict, the buffer pool discrepancy, and unresolved reversal treatment.

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

The verification report confirms additionality through a combined test and names TÜV SÜD South Asia Pvt. Ltd. as the VVB, which supports the project’s core environmental case. On the downside, the monitoring record reports bark beetle damage with harvesting on nearly 50 hectares and says reversal events were not addressed, while the verification report also lists corrective actions required. The buffer pool is 20% in the verification report, but an older document reportedly showed 30%, so I privileged the later verification value because it is more recent and project-specific.

Transparency

Transparency is moderate because the project has a named verifier, a defined monitoring period, and a quantified verified removal figure of 13,308. However, the extracted record does not state claimed issuance, does not provide a usage monitoring method, and leaves several MRV details incomplete. The documentation is usable, but not fully auditable from the extracted facts alone.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is weakened by the project-based baseline and the limited leakage treatment, which is only described as negligible rather than quantified. The documents also conflict on additionality framing, with the monitoring report using a combined test while the PDD reportedly refers to an investment test; I privileged the monitoring report because it is later and reflects the verification-era position. CORSIA ineligibility helps reduce dual-claim risk, but the overall over-crediting and narrative-risk profile is still only moderate.

Documentation

The documentation set is reasonably broad, with PDD, monitoring, verification, and other official materials represented, and extraction confidence is medium rather than low. Still, there are unresolved inconsistencies on buffer pool size, leakage justification, additionality framing, and crediting period, which reduce confidence in the record. The presence of multiple corrective actions also suggests the file was not fully clean at verification.

Overall

Overall, this is a mid-quality removal project with real strengths in VVB-confirmed additionality, safeguards, and a substantial buffer pool, but it is held back by permanence concerns and documentation inconsistencies. I privileged the later monitoring/verification-era statements over older or less specific records for buffer pool, leakage, additionality framing, and crediting period because they are more recent and operationally relevant. The project remains credible, but the contradiction set and reversal issue justify a cautious score rather than a high one.

Audit Analysis

This is a Gold Standard reforestation project with VVB-confirmed additionality, a 20% buffer pool, and safeguards such as FPIC and a grievance mechanism. However, permanence and leakage are not fully clean: reversal events are described in the monitoring record, leakage treatment is only described as negligible, and several corrective actions were still required in verification.

Project Description

The BaumInvest Reforestation Project restores vital ecosystems across 1,538 hectares in the northern tropical lowlands of Costa Rica, a global biodiversity hotspot. Since 2007, this high-impact initiative has combined close-to-nature restoration with strict conservation, allocating 25% of the project area to the permanent protection of natural habitats. By planting native and endangered tree species, the project creates essential biological corridors directly adjacent to UNESCO biosphere reserves and national parks, restoring ecosystem services in a region that holds 6% of the world's biodiversity. As one of the most experienced actors in the carbon market, BaumInvest ensures long-term security through private land ownership and Costa Rica’s tradition of political stability. The project goes beyond carbon sequestration by producing sustainable timber and fostering resilient communities through fair employment and gender equality. Verified under the Gold Standard since 2014, the project demonstrates how professional, large-scale restoration delivers measurable climate action, restores degraded landscapes, and creates lasting social value. Project impacts and benefits: Social Benefits: Gender Equality in Action: Women represent over 40% of employees and board members, actively promoting inclusive leadership. Dignified Livelihoods: Creation of long-term employment with formal working agreements and full board and lodging. Safety and Training: Provision of high-quality safety equipment and continuous professional training for all staff members. Community Resilience: Investment in carbon credits that support strong, stable communities in the project host regions. Environmental Benefits: High-Impact Carbon Removal: Active sequestration of 175,859 t/CO2 (verified issued) through restoration. Biodiversity Conservation: Restoration of habitats and biodiversity corridors that support the return of native and endangered species.

Red Flags

  • A bark beetle infestation caused tree harvest on nearly 50 hectares, and the monitoring record says reversal events were not fully addressed.
  • The project has contradictions across documents on buffer pool size, leakage treatment, additionality framing, and crediting period, which weakens reliability.

Credit Vintages

Issued Retired Available
2008
711 627 84
2009
788 584 204
2010
3,980 1,466 2,514
2011
6,772 3,832 2,940
2012
16,229 9,337 6,892
2013
20,675 15,671 5,004
2014
17,040 15,942 1,098
2015
20,496 18,380 2,116
2016
20,496 18,500 1,996
2017
20,496 17,910 2,586
2018
20,496 20,362 134
2019
20,496 20,278 218
2020
20,492 18,680 1,812
2021
13,366 0 13,366
2022
13,366 0 13,366
2023
13,366 0 13,366
2024
13,366 0 13,366
2025
13,365 3 13,362
Total 255,996 161,572 94,424

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

  • Publish a clear, quantified leakage assessment and reconcile the differing leakage statements across documents.
  • Provide a full reversal response and updated permanence plan for the beetle-affected area, including any replanting and buffer implications.

Questi suggerimenti indicano quali prove pubbliche aggiuntive potrebbero migliorare il livello di confidenza di questa valutazione. Non garantiscono un punteggio futuro più alto.

Risk Indicators

Additionality

VVB-confirmed combined test

Permanence

reversal event reported

Leakage

negligible but not quantified

Baseline

project baseline

Safeguards

FPIC and grievance mechanism present

Double-claim

not CORSIA-eligible and no CCP approval stated

Where to buy

Marketplaces

+ Know where to buy this?

Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].

⚑ Dispute this rating
Analysis Provenance Scored 2026-04-10 General Methodology v2.0 Documentazione completa

Sei il proprietario di questo progetto?

Correzione metadati (gratuita)

Nome, paese, marketplace o link errati? Segnalacelo.

Non modifica lo score.

[email protected]

Rivalutazione con nuovi documenti

Hai documentazione aggiornata non ancora inclusa? Puoi richiedere un nuovo run della pipeline con i nuovi input.

Invia Documenti