Vai al contenuto principale
VCS avoidance Brazil Vintage 2020 Registry: Verification approval requested Documentazione completa General Methodology v2.0

REDD+ RESEX RIO PRETO-JACUNDÁ

VCS-1503 ↗

4.3 / 10
Integrity
4.4
Transparency
4.8
Claim Safety
4.2
Documentation
3.1

Score Breakdown

Integrity

verified Additionality was confirmed by the VVB, and the project uses a barrier test under VM0015 with a project-specific baseline last reassessed in 2022.

missing The verification materials list 13 non-conformities and required corrective actions, and the record says reversal events were not addressed.

Transparency

verified The monitoring period is stated, the VVB is named as RINA S.p.A., and the project reports an annual survey for usage monitoring.

missing Total verified and claimed emission reductions are not stated in the extracted record, and extraction confidence is low.

Claim Safety

verified Leakage is treated with a quantified deduction of 10%, which is better than an unquantified approach.

missing The project is marked CORSIA-eligible, CCP status is only not mentioned, and contradictions exist on leakage, buffer pool size, and reversal reporting.

Documentation

verified The record draws on many documents, with 30 documents used, and includes a recent PDD dated 2024-04-09.

missing Evidence quality is weakened by low extraction confidence, an evidence list that is not informative, and multiple corrective actions still required.

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

The project has a positive integrity signal because the VVB confirmed additionality and the PDD describes a barrier test under VM0015 with the baseline last reassessed in 2022. That said, the verification record lists 13 non-conformities plus additional corrective actions, and reversal events are not addressed in the extracted record, which materially weakens confidence in permanence and overall robustness.

Transparency

Transparency is moderate at best: the VVB is identified as RINA S.p.A., the monitoring period is stated, and usage monitoring relies on an annual survey. However, the extracted record does not provide verified or claimed emission reduction totals, and the low extraction confidence suggests at least one key source was difficult to read, reducing trust in completeness.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is constrained by the project being marked CORSIA-eligible while CCP status is only not mentioned, leaving dual-claim risk unresolved. The leakage deduction is quantified at 10%, which helps, but contradictions show earlier documents indicated different leakage treatment, different buffer pool size, and even reported reversal events, so the reliability of the claim is weakened.

Documentation

Documentation breadth is decent because 30 documents were used and the PDD is recent, dated 2024-04-09. Still, low extraction confidence, an uninformative evidence-doc list, and multiple required corrective actions indicate the file is not cleanly documented, and the record does not clearly show a fully settled compliance trail.

Overall

I privileged the most recent PDD for the barrier-test additionality description, the 10% buffer pool, and the quantified leakage treatment because it is newer and more specific than the older references. However, I downgraded confidence because the contradictions are material: the record conflicts on additionality method, CCP status, leakage justification, buffer pool percentage, and whether reversal events were reported, and the verification materials also list many non-conformities. Under the stated gate rules, the low documentation score would cap transparency post-scoring, and the integrity score remains below a strong threshold due to the corrective-action burden and unresolved permanence issues.

Audit Analysis

This REDD+ project has some positive signals, including VVB-confirmed additionality, a quantified leakage deduction, and a buffer pool for non-permanence risk. However, the record also shows many non-conformities, low extraction confidence, and several unresolved contradictions that weaken confidence in the claimed climate benefits.

Project Description

RESEX Rio Preto-Jacundá REDD+ Project is a partnership between Biofílica and the residents of Resex Rio Preto-Jacundá, represented by the Neighborhood Association of The Extractive Reserve Rio Preto-Jacundá and Ribeirinhos do Rio Machado (ASMOREX), having the Center of Studies Rioterra (CES Rioterra) and the Executive Board of the Extractive Reserves of Anari Valley (CDREX) as partners in the planning and implementation of the activities of the Project. Located in the extractive reserve of the same name at the municipalities of Machadinho D’Oeste and Cujubim, northeastern of the State of Rondônia, RESEX Rio Preto-Jacundá has a territory of 95 thousand hectares. It was created in 1996 by State Decree 7,336 and has a history of struggle for rubber tappers rights.The main goal of RESEX Rio Preto-Jacundá REDD+ Project is the promotion of the sustainability of the exctractive community by reducing forest degradation and unplanned and illegal deforestation and consequent emission of greenhouse gases (GHG), achieved through a list of activities funded by the sale of carbon credits.

Red Flags

  • Thirteen non-conformities and two further corrective-action items were listed in the verification materials, indicating substantial documentation or compliance issues.
  • The record contains contradictions on additionality method, buffer pool size, leakage treatment, and whether reversal events were reported.

Credit Vintages

Issued Retired Available
2012
310,664 310,663 1
2013
454,386 454,148 238
2014
446,476 442,282 4,194
2015
156,537 153,115 3,422
Total 1,368,063 1,360,208 7,855

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

  • Publish a clean reconciliation of the contradictions, especially additionality method, buffer pool percentage, leakage treatment, and reversal-event status, with document hierarchy explained.
  • Provide verified emission reduction totals, clearer registry/claim status information, and a complete, readable set of verification findings and corrective-action closures.

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 test

Permanence

buffer pool present, reversal handling unclear

Leakage

quantified deduction

Baseline

project baseline, reassessment timing limited

Safeguards

FPIC and grievance mechanism present

Double-claim

CORSIA-eligible, CCP not mentioned

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 2026-04-18 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