VCS avoidance Cambodia Vintage 2018, 2019, 2020 Registry: Verification approval requested Documentazione completa General Methodology v2.0

Southern Cardamom REDD+ Project

VCS-1748 ↗

4.1 / 10

Integrity

4.2

Transparency

4.6

Claim Safety

4.1

Documentation

3.0

Score Breakdown

Integrity

verified Additionality was confirmed by the VVB, and the project uses an investment test under VM0009.

missing The verification record reports many findings and corrective actions, including missing ERR spreadsheets and issues around stakeholder consultation and safeguards.

Transparency

verified The monitoring period is stated as 2022-01-01 to 2023-12-31, and the baseline was reassessed in 2024.

missing Key MRV quantities are not stated in the extracted record, including claimed and verified ERR totals and the usage monitoring method.

Claim Safety

verified The project is marked as CORSIA-eligible and CCP-approved, which supports market recognition.

missing The record contains contradictions on leakage, baseline method, additionality test type, and reversal status, increasing over-crediting and claim-risk concerns.

Documentation

verified A large number of documents were used in extraction, and the project record includes VVB and monitoring information.

missing Extraction confidence is low, and the evidence set contains many unresolved findings plus several contradictory statements across documents.

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

The project has some core integrity strengths: the VVB confirmed additionality, the project is described as using an investment test, the baseline is jurisdictional, and the buffer pool contribution is 10%. On the negative side, the verification material lists extensive findings and corrective actions, including missing ERR calculation spreadsheets and issues around stakeholder consultation, grievance handling, and worker health and safety. The record also says there have been no reversals, but the contradictions field notes a conflicting document that reported reversals, so reliability is weakened.

Transparency

Transparency is only moderate because the monitoring period is stated and the baseline was reassessed in 2024, but key reporting values are missing from the extracted record. Claimed and verified ERR totals are not stated, and the usage monitoring method is also not found. The low extraction confidence further reduces confidence that the public record is complete and easy to audit.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is mixed. On the positive side, the project is marked as CORSIA-eligible and CCP-approved, and leakage is shown as a 0% deduction with a quantified justification. However, the contradictions show major reliability issues on leakage, baseline method, additionality test type, and reversal status, which raises concern about over-crediting and the robustness of the claim. The absence of claimed and verified ERR totals in the extracted record also limits confidence in the volume of credits being asserted.

Documentation

Documentation quality is weak to moderate. Although many documents were used, the extraction confidence is low, which suggests at least one key source was hard to read. The record also contains a long list of findings and required corrections, including missing buffer contribution details and missing ERR spreadsheets, which indicates incomplete or unsettled documentation. The crediting period is long and the monitoring period is recent, but the contradictions across documents reduce trust in the assembled file.

Overall

Overall, this is a mid-quality REDD+ project record with some strong formal elements but substantial reliability and documentation concerns. I privileged the more recent and more specific statements where possible: for example, the 2024 jurisdictional baseline and the later statement that no reversals were reported, while noting that an older document reportedly said otherwise. I also privileged the later leakage value of 0% and the later investment-test framing, but the contradictions on leakage, baseline method, additionality test type, reversal status, and crediting period all require a downward adjustment because they indicate inconsistent source documents and reduce confidence in the extracted facts.

Audit Analysis

The project has some positive signals, including VVB-confirmed additionality, a jurisdictional baseline last reassessed in 2024, a 10% buffer contribution, and no reversals reported in the extracted record. However, the verification material also shows many findings and corrective actions, low extraction confidence, and several contradictions that reduce confidence in the reliability of the claims.

Project Description

Project Summary The Cardamom Rainforest Landscape is one of the last unfragmented rainforests remaining in Southeast Asia and is a critical part of the Indo-Burma Biodiversity Hotspot. Using global best practices for forest protection and community development, the Southern Cardamom REDD+ project prevents more than 3,000,000 tons of carbon emissions annually and protects 497,000 hectares of tropical rainforest in South-West Cambodia. This area is globally significant for ecosystem servicing, wildlife conservation, and community livelihoods and serves as the region’s most important watershed, climate regulator and carbon sink. The Threat In 2001, there was a tiger and elephant hunting crisis in the Cardamom Rainforest Landscape where 29 tigers and 39 elephants were poached as a result of the construction of a new highway. It was at this time that the Wildlife Alliance came to the project area to conduct emergency interventions. At the same time, anarchic slash and burn cultivation was destroying thousands of hectares of the forest area each month, leaving the Cardamom Rainforest on the brink of destruction. Following the success of reducing threats to the forest and wildlife, the Wildlife Alliance was asked to help design and implement a long term Protected Area Management Plan by the Royal Government of Cambodia to help protect the landscape, its forests and its wildlife. Since 2014, the threats to the Cardamoms have accelerated, driven by massive Chinese investment in Cambodia as part of their national Belt and Road Initiative, requiring a more intensive response from the project. The Solution In 2016, Wildlife Alliance and Wildlife Works, in partnership with Cambodia’s Ministry of Environment, established the Southern Cardamom REDD+ project. Through the sale of REDD+ credits, the project has implemented a direct threat-based approach to protect the forest and safeguard wildlife. The project partners with communities and government

Red Flags

The verification record includes many findings, including 19 CARs, 11 CLs, 63 NCRs, and a FAR tied to stakeholder consultation and participation.
There are contradictions on key issues such as leakage treatment, baseline method, additionality test type, reversal status, and crediting period, which weakens trust in the extracted evidence.

Credit Vintages

	Issued	Retired	Available
2015	1,609,113	1,379,800	229,313
2016	1,981,604	1,335,320	646,284
2017	1,972,074	124,536	1,847,538
2018	3,994,038	691,890	3,302,148
2019	4,003,969	225,731	3,778,238
2020	4,139,716	151,349	3,988,367
2021	3,846,317	576,470	3,269,847
Total	21,546,831	4,485,096	17,061,735

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

Publish a clean, reconciled set of ERR calculations and monitoring tables showing claimed versus verified issuance for the monitoring period.
Resolve the document contradictions on leakage, reversals, baseline method, additionality framing, and crediting period, and provide a clearer public audit trail.

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