Strengthening rural livelihood through carbon finance: Agroforestry practices in Gorakhpur Forest Circle of Uttar Pradesh
#183of 261 in Soil carbon#854of 975 in India#1128of 1339 in Verra (VCS)
Audit Analysis
This agroforestry project in Uttar Pradesh, India has a 21% buffer pool and a quantified 27% leakage deduction, but is undermined by a severe discrepancy in claimed emissions (10,458 vs 1,104,382 tCO₂e across PDD versions), a contradiction on whether reversal events were reported, and the absence of verified monitoring data. The VVB (Carbon Check) confirmed additionality via a barrier test and raised 13 corrective actions, but the overall data reliability is compromised by the conflicting figures across documents.
Red Flags
- Massive ERR discrepancy: the 2023 PDD claims 1,104,382 tCO₂e lifetime while the 2026 PDD claims 10,458 tCO₂e — a factor of ~106 difference that raises serious questions about which figure is correct and whether credits were issued on the higher basis
- Reversal events contradiction: the appendix (Oct 2025) reports reversal events, yet the validation report (Feb 2026) states they were 'not addressed', leaving the permanence risk unresolved
- No verified monitoring-period ERR data is available in the extracted record, making it impossible to confirm actual delivery against the ex-ante estimate
- FNRB value and method are not stated in any available document, a critical gap for a soil-carbon project under AR-AMS0007
- 13 Corrective Action Requests were raised during validation, including insufficient non-permanence risk assessment and unclear additionality (regulatory surplus) demonstration
Credit Vintages
No issuances recorded on the registry.
Risk Indicators
VVB-confirmed barrier test, but PDD originally described a combined test; regulatory surplus assessment flagged as unclear
21% buffer pool present, but reversal events reported in appendix and stated as not addressed in validation report
27% quantified deduction per validation report (up from 0% in original PDD)
Project-specific baseline; FNRB not stated; reassessment not yet due under VCS 10-year rule
FPIC conducted, grievance mechanism in place, benefit sharing described, safeguards documented
CORSIA eligibility not stated; CCP status not mentioned — dual-channel risk cannot be excluded
⚑ Dispute this rating
Are you the project owner?
Metadata correction (free)
Name, country, marketplace or links incorrect? Let us know.
Does not modify the score.
[email protected] →Pipeline re-run with new documents
Have updated documentation not yet included? You can request a new run of the pipeline with the new inputs.
Submit Documents →Share this rating
