GS removal Colombia Vintage 2018 Registry: Certified & crediting Documentazione completa General Methodology v2.0

VICHADA CLIMATE REFORESTATION PROJECT (PAZ)

GS-1806 ↗

4.4 / 10

Integrity

4.8

Transparency

4.2

Claim Safety

4.1

Documentation

4.0

Score Breakdown

Integrity

verified Additionality was confirmed by the VVB, and the project uses a combined additionality test under the afforestation/reforestation methodology.

missing Reversals were reported, and the latest monitoring record notes an initial reversal estimate of 2.67% of previously verified GSVERs.

Transparency

verified The project has a named VVB, a defined monitoring period, and a documented Gold Standard registry status.

missing Total claimed versus verified emission reductions are not stated, and the extraction confidence is low with several material findings reported.

Claim Safety

verified The project is a removal project with a quantified buffer pool of 20%, which helps absorb some reversal risk.

missing Leakage justification is inconsistent across documents, and the latest record does not provide the actual leakage deduction percentage.

Documentation

verified The record includes multiple official document types, including a monitoring report, validation report, PDD, and stakeholder consultation materials.

missing Low extraction confidence and four material findings in the latest monitoring report reduce confidence in the completeness and readability of the evidence base.

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

The project has a relatively solid starting point because the VVB confirmed additionality and the methodology is a project-based afforestation/reforestation approach. That said, reversals were reported in the monitoring record, and the reversal detail says the initial estimate was 2.67% of previously verified GSVERs, which is a meaningful permanence concern even with a 20% buffer pool. Leakage is not fully transparent because the extracted record gives a quantified justification but not the actual deduction percentage.

Transparency

Transparency is mixed. The project has a named verifier, a clear monitoring period from 2022-10-01 to 2024-08-31, and a Gold Standard registry record, but the extracted facts do not state total claimed or verified ERs, and usage monitoring details are missing. The low extraction confidence also suggests at least one key source was difficult to read, which lowers confidence in the documentation trail.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is weakened by the reversal history and the incomplete leakage record. The project is a removal project with a 20% buffer pool, which is positive, but the absence of a stated leakage deduction percentage and the contradictory leakage treatment across monitoring documents create over-crediting risk. CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated in the extracted record, so dual-market claim risk cannot be ruled out from the available facts.

Documentation

Documentation is moderate rather than strong. The evidence set is broad, including a monitoring report, validation report, PDD, appendix, and stakeholder consultation materials, and the project documents mention FPIC, grievance handling, and benefit sharing. However, the extraction confidence is low, four material findings were reported, and no corrective actions are listed, which suggests the file is not fully clean or consistently legible.

Overall

I privileged the most recent monitoring report for leakage and reversal information because it is newer and more specific than earlier records. The contradiction on leakage is resolved in favor of the 2025 monitoring report, which says the leakage treatment was quantified, but the earlier 2024 report said it was deemed negligible; this inconsistency lowers reliability. I also privileged the 2025 monitoring report on the crediting period because it is the latest extracted value, but the shift from a 2019-12-31 to 2024-12-31 window to a 2006-02-02 to 2036-02-01 window is a major inconsistency that materially reduces confidence in the record.

Audit Analysis

This is a Gold Standard reforestation project with VVB-confirmed additionality, a 20% buffer pool, and documented safeguards such as FPIC and a grievance mechanism. However, the record shows reported reversals, material findings in the latest verification cycle, missing quantified leakage and monitoring details, and low extraction confidence, which together weaken confidence in the claimed removals.

Project Description

The Vichada Climate Reforestation Project restores degraded savanna ecosystems across 106,522 hectares in Colombia’s Orinoco River basin. What began as a timber initiative has evolved into a large-scale conservation program that strengthens biodiversity, improves watershed health, and enhances landscape resilience in a region increasingly affected by fires, flooding, and climate variability. Through extensive reforestation and the protection of riparian vegetation, the project reduces soil erosion, improves water quality, and creates vital habitat for wildlife—including 110 threatened species. By generating 381 local jobs, most above the regional minimum wage, and delivering continuous training programs, the project supports long-term economic development in remote communities. Technology transfer, environmental education, and inclusive employment practices further empower local families to participate in sustainable land management. Built on a landscape previously classified as degraded grassland and fully compliant with Gold Standard land-use requirements, the project demonstrates how responsible reforestation can deliver measurable climate mitigation, ecological restoration, and meaningful socio-economic benefits. Project impacts and benefits: Social Benefits: 381 local jobs created, with the vast majority earning above the regional minimum wage Diverse and multicultural workforce supported through inclusive employment practices Continuous capacity-building and environmental education for local communities Establishment of forest fire brigades, strengthening safety and community collaboration Economic Benefits: Stable long-term employment supporting improved livelihoods in remote communities Regular training enhances professional skills and employability Sustainable forestry operations strengthen local economic resilience Quality assurance and monitoring systems strengthen project performance and ensure high implement

Red Flags

Reported reversals and a non-trivial reversal estimate reduce permanence confidence, even though a buffer pool is in place.
Leakage treatment is not consistently quantified across documents, and the latest record contains multiple material findings with low extraction confidence.

Credit Vintages

	Issued	Retired	Available
2007	287	229	58
2008	1,962	1,569	393
2009	5,653	4,521	1,132
2010	20,408	18,743	1,665
2011	44,707	42,363	2,344
2012	66,006	63,217	2,789
2013	81,791	78,234	3,557
2014	104,673	99,431	5,242
2017	86,811	69,422	17,389
2018	180,962	132,935	48,027
2019	344,671	223,771	120,900
2020	389,306	237,810	151,496
2021	388,242	71,677	316,565
2022	324,415	151,519	172,896
2023	140,765	35,000	105,765
2024	94,100	237	93,863
Total	2,274,759	1,230,678	1,044,081

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

Publish a clear reconciliation of the leakage treatment, including the exact deduction percentage and why the earlier negligible finding changed.
Provide a clean, auditable reconciliation of the crediting period and reversal accounting, with the material findings and any follow-up actions fully documented.

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