General Project Requirements

💡 All Projects seeking certification under the ERS scheme must comply with the requirements outlined in this section as well as the requirements of the applicable Methodology and referenced documents.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

1. Three-pillars approach 

ERS certifies Projects that are designed to bring additional benefits on: 

1. Ecological Recovery. Projects must be designed to restore ecosystems to their native state, including the restoration of native biodiversity and ecosystem services. 
2. Climate Mitigation. Projects must restore natural carbon sinks to help limit the rise in global temperature, in line with the Paris Agreement.
3. Sustainable Livelihoods. Projects must empower local communities and foster opportunities for improved livelihoods. 

Projects must establish the baseline scenario for each pillar according to the latest version of the applicable ERS methodology.

2. GHG Accounting Principles 

ERS employs the following GHG accounting principles:

1. Relevance. ERS selects GHG sources, sinks, reservoirs and related parameters relevant to the Project type. 
2. Completeness. ERS includes all GHG emissions and GHG removals. 
   1. An individual methodology selects relevant GHGs sources, sinks and reservoirs and may omit a GHG source, sink or reservoir by the virtue of its design elements (eligibility criteria) or where a GHG is not considered for conservative purposes. 
   2. ERS employs Global Warming Potential as per IPCC Assessment Report 6 (AR 6) taken on a hundred-year horizon. 

3. Innovation. ERS promotes and employs new and innovative methods, technologies, and procedures that are scientific and evidence-based. 
4. Accuracy. ERS reduces bias and uncertainties as far as practically possible. 
5. Conservativeness. ERS uses conservative values and assumptions that ensure net GHG removals are not overestimated and are preferably estimated to be less than actual achieved net GHG removals. 

COMPLIANCE WITH ERS PRINCIPLES AND METHODS

1. The Standard establishes minimum requirements for Project design and development and, subsequently, implementation, monitoring, and reporting of certified Projects. 
2. Projects must meet and demonstrate compliance with the requirements and procedures as established in this document. 
3. Projects must apply the latest version of the applicable ERS Methodology and its associated tools, procedures, and guidelines and demonstrate compliance with the requirements and procedures established therein. 

GEOGRAPHY & PROJECT BOUNDARIES

1. The Standard allows Project development across the globe. A Project type may be limited by geography by the Methodology. Where proposed interventions span across boundaries of more than one national jurisdiction, the Developer must submit separate Projects for each jurisdiction.
2. The Standard exclusively focuses on the development of project-based activities. It does not permit the development of programmatic, jurisdictional, policy, or sectoral approaches for crediting.
3. Projects must clearly define their geographic boundaries by specifying the physical delineation and geographic area, including the limits such as city, state, region, country, along with geographical coordinates in the form of shapefiles.
4. The Standard does not prescribe nor limit the Project by its scale; there is no minimum or maximum limit to Project size in terms of land or net GHG removal potential.

KEY PROJECT DATES & CREDITING PERIOD

1. The Project start date corresponds to the date when Project Activities started, including Pre-submission activities. Such activities may be preparation of land, preparation of soil, direct or indirect planting, among others, whichever is the earliest. 
2. The Project registration date corresponds to the date on which the Project Design Review is completed, and all required documentation is uploaded to the ERS Registry.
3. The Project certification date corresponds to the publication date of the Project Design Document on the ERS Registry, following its Validation by a VVB. 
4. Projects must send the Project Submission Form within three (3) years of the start date.
5. The crediting period of a Project includes the duration for which the Project must implement and monitor activities and is eligible to issue Restoration Units. It also covers the period during which any reversals must be compensated.
6. A Project’s total crediting period is forty (40) years from its start date or certification date, whichever is earlier.
7. To allow for progressive ambition, the Project Design Document (PDD) must be  revised and adapted every four (4) years. Refer to the MRV Procedures section for more details.
8. The crediting period cannot be extended or renewed further. 

OWNERSHIP AND CARBON RIGHTS

To ensure the Project's legitimacy and compliance, Developers must demonstrate that they possess the legal right to operate on the designated land and benefit from the resulting Restoration Units.

1. Developers must demonstrate ownership and carbon rights for the entire crediting period through the following options:
   1. When land tenure is held directly by the Developer, they must submit a valid property title. 
   2. When land tenure is held by a third party, the Developer must demonstrate exclusive and indisputable right for the entirety of the crediting period via a binding and enforceable agreement signed  with the right’s holder(s) . 
      1. If the right’s holder(s) are designated as IPLCs, the agreement must be done following the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC).
   3. In cases where carbon rights are not intrinsically attached to the land tenure, two (2) different binding and enforceable agreements must be signed with the rightful rights’ holders.
2. All documentation submitted must demonstrate the absence of conflicting disputes over land tenure.

APPLICATION OF A METHODOLOGY

1. Projects must select the latest version of applicable Methodology approved by ERS and demonstrate compliance to its requirements including those related to:
   1. Eligibility criteria; 
   2. Ecological Recovery pillar with its Principles and Methods; 
   3. Livelihoods pillar with its Principles and Methods; 
   4. Carbon pillar with its Principles, Methods and its associated Quantification Methodology, specifically: 
      1. Determination of Project boundary including selection of relevant GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs;
      2. Demonstration of additionality;
      3. Quantification of net GHG removals:
         • Determination of the baseline emissions/removals scenario;
         • Determination of removals by Project scenario;
         • Determination of Project emissions;
         • Determination of leakage;
         • Uncertainty and associated parameters.
   5. Determination of GHG reversal risks and a reversal mitigation plan;
   6. Monitoring and Reporting of achieved net GHG removals and Project interventions.

CORE CARBON PRINCIPLES

1. Additionality

   1. Projects must demonstrate that the net GHG removals to be generated would have not been possible without the revenue from sales of Restoration Units.
   2. Projects must demonstrate additionality in the following three-step approach: 
      1. Regulatory Surplus;
      2. Environmental Surplus;
      3. Barrier Analysis.

   3. Projects must demonstrate additionality as per the requirements and procedures established and referred to in the latest version of the applied ERS methodology.

      Permanence

   4. The GHG removals from Projects’ activities must be permanent or, where there are risks associated with reversal of achieved GHG removals, they must be mitigated and compensated.
   5. Projects must demonstrate permanence following the requirements of the applicable Methodology. 
      1. Reversal risks must be assessed and mitigated following the requirements laid out in the Risk Management section. 

      2. Loss events must be monitored, reported, quantified and compensated. More details regarding the procedures related to these requirements can be found at the Methodology level. 

         Robust Quantification 

   6. The net GHG removals from the Project activities must be robustly quantified, based on conservative approaches and scientific methods.

   7. Dynamic Baseline. The Project baseline is calculated during Project Design and re-evaluated throughout the crediting period before each Verification. This process is designated as Dynamic Baseline.

      💡 Each methodology provides further guidance on determining parameters and equations for conducting the dynamic baseline process.

   8. Conservativeness. ERS deliberately and systematically applies a conservative approach to the quantification of net GHG removals. 
      1. In estimating overall uncertainty, all causes of uncertainty are considered, including the baseline scenario, parameters, equations, and measurements. The overall uncertainty is then assessed as the combined uncertainty from individual causes.
      2. ERS aligns with the Aboveground Woody Biomass Product Validation Good Practices Protocol:
   • High-Quality Reference Data: ERS verifies that the AGB provider integrates field campaigns with individual tree measurements and airborne LiDAR data to provide accurate and reliable biomass estimates.
   • Consistency in Definitions and Metrics: ERS adheres to standardised definitions for Above Ground Biomass Density (AGBD), typically measured in Mg/ha or t/ha, and follows validation metrics such as bias, uncertainty, precision, and accuracy.
   • Calibration and Validation Data: ERS ensures that calibration data is independent of validation datasets.
   • Error Propagation and Reporting: ERS quantifies and propagates errors from measurements, models, and geolocation processes to the final AGB estimates. Uncertainty is calculated using standardised methods and reported following IPCC or CEOS good practices guidelines.
   • Field Measurement Recommendations: ERS verifies that the AGB provider follows field measurement recommendations, including the use of square plots, preferred plot sizes, accurate measurement of tree diameter, height, and wood density, and contemporaneous field and satellite data collection.
   • Airborne LiDAR Validation: ERS verifies that the AGB provider uses airborne LiDAR data, which meets the protocol's recommendations for LiDAR data specifications, spatial and temporal matching, and coverage of field plots and surrounding areas.
   • Linking to Satellite Data: ERS verifies that the AGB provider addresses spatial mismatches between plot and satellite pixel sizes, and bridges the scale between ground plots and satellite pixels using airborne LiDAR data.
   • Independent Validation: ERS conducts independent validation using high-quality reference data from Sylvera. Additionally, ERS verifies that the AGB provider validates its model with independent data. This involves using fully independent, higher-quality datasets, including airborne LiDAR-derived biomass estimates, ground LiDAR, UAV LiDAR, and field plots.
   • Uncertainty Quantification: ERS calculates the uncertainty of woody AGB, woody BGB, total woody biomass, non-woody shrubland and grassland AGB, total non-woody biomass, total biomass, and CO2e using standardised formulas and methods.
   9. Leakage emissions. To minimise, account for, and monitor leakage emissions, Projects must comply with the following principles and requirements.
      1. Scope. The emissions sectors deemed at risk of leakage are:
   • Terrestrial Forest Restoration
   • Wetlands, Peatlands, and Coastal Ecosystems Restoration
   • Agroforestry
   • Conservation
   1. Mitigation. Projects must strive to limit leakage emissions resulting from activity-shifting. Developers must define a leakage mitigation plan to:
   • Identify existing activities that must be displaced or discontinued due to project activities.
   • Minimise the environmental impact of the displaced activities and ensure, when applicable, that required displacements are done following the Livelihoods principles and requirements.
   • Mitigate and compensate for any loss resulting from discontinued activities.
   1. Quantification.
   • ERS must account for the emissions resulting from activity-shifting leakage in the net GHG removals.
   • ERS must monitor leakage emissions throughout the Project’s crediting period.
   10. Improved Incentives. ERS quantifies net GHG removals at the Standard level using science-based quantification methodologies.

       1. Each Methodology is associated with a specific Quantification Methodology employed by ERS for quantifying GHG emissions removals.

          📌 For Projects using the M001 - Methodology for Terrestrial Forest Restoration, ERS will quantify GHG emissions and removals according to the Quantification Methodology for Terrestrial Forest Restoration.

       2. To mitigate conflicts of interest, ERS’ fees are neither linked to the volume of issuances nor the price of Restoration Units. Instead, ERS charges a flat per-hectare fee. Refer to the Fee Schedule on the ERS website for more details. 

2. No Double-Counting

The net GHG removals from Project activities must not be double-counted. To ensure this, ERS utilises a robust Registry and rigorous Programme processes. More specifically, double counting is prevented through the following measures:

1. Double Registration. To effectively mitigate the risk of double registration, the following measures are implemented:
   1. No double registration. Activities registered, previously registered, or seeking registration under another carbon crediting program are not eligible for ERS certification. Restoration Units must only be credited to Project activities that are uniquely registered with ERS and have not been issued carbon credits or similar instruments for the same activities before their registration date.
   2. Proof of rejection. Projects rejected by another carbon crediting scheme are eligible for ERS certification only upon proof of rejection (such as official communication by the carbon crediting program administrator), including evidence of the official grounds for their rejection.
   3. Proof of cancellation. Projects that were seeking registration under other carbon crediting programs but did not undergo Validation by a VVB can only apply for ERS certification if they provide proof that their former application has been withdrawn and no credits have been or will be issued. This proof can include documentation of cancellation or voluntary withdrawal by Developers and subsequent acceptance by the carbon crediting program.
   4. Distinction between Project Zones. Projects that are or have been registered under other carbon crediting programs can only apply for ERS certification for the activities located in areas not included in current or former Projects. 
2. Double Issuance. To effectively mitigate the risk of double issuance, the following measures are implemented:
   1. Unique issuance. Only one Verified Restoration Unit (VRU) is issued for each 1tCO2e of net GHG removal achieved. 
• Where a Project has issued Projected Restoration Units (PRUs), they are converted to VRUs upon Verification. 
• PRUs and VRUs cannot be issued for achieved net GHG removals under both ERS and a national, regional, or local Emission Trading System, Binding Limit, or Compliance System.
1. Serialisation of Units. All units, PRUs and VRUs, are serialised, meaning they are assigned a unique serial number to ensure a distinct identity. Refer to the Labelling and Serialisation procedures in the Registry Procedures for more details. 
2. Robust Registry Procedures.  To prevent double issuance, the ERS Registry includes the following features:
• Transparent management of the issuance, transfer, conversion, retirement and cancellation of Restoration Units (RUs).
• Details about the beneficiary and the calendar year for which the offsetting requirement is fulfilled through the cancellation.
• Impossibility to transfer, retire or cancel already retired VRUs. 
• Public disclosure of all of the Project’s documentation. Refer to the Registry Procedures for more details. 
3. Double Claiming
   1. To effectively mitigate the risk of double claims in the context of international mitigation purposes other than NDCs, or other purposes, Developers must follow the procedure described in the Avoiding Double Claiming Guidelines.

STAKEHOLDERS PARTICIPATION

💡 Extensive requirements for Stakeholders participation can be found at the Methodology level.

1. Stakeholder mapping. Developers must identify and classify all the Stakeholders directly and indirectly impacted by or impacting the Project.
2. Stakeholder engagement. The integrality of a Project, including the delimitation of the Project Area, its baseline assessments, the definition of objectives, intervention planning and result monitoring, must engage the Project’s Stakeholders.
3. FPIC. The Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) must be applied prior to the start and throughout the crediting period of any Project directly or indirectly impacting lands, territories and resources of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs).
   1. Projects must identify IPLCs, address their concerns, and engage with their representatives. Specifically, Projects must:
      1. Identify IPLCs affected by the Project, recognising their language, customs, communication channels/media, and customary rights, including to the territory.
      2. Assess the IPLCs’ governance system and structure, identifying their designated representative(s) and who are legitimately authorised to represent them in consultations, negotiations, decision-making, and consent-seeking processes.
      3. Present the Developer, the mandate and the nature of the Project.
      4. Identify the applicable legal frameworks the Project must comply with.
   2. Projects must document geographic and demographic information through a participatory mapping. Specifically, the Project must:
      1. Ensure all communities related to the Project are equitably involved in the participatory mapping.
      2. Document IPLCs’ land and natural resources history and usage. 
      3. Identify IPLCs and Developers’ “non-negotiables”, for example, geographic areas that are off-limits. 
      4. Identify spiritual practices or traditional ethical codes that must be observed.
      5. Cross-check the existence of mobile communities migrating seasonally across the territory or depending on it for their livelihood.
   3. Projects must implement a participatory communication plan. The plan must:
      1. Include information needs, communication channels and activities.
      2. Ensure the timely provision of materials in formats and languages accessible and intelligible to the IPLCs, preferably in their language and respecting traditional and customary protocols. 
      3. Include norms for both verbal and non-verbal communication if necessary.
      4. Explicit IPLCs’ right to refrain from decision-making if they are not undoubtedly certain of it.
      5. Document the proceedings and outcomes of the discussions and make them available to all parties.
      6. Provide information about the Grievance Mechanism and explain how IPLCs can utilise it to raise and resolve issues throughout the Project’s crediting period.
   4. Developers and IPLCs must reach consensus that is:
      1. Mutual and recognised by all parties, considering customary modes of decision-making and consensus-seeking.
      2. Integrally documented, including the process and outcome, and made publicly available to all IPLCs.
   5. Developers must monitor the evolution of agreements throughout the Project’s crediting period. The monitoring must:
      1. Comprise diverse voices, including at least vulnerable communities and women, to ensure their rights are equally respected.
      2. Offer and, when requested, maintain respondents and input anonymity.
      3. Ensure Verifications’ results are shared through the designated communication channel, allowing IPLCs to confirm or contest the findings and request that a different VVB repeat the process if necessary.

💡 When IPLCs oppose specific components of a Project, Developers must clearly identify the accepted elements and those requiring adaptation or abandonment. This process includes adjusting objectives to achieve mutual agreement among all parties.

SAFEGUARDS

1. Projects must be designed and implemented to meet the following social safeguards requirements. 
   1. Abide by the host country’s national and local laws, regulations and policies. If applicable, compliance with universal agreements or international conventions is also required. 
   2. Abide by the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its follow-up.
      1. Provide a safe and healthy workplace, including:
         • Access to the Project Area by workers (i.e. commuting doesn't imply crossing conflict or unstable zones);
         • Proper housing on the Project's site if workers have to sleep at the Project's premises;
         • No exposition to physically dangerous working conditions such as exposition to dangerous chemicals, dangerous wildlife, climate adversity or unstable terrain; 
         • Adequate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).
      2. Treat workers fairly, providing equal opportunities, provide equal and fair pay and compensation, and avoiding discrimination of all types, including but not limited to gender, age, religion, colour, caste, nationality, sexual orientation. 
      3. Forbid the use of forced labour, child labour and trafficked people. 
      4. Protect contracted workers employed by third parties
   3. Respect and protect universal human rights and freedoms as defined by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and any other instrument ratified by the Project’s host country on Human Rights. 
   4. Protect against and appropriately respond to violence against children, women and girls present in the Project Area.
   5. Recognise, respect, and preserve indigenous lands, collective rights, cultural heritage, and ancestral practices following the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), particularly Article 3, and ILO’s Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.
   6. Prevent the physical and/or economic displacement and involuntary resettlement of communities. If displacement or resettlement is part of the Project’s design, Developers must:
      1. Demonstrate the indisputable necessity for it. Only the following grounds are acceptable: 
         • The implementation of the Project poses a risk to human-life and safety. 
         • The Project represents critical widespread public interest. 
         • The Project preserves ecosystems critical for global biodiversity, and in-situ preservation by IPLCs is unfeasible.    
      2. Provide material evidence that it results from a community-based consensus and that alternatives were exhausted. Meetings recordings and signed declarations are the only material evidence acceptable. ERS might request a randomised interview to attest the veracity of the document. 
      3. Abide by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standard 5 on Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement. 
2. Projects must be designed and implemented to meet the following environmental safeguards requirements. 
   1. Avoid employing techniques for ecological restoration that may lead to release of hazardous waste/materials to land, water, air, including chemical fertilisers, insecticides, and pesticides. 
   2. Identify and where applicable minimise and mitigate any impacts related to pollutant emissions to air, noise and vibration, e.g., during preparation of land for planting. 
   3. Minimize negative impacts on terrestrial and marine biodiversity and ecosystems.
   4. Avoid disruption to habitats of rare, threatened, and endangered species, including those critical for habitat connectivity.
   5. Implement measures to prevent soil degradation and erosion.
   6. Optimise water consumption to avoid excessive use and prevent water stress associated with the Project’s activities.
3. Developers are requested to identify if the Project poses a risk to the safeguards listed above using the Safeguards Declaration.
   1. Information in the Safeguards Declaration must be disclosed in the Project Design Document. 
   2. Where an existential risk is identified, the Project must propose and implement measures to reduce and as much as possible mitigate risks as part of social and environmental risk mitigation plan. 
   3. The risks must be monitored annually as part of the Monitoring Plan, and Developers must report on its progress in the Annual Report.

💡 ERS-certified Projects must be designed to restore degraded ecosystems, uplift biodiversity and empower local communities. Requirements that go beyond those safeguards to create net positive outcomes are detailed and assessed at the Methodology level.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS

1. Projects must demonstrate positive impact on at least three (3) United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). 
   1. Contribution to SDG 13 (Climate Action) is demonstrated by net GHG removals achieved by the Project. 
   2. Contribution to SDG 15 (Life on Land) is demonstrated through Project design and implementation in accordance with the Ecological Recovery principles and methods outlined in the latest version of the ERS Methodology.
   3. Contribution to at least one relevant socially oriented SDG (such as SDG 1, SDG 2, SDG 3, SDG 4, SDG 5, and SDG 10, among others), is demonstrated by Project design and implementation in accordance with the Livelihood principles and methods outlined in the latest version of the ERS Methodology. 
2. Contributions to SDGs must follow the MRV Procedures. Projects must demonstrate alignment with the host country's SDG objectives by selecting appropriate indicators from the SDG Contribution Tool, monitoring them using the standardised methods proposed in the tool and reporting progress annually in the Annual Report.

BENEFIT SHARING

1. Benefits arising from the sale of Restoration Units must be shared among IPLCs through a Benefit Sharing plan.
   1. The plan must be appropriate to the context and consistent with applicable national rules and regulations.
   2. The plan must be agreed upon and arranged between the Developer, the IPLCs and all relevant Stakeholders. The final plan must be shared with the affected IPLCs in a form, manner, and language that is understandable to them.
2. The Developer must ensure that the parties withholding land tenure receive fair compensation for land use.
3. Benefit-sharing outcomes from the benefit-sharing plan must be publicly available and declared in the Annual Report.

RISK MANAGEMENT

Project risks must be analysed by ERS and addressed by Developers according to the following approach. 

1. Scope. 
   1. Risks derive from the following categories:
      1. Risk of failure to deliver - Delivery Risk. All risks that threaten the Developer’s capacity to deliver the Project.
      2. Risk of avoidable and unavoidable reversal - Reversal Risk. All risks that pose a reversal threat once restoration is already done.
      3. Risk of non-compliance with an ERS Requirement - ERS Requirements Risk. All risks that threaten the Project’s compliance with an ERS Requirement.
   2. Risks that are Methodology-specific will be identified accordingly in the template. 
2. Risk assessment. ERS observes the ISO 31000 assessment structure:
   1. Risk Identification. A hundred and twenty-four (124) pre-identified risks are outlined in the Risk Assessment Matrix, which also allows additional risks to be included by Developers on a per-project basis. When identifying new risks, Developers should consider: 
      1. Tangible and intangible sources of risk; 
      2. Vulnerabilities and capabilities;
      3. Changes in the external and internal context; 
      4. Limitations of knowledge and reliability of information; 
      5. Time-related factors; 
      6. Biases, assumptions and beliefs of those involved. 
   2. Risk analysis. All risks are analysed by ERS based on their likelihood of happening and the severity of their consequences.
      1. Analysis is based on the integrality of the Project documentation provided by Developers, desktop data, and on-the-ground findings from Validation and Verifications. The detailed sources of information can be found in the “Analysis and Methodology” column of the Risk Assessment Matrix.
   3. Risk evaluation. All risks are evaluated on a scale from 0 to 5, following the table below.
      1. The final risk evaluation is the multiplication of both scores and can range from 0 to 25.
      2. The Project’s risk-category score (Delivery Risk Score, Reversal Risk Score, ERS Requirement Risk Score) is the simple average of all risks in that category.

3. Risk treatment. If risks are identified, ERS notifies the Developer who must provide mitigation and monitoring, where required. Risks are subject to different treatments depending on their likelihood and severity evaluations. Refer to the Risk Assessment Matrix for more details. 
   1. Monitoring. All risks with Likelihood and Severity evaluations one (1) or higher must be monitored and included in the Monitoring Plan. 
   2. Mitigation. All risks with Likelihood or Severity evaluations four (4) or higher must be mitigated and mitigation actions must be monitored and included in the Monitoring Plan.
   3. The Developer is responsible for indicating directly in the Risk Assessment Matrix: 
      1. The monitoring and mitigation plans; 
      2. Indicators and methods for monitoring.
   4. Schedule. The Developer must define the monitoring schedule of each mitigation and monitoring, to which the interval cannot exceed twelve (12) months. The schedule must be disclosed in the PDD.
   5. Review. ERS reviews monitoring and mitigation plans, either approving them or requesting corrective actions (CARs) or clarifications (CLs). If the submitted CARs and CLs still fail to meet ERS's risk mitigation standards, Project certification may be halted or rejected.
      1. In cases where mitigation is necessary, a new risk evaluation is issued based on the effectiveness of the mitigation measure proposed by the Developer. 
   6. Reporting. Monitoring and Mitigation results must be reported yearly in Project’s Annual Report.
4. Risk assessment update. The Risk Assessment Matrix must be updated every four (4) years.
   1. Where significant changes occur within this four-year period, ERS must publish a new risk assessment. 
      1. Significant changes include, but are not limited to: 
         • Reversal events;
         • Changes in the Project’s local climate legislation; 
         • Civil unrest; 
         • War; 
         • Changes in land tenure; 
         • Changes in the Developer’s governance; 
         • Grievances from the Project’s Stakeholders.

FINANCING & PROJECT BUDGET

1. If Developers secure part of the funding through sources other than the sale of Restoration Units, they must be included in the Additionality demonstration and justified as insufficient to cover the total Project’s expenses.
2. Developers must provide transparency about the budget use.
   1. At the start of a four-year period, Developers must inform the period’s estimated budget in the Project Budget template. 
   2. Every year, Developers must report the realised expenses in the Project’s Annual Report, publicly available on the ERS Registry.