Breaking Down VM0048: How Risk Maps Change REDD+ Baselines

 

If you’re involved in the origination of a new REDD+ project and have been struggling to make sense of how Verra’s new VM0048 methodology could impact eligibility and issuance potential, you’ve come to the right place – in this article, we’re going to shed some light on what the new VM0048 risk maps will mean for your credit issuance.

In short, Verra is moving away from a system where each project establishes its own baselines to one where baselines are standardised at a jurisdictional level. 

While we believe jurisdictional baselines are the right step towards building public trust and integrity in the carbon market, there’s still plenty of uncertainty around what the new risk maps will mean for the viability of future REDD+ projects. The big question is: how will this impact credit issuance for new projects?

So, what’s actually changing?

To establish jurisdictional baselines, VM0048 has introduced deforestation risk maps – these are heat maps of deforestation probability that cover entire jurisdictions at a national level, or, in the case of very large countries, at a regional level. Verra has partnered with nature mapping providers, including Space Intelligence, to supply forest cover benchmark maps and deforestation activity data using high quality remote sensing imaging. But why is this significant?

Historically, REDD+ projects generated their own deforestation baseline based on a local reference area with respect to historical deforestation trends, forest type, land tenure and socio-economic structures of local communities. 

While the approach had its logic, the lack of standardisation created room for inconsistencies and, in some cases, overly optimistic crediting. The introduction of risk maps changes this by ensuring baselines are externally determined rather than left to individual developers. We believe a country-level approach – one that captures high level independently determined spatial trends in deforestation drivers – is the best way to reduce inconsistencies between projects and lower the risk of inflated credit issuance. 

The tradeoff: lower credit volumes, higher prices?

Verra’s new VM0048 methodology is a major step toward making carbon credits more transparent. By standardising how deforestation risk is assessed, this new approach takes the power of setting baselines out of individual developers’ hands and places it with an independent data provider. This leads to a more consistent and credible crediting process – one that buyers can trust actually represents real carbon reductions. 

And that trust is crucial. REDD+ has been one of the only effective ways to stop deforestation globally and preserve the 60% of tropical forests that we, despite humanity’s best efforts, have still got left. These projects need funding to scale, and fast. The more confidence there is in the integrity of these credits, the more investment will flow in. Ideally, by the end of this decade, we’ll see a significantly larger share of at-risk forests protected under REDD+. If that happens, the annual forest loss – currently around 1% – could be significantly reduced.

However, there are concerns that this change will lead to fewer credits per project. Some early reports suggest that credit issuance is indeed being reduced under the new system, though the impact varies by country. But there is hope that the new methodology will offset financial challenges in other ways. 

Despite this, the shift to more conservative baselines is hoped to generate higher quality credits and prices are expected to rise to the $11-15 price per tonne range for REDD+ projects.

Understanding the new risk maps

Verra’s new risk maps are created on top of forest cover benchmark maps (FCBM) and provide spatially explicit jurisdiction-wide estimates of unplanned deforestation. The risk is allocated proportionally, meaning areas with a higher likelihood of deforestation receive a larger share of the jurisdiction’s total deforestation estimate.

Example risk map over Cambodia

These maps are intended to help developers to:

• Identify high-risk areas where their projects can have the greatest impact
• Establish baseline deforestation rates for credit calculations

Verra will provide access to these maps in two tiers:

• Open-access jurisdictional risk maps – Lower-resolution (1-hectare pixel) maps that offer a broad view of deforestation risk across a jurisdiction. These maps will be free and will help project developers assess feasibility.
• VMD0055-compliant jurisdictional risk maps – High-resolution, rigorously reviewed maps. These are essential for formal project documentation, third-party validation, and project registration. Developers submitting a Project Description Document (PDD) can purchase data for specific project areas, while jurisdiction-wide datasets are available on request.

As of now, Verra has released provisional versions of these risk maps for select Brazilian states – Pará, Amazonas, Rondônia, and Mato Grosso – with more states and countries to follow throughout the year.

Risk maps have a 10 year historical reference period that is then valid for 6 years into the future. So for example, the new Amazonas State map uses a historical reference period of Jan 1, 2013 – Dec 31, 2022, meaning it’s valid from Jan 1, 2023 through to the end of 2028. Existing projects have two years to transition, while new projects will be required to use these maps starting in 2025.

To help project developers and investors understand the implications of VM0048, we at Space Intelligence analysed how the new methodology would impact credit issuance in Kenya, one of the seven countries where Verra has used Space Intelligence’s Activity Data (AD) that risk maps are produced from.

Case study: VM0048’s impact on a REDD+ project in Kenya

We examined a previously operational project in Kenya and compared its baseline under its  old VM0009 methodology to what it would look like under VM0048. We used the figures the project reported in the project documents at the time of origination. For the VM0048 methodology, we used risk maps generated from Verra’s FCBM and AD.

Project boundary on a risk map over Kenya

To convert deforestation (ha) into carbon emissions (tCO2e), project developers use a ‘deforestation emissions factor’ – an estimate of how much carbon is stored in forests per hectare, which is then lost if the forest is cleared. 

There’s no need for a reference area – we can retrieve the baseline deforestation estimate directly from the project boundary on the risk map. To calculate the new baseline, we multiplined the baseline deforestation estimate (103 ha) by the emissions factor (208 tCO2e/ha).

 

	VM0009	VM0048
Baseline deforestation	21,010 tCO2e	21,424 tCO2e

 

Under VM0009, the project’s baseline estimate of emissions from unplanned deforestation during the baseline validity period averaged 21,010 tCO2e. Under VM0048, baseline emissions would reach 21,424 tCO2e – only a marginal increase. To note, the project’s estimate included emissions from soil, while Space Intelligence’s estimate only accounted for woody biomass.

In this case, the difference in baselines was negligible. One project is not indicative of the overall trend, so we’re not going to draw any conclusions over how VM0048 impacts REDD+ projects in Kenya. It might be that the new methodology will not have a massive impact on credit issuance, depending on where the project is located. Rather than making assumptions, we’ll stick to the facts: the risk-based approach is more effective at standardising project assessments, enabling better comparisons across the same region, and building greater trust in their impact.

Final thoughts

The VM0048 shift toward standardised, externally validated risk assessments is a win for transparency and trust in the carbon market. For developers and the communities they work with, VM0048’s risk maps present an easy way to spot areas with high deforestation risk. 

Verra will be rolling out more countries across the tropics in the coming months. But having the risk maps is only half the battle – interpreting them for pre-feasibility work requires a deeper understanding of how these methodologies work.

At Space Intelligence, we now offer Technical Pre-Feasibility Reports for countries across the tropics, including Kenya, Tanzania, Indonesia and more. As a trusted Verra data provider, we will provide you with screening-grade data, interpreted by our experts to assess feasibility and carbon sequestration potential.

If you’re working on a project and need expert insights, let’s talk.