The geography of avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management offsets: the enduring question of additionality

Avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management (AD/SFM) offset projects have developed piecemeal, lacking consensus standards and receiving only quite low carbon prices. The diverse forces project developers face have led to a complex geography of different offsetting standards and funding sources adopted by various projects. Combining and updating existing AD/SFM pilot project databases, we produce - to our knowledge - the largest publicly available dataset of such projects' approximate locations, containing nearly 800 worldwide. Using Cox proportional hazards models, we analyze the geography of these AD/SFM offset projects to understand better how different pressures project developers face in this weakly consolidated field have shaped where projects are more and less likely to be undertaken. We find that, at a fifty-kilometre-per-side hexagonal resolution, both AD/SFM projects tend to be located in areas with high above-ground biomass and high IUCN Red List species richness. Additionally, AD projects tend to be located in areas with stronger deforestation drivers. There is also a clear geographic specialization, with over 85% of the SFM projects in our dataset located in the United States. In contrast, AD projects have generally been established in countries that have engaged with the United Nations Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (UN-REDD) Programme or the World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. While AD/SFM projects may not be avoiding emissions at levels estimated in existing offset systems, they might still have a role to play in climate and habitat protection. Voluntary avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management offset projects tend to be located in areas of high biodiversity and carbon sequestration value, with avoided deforestation projects also located in areas with higher deforestation risks.When selecting project locations, voluntary avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management offset project developers face several constraints, in addition to the tradeoff between carbon values and opportunity costs.There may be further opportunities to incentivize biodiversity conservation in these projects, as they already appear to respond positively to relatively weak market signals encouraging threatened species protection.