CCP-Approved forest methodologies

Afforestation, Reforestation, and Revegetation (ARR)

Verra’s VM0047 is the primary global ARR methodology and was CCP-approved for both v1.0 (late 2024) and v1.1 (October 2025). It is the first nature-based methodology approved to use remote sensing to establish a dynamic performance benchmark and test additionality, a feature the ICVCM cited as central to its approval. VM0047 applies globally to activities that increase the density of trees or woody vegetation, covering afforestation, reforestation, and revegetation. The first credits issued under VM0047 came to market in April 2026 for a large-scale project restoring degraded pasture in the Brazilian Cerrado, making them the first CCP-labelled ARR credits in the market. The first project registered under the methodology, a year earlier, was a West Africa project restoring 12,000 hectares of degraded land in Burkina Faso. As of early 2026, at least four projects had registered under VM0047, including the first in India and the first in Asia. VM0047 is also potentially relevant to Article 6.4 transition, as CCP approval confirms it has already cleared the ICVCM’s rigorous additionality and dynamic baseline assessment, providing a strong foundation for its adoption as a PACM methodology, if submitted.

Isometric’s ISM Reforestation Protocol v1.1, was CCP-approved in February 2026. It has a narrower scope than Verra’s VM0047, covering only activities that restore forest on previously forested land. Twenty project developers are registered under the methodology, with Isometric expecting to issue over 4 million credits annually by 2030.

REDD (avoided deforestation)

In November 2024, the ICVCM approved three REDD methodologies: Verra’s VM0048 Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation v1.0; Verra’s Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (JNR) Framework v4.1; and the Architecture for REDD+ Transactions (ART) TREES v2.0 TREES Crediting Level. This was a landmark decision. Verra’s older REDD methodologies VM0006, VM0007, VM0009, VM0015, and VM0037 were explicitly excluded from assessment by Verra and will not receive CCP labels. These older methodologies account for the majority of REDD credits currently on the market and around a quarter of all carbon credits retired in 2023. Verra requires projects using older methodologies to transition to VM0048, including a requantification of emission reductions under the new baseline and monitoring rules. Projects that complete this transition successfully can then access the CCP label. The pipeline under CCP-approved REDD methodologies is substantial: as of late 2024, 21 projects were in development under VM0048 with the potential to issue approximately 300 million credits during their first crediting period, nine jurisdictions were in the ART TREES pipeline with potential to issue 123 million credits, and several programs were under the JNR framework.

Improved Forest Management (IFM)

Verra’s VM0045 and ACR’s IFM on Non-Federal U.S. Forestlands were both approved as CCP-Eligible in early 2026. Both are new methodologies with limited credits issued to date but growing project pipelines. The ICVCM’s assessment of IFM methodologies noted specific conditions: VM0045 applies tiered default leakage deduction factors (10% for projects not involving a permanent reduction in timber supply), and the assessment flagged that some IFM methodologies exclude soil organic carbon pools, a conservative approach that is acceptable given that IFM practices generally do not involve significant site disturbance.

Excluded methodologies

Approximately 25 submitted methodologies have not met CCP requirements. In addition, Verra’s older REDD methodologies were not submitted. A number of cookstove and household energy methodologies did not meet requirements, primarily on additionality and leakage grounds. Several energy efficiency and fuel switching methodologies were found not to meet the requirements on similar grounds. The ICVCM has not published a comprehensive list of failed methodologies with full explanations, but its assessment observations documents offer detail on the specific criteria that proved difficult to satisfy.

For buyers and developers, if a methodology is not CCP-Approved, credits from projects under that methodology will not carry the CCP label and will face increasing difficulty, and likely lower price, in high-integrity procurement channels. CSRD disclosure requirements, SBTi OER integrity criteria, and CORSIA eligibility are all progressively high integrity and in many cases aligning with CCP-level quality. Methodologies outside that bar are not incorrect or poor quality, but they face a structural market access problem that will only deepen.