Third-party Evaluations

Authors: OroVerde, Global Nature Fund - 2011
Supporters: Federal Environment Agency (UBA), Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU)

Investing in forest carbon projects - Guidelines for companies and private investors


Conclusion:
The CarbonFix Standard fulfills the majority of the essential criteria regarding the methodology on CO2-calculation as well as the social and ecological criteria. Page 29.

Website: www.globalnature.org/31768/PROJECTS/

  Download report

Authors: E. Merger, M. Dutschke, L. Verchot - 2011
Supporters: UNIQUE GmbH, BioCarbon Consult, CIFOR
Scientific review: forests

Options for REDD+ Voluntary Certification to Ensure Net GHG Benefits, Poverty Alleviation, Sustainable Management of Forests and Biodiversity Conservation


Conclusion:
The CarbonFix Standard provides a practical approach that includes a comprehensive framework for designing and implementing A/R projects promoting SFM and forest conservation. Page 568.

Website: http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/2/2/550/

  Download report

Authors: natureOffice - 2011
Language: German only   

Gold Standard versus CarbonFix

Conclusion:
Both standards are seen as equally good to provide investors and companies with a transparent tool to secure high-quality certificates for voluntary commitments in climate protection. Page 15.


  Download report

Authors: International Carbon Reduction and Offset Alliance (ICROA) - 2011

Conclusion:
"We selected the CarbonFix Standard for inclusion in the ICROA Code because CarbonFix offset credits are environmentally robust, highly innovative and focus on biodiversity and sustainability." Edward Hanrahan, ICROA co-chair

Website: http://klimabonus.com/article160_15704.html 

Authors: CarbonPositive - 2010

Status and Future of the Afforestation and Reforestation (A/R) Carbon Sector


Conclusion:
By 2010 already 31% of the worlds voluntary A/R forest carbon projects were using the CarbonFix Standard. Page 15.

  Download report

Authors: Imperial College London, P. Lopes - 2009

A Comparison of the leading Standards in the - Voluntary Carbon Market


Conclusion:
For reforestation projects, CarbonFix is highly recommended. CarbonFix managed to transform a highly complex process into a simplified, user friendly standard and still guuarantees high-quality carbon credits. Page 72.

  Download report

Authors: Canterbury University, E. Merger - 2008
Supporters: Carbon Positive

Title: A Comparison of the leading Standards in the Voluntary Carbon Market

Conclusion:
For projects larger than 100ha the CarbonFix Standard can be recommended as being the most appropriat. Page 67.

  Download report

 

Why CarbonFix ?

Many project developers inquire about the differences between the CarbonFix Standard and other standards. This page provides you with information on the major differences of the following standards:

A/R CDM

VCS

CCBS & FSC

 
 

CCBS & FSC

No Carbon Credits

The standards FSC as well as CCBS set social and ecological safeguards to ensure sustainable management of projects. Both of these standards do not generate carbon certificates themselves and must therefore be applied together with a carbon accounting standard. CarbonFix is such a standard.

PRO CarbonFix   The CarbonFix Standard in an integrative standard, including a methodology for carbon accounting as well as social and ecological safeguards. Therefore, CarbonFix can be used as stand-alone standard, but also in combination with a FSC or CCBS.

In order to avoid double work for the projects developer, CarbonFix acknowledges FSC and CCBS criteria in replacement of its own set of social and ecological safeguards.