This report, commissioned by the German Environment Agency and co-authored by Ecologic Institute, contains a detailed assessment of ten crediting methodologies on climate-friendly soil management measures. These crediting methodologies are examples of result-based payment and offsetting approaches to fund enhanced carbon sequestration and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agricultural practices. Our evaluation of these certification methodologies covers key aspects, including emission quantification, baseline setting, additionality, risk management, environmental and social impacts, and governance. We find many weaknesses with the assessed methodologies.

Soils are vital for climate mitigation, storing substantial carbon. This report, co-authored by Ecologic Institute's Hugh McDonald, Aaron Scheid and Dr. Ana Frelih-Larsen, examines funding approaches to promote climate-friendly soil management in Europe, focusing on two models: action-based and result-based. Action-based funding supports specific activities but doesn't ensure measurable outcomes, while result-based funding ties payments to verified results, encouraging innovation but involving higher costs and monitoring. Result-based funding approaches can be challenging in the context of soil carbon, with offsetting approaches found to be particularly risky.

Climate-friendly soil management measures generate climate impact through both temporary carbon removals and emissions reductions, posing a challenge for defining key terms such as "carbon removals", "emissions reductions," "avoided emissions," and "negative emissions". This brief reviews scientific definitions of these key terms to create a mini-glossary and discuss key definitional issues in the soil carbon context. A key conclusion is that different policy contexts require definitions to be adapted.

Hugh McDonald presented preliminary findings from the final report "Funding climate friendly soil management: Appropriate policy instruments and limits of market-based approaches" to an audience of more than 100 staff from the German Environment Agency.

Niether, Wiebke et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Determining the soil organic carbon (SOC) content and changes over time. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

Siemons, Anne et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Preventing double counting. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

McDonald, Hugh et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Ex ante vs. ex post crediting. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

Niether, Wiebke et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Impacts on soil health. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

Siemons, Anne et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Jurisdictional vs. project-based approaches. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

Siemons, Anne et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Land use competition. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

Siemons, Anne et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Carbon leakage. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

Siemons, Anne et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Addressing non-permanence. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

McDonald, Hugh et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Additionality. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

Bodle, Ralph and Hugh McDonald 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Ownership, tenure, and other land rights: The link to climate-friendly land use. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.

McDonald, Hugh et al. 2022: Funding climate-friendly soil management – key issues. Setting Baselines. Factsheet. German Environment Agency: Dessau-Roßlau.