Methodology Development, Feedback & Approval
Explains which types of projects can be proposed, the process by which methodologies receive feedback and ultimately approval after public commentary.
Last updated
Explains which types of projects can be proposed, the process by which methodologies receive feedback and ultimately approval after public commentary.
Last updated
DISCLAIMER: All methodologies are grounded in the latest scientific advancements and carbon market best practices. Both of these are evolving rapidly and will progress and improve as time goes by. On the OCP, we run ad-hoc and annual audits on all methodologies and projects, which includes consultations with industry experts to ensure all work operates with the most up-to-date science and data (see more here). While previous versions will remain publicly available for transparency and the ability to track scientific and market developments, only the most recent version should be used for project development. The Expert Panel, and other stakeholders, can only operate using knowledge and research available at the time which may lead to uncertainties or knowledge gaps, and this should be considered when assessing rapidly evolving sectors or previous versions of methodologies or projects.
New methodologies can be proposed by any stakeholder: Project Developers, NGOs, Rating Agencies, dMRVs, buyers.
A panel of experts & stakeholders involving academic and industry experts, potential project partners, rating agencies and buyers will work together to craft and agree on a high-quality methodology.
The duration of the process will vary, but we estimate it will take 10-12 weeks for the panel to reach an 80% consensus to conditionally approve or reject the methodology. If approved, it then undergoes a 1 month public commentary period before being published.
While the OCP encourages flexibility for teams to work on what they deem most important, methodologies must meet key criteria in our guidelines on how to write methodologies for the VCM. Methodology curators can decide which industry-level standards (e.g. ICROA, ICVCM’s CCPs, CORSIA) they want to conform to. The OCP registry will track and publicly display which certifications the methodology is eligble for and adheres to.
The OCP is sector and geographically agnostic-- anyone with an idea for a methodology yet to see in the market can propose it on the platform. Methodologies can cover any project sector in any geographic region.
The ‘Expert Panel’ has commenting and voting rights on the methodology
At the end of the feedback process, they’ll choose to ‘approve’ or ‘reject’ the methodology
Their vote will be publicly shown on the methodology page, along with their identity
The ‘Contributors’ are non-voting experts, which means they can provide comments but do not vote
This is a role for those with some incentive to either pass or reject the methodology (e.g. they’ve worked with the proposer before or they’ll be able to make money off the methodology in the future)
The methodology is conditionally passed when 80% of the voting Expert Panel attest positively to:
Does this methodology employ conservative and accurate calculations, grounded in the latest scientific data, to ensure that the mitigation activity is not overestimated?
If a project developer complied with this methodology, would each carbon credit produced by the project represent one tonne of C02e avoided or removed?
If the answer is no, then what prevents this?
All comments will be published publicly alongside methodologies.
All comments are published publicly alongside the methodology.
