# The Expert Community The OCP methodology development process is modeled on the academic peer review process. Instead of relying on an in-house team, the OCP assembles relevant groups of independent experts from across academic, industry, and carbon markets to create a balance of experiences and opinions reflecting all viewpoints on a sector or topic. The **Voting Experts**, independent of the OCP and Methodology Curator, decide which methodologies are approved, removing the incentive to pass low-quality or un-conservative methodologies. The Expert Community are also involved in the [Annual Audit Process](/ocp-handbook/governance/annual-audit-process.md#methodology-review--audit), as well as brought in ad-hoc to opine on specific topics and issues. *** ### **Who can be an expert?** * Our expert community comprises of people representing a specific expert perspective on the voluntary carbon market and/or the science, accounting, and project implementation in each of the sectors we look at. * Many of our experts are academic, industrial or VCM experts, but we also bring in perspectives from project developers, carbon credit buyers, dMRV and VVBs. * During the application process, all experts must provide their sector expertise, as well as their educational and professional background, organizational affiliations, and published research or reports. This is checked by the OCP team as part of the onboarding process. *** ### **What do the experts do?** * Expert panels are assembled from those already in the OCP Expert Community and external. The panel provides anonymous feedback on new methodologies from the perspective of their expertise. Experts with no conflict of interest may be selected as 'Voting Experts,' responsible for which methodologies are approved or rejected. Other experts on the panel will be 'Contributors,' providing comments but without voting rights. * Academic experts will likely provide the most input on quantification and other scientific topics within the methodology. * Industry experts and practitioners (e.g. project developers or dMRV providers) input of feasibility and industry context. * Carbon market experts can help craft the VCM-specific sections, such as eligibility, additionality, monitoring, etc. * Buyers share their perspectives on what high-quality credits they want to buy and what information should be required or suggested in the methodology to trust the resulting credit. * All Experts are provided with the [OCP Methodology Requirements](https://open-carbon-protocol.gitbook.io/ocp-methodology-requirements/) to ensure alignment with OCP policies and ICVCM Core Carbon Principle Guidance. {% content-ref url="/spaces/J74f9z1HD7PVdEYWZTll" %} [OCP Methodology Requirements](https://open-carbon-protocol.gitbook.io/ocp-methodology-requirements/) {% endcontent-ref %} * In addition, experts or expert panels may have other opportunities to provide input and feedback on new projects, key OCP questions and issues, and during the annual methodology and project audit process. *** ### **How are expert panels assembled?** * In the short term, as the OCP is getting set up, the OCP Science team assembles the expert panels with input from advisors and partners. * Over time, we aim to shift to a community-driven model, where experts within a sector will recommend and approve panels based on who they believe is most needed for a high-quality, trustworthy methodology. *** ### **What incentives are there for being an expert?** * All Voting Experts receive hourly compensation for work on methodology development and approval, paid for by the OCP. * Experts are paid by the hour of work, not the outcome, to ensure incentives are independent of methodologies being approved or rejected. * On top of this, all the experts we've talked to and worked with so far are also incentivized to improve the carbon market and increase learning in their chosen sectors. *** ### **How is the expert community moderated?** * Experts and methodology curators can give anonymous feedback on the work of other experts on their panel. If necessary, this feedback is assessed by the OCP team and the OCP Advisory Board. The OCP team also tracks the timeliness of responses and the degree of interaction and collaboration with the methodology curator and other experts. * If any experts are seen to be doing poorly, they are given private feedback and deprioritized in the selection of new expert panels. Repeated poor performance or any major issue (e.g., falsifying data or not identifying conflict of interests) will result in an expert being removed from the expert community, banned from the OCP, and reported to any relevant bodies. *** ### **How do we ensure quality review and content?** * All methodologies also go through a 30-day public commentary period, where anyone can read the methodology, as well as previous comments and any supporting materials, and give feedback. The methodology curator responds to all commentary, and the commentary and responses are both provided to the expert panel and published alongside the methodology. * On top of this, the OCP team runs an [annual audit process](/ocp-handbook/governance/annual-audit-process.md#methodology-review--audit) on all methodologies and experts every year. * [If any methodology is required to be updated](/ocp-handbook/methodologies/methodology-updates.md), an expert panel is assembled to review and vote . The experts also vote on whether existing projects will need to be stopped and re-submitted, including new validation. --- # Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter: ``` GET https://open-carbon-protocol.gitbook.io/ocp-handbook/methodologies/the-expert-community.md?ask= ``` The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.