# Executive summary

Conservation-first, indicator-species-based biodiversity crediting

**This methodology has been designed for simplicity and rapid deployment. It was co-developed with Indigenous Peoples (IP) and local communities (LC) involved in grassroots conservation in the Colombian Amazon, *****then***** translated to global markets by a dedicated core of conservation scientists for the immediate use of like-groups.** 

Indigenous Peoples steward an estimated [80% of the conserved biodiversity](https://report.territoriesoflife.org/global-analysis/) on Earth and yet recieve [less than 2% of climate financing. ](https://sdg.iisd.org/commentary/guest-articles/climate-finance-needs-rethinking-to-reach-indigenous-peoples-on-the-ground/)This methodology is specifically designed to eliminate the scientific bureaucracy and market middlemen that could siphon money out of the commercialization of this service. Instead, it enables *immediate and autonomous* quantification and *direct payments* to these groups and their smallfarmer neighbors. 

**This methodology relies on indicator species.** A simple but powerful concept: certain species of flora and fauna can survive only in functional ecosystems. A healthy specimen in the wild is a scientifically valid indicator that the ecosystem is functionally intact. Proving the existence of indicator species using non-invasive monitoring techniques (such as game cameras, photographs, or audio recordings), respects the wildlife and can be easily, and immediately implemented on the ground by IP and LC groups within traditional hunter-gatherer contexts. This is practical, useful, and valid given the difficulties of knowing or monitoring the fauna and flora of large ecosystems like the Amazon, and thanks to recent [research](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04664-7), it is demonstrated that species diversity in one taxonomic group may be sufficient to represent other aspects of biodiversity. ([Cox et al. 2022](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04664-7)); ([Rapacciuolo 2024](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/giorapac_knowledge-of-species-diversity-may-be-sufficient-activity-7168337656769105920-_aOx/?utm_source=share\&utm_medium=member_ios)); ([Rapacciuolo et al. 2019](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-018-0744-7)).

**This methodology issues voluntary biodiversity credits (VBCs).** As such, it can never be used to provide “offsets” of any kind. Its authors do not believe that it will ever be ethical to trade a [chimpanzee for a jaguar](https://www.propublica.org/article/biodiversity-offsets-guinea-world-bank-group-chimpanzees-outbreak), or one IP group's jaguar for another's. 

**This methodology has been *****intentionally***** simplified**. The scientists who have promoted it have used their expertise to democratize the measurements required for market inclusion, not in the name of scientific advancement, but in the name of immediate action.  

#### Figure 1. One year of data loaded to open source code for biodiversity credit calculations

<figure><img src="/files/pD7ayqENCwH7z6OX5GWJ" alt=""><figcaption><p>Figure 1. Data from ISBM biodiversity pilot site occuring over one year in the Colombian Amazon. </p></figcaption></figure>

To the clear aim of *direct* market access for IP and LC, we have intentionally omitted the following scientific quantification methods:&#x20;

* **Identification of individuals** of an indicator species, or calculations of population change,
* **eDNA or other sophisticated scientific methods** of biodiversity characterization,
* **Ecosystem or habitat quantification** at a project level,
* **Species richness metrics** at a project level.

We acknowledge that these compromises may mean lower market values for the VBCs issued under this standard and consider it an acceptable tradeoff for omitting scientific standards which are exclusionary to the people we directly seek to incentivize. &#x20;

**This methodology was** [**co-developed with IP and LC**](/appendices/appendix-h-indigenous-authors). To date, leaders from eighteen [Indigenous communities](<https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/authors#independent-indigenous-leaders >) and hundreds of [Indigenous smallfarmers](https://www.savimbo.com/growers) in the Colombian Amazon have directly contributed to the design and piloting of this methodology.  It is currently being considered for adoption by IP and LC groups in Ecuador, Peru, Brazil, Suriname, Mexico, Panama, Bolivia, Guatemala, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, the Philippines, Gabon, Kenya, South Africa, Uganda, Australia, New Zealand, the US, and Canada. It has been reviewed and refined [privately](/document-history) and [publically](/appendices/appendix-i-letters-of-support) by hundreds of global experts using biological and anthropological considerations for biodiversity preservation, scientific understandings of complex adaptive systems, market needs for fungibility, and the urgency of minimizing further irreversible extinctions.&#x20;

**This methodology was designed for behavior change.** IP and LC can preserve or traffick rare species. They have unrestricted access to hunt or study the rarest and most valuable species on earth.  They have traditional knowledge that far exceeds our best botanical and behavioral science. We have no choice but to fully respect their autonomy. This methodology is intentionally designed to economically incentivize positive role models within IP and LC and enables them to self-reinforce traditional ways of life which conserve and retain knowledge of biodiversity in its fullest expression.&#x20;

We remain hopeful and determined that this methodology will have the intended effect of strengthening the people with the biggest global impact on conserving biodiversity.&#x20;

The Savimbo Team\
[eco at savimbo.com](mailto:eco@savimbo.com)\
[savimbo.com ](https://www.savimbo.com/about)

<figure><img src="/files/MXnImhjY5Q793iwWrpHT" alt="" width="188"><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

<details>

<summary>© 2023–2026 Savimbo Inc.</summary>

*Suggested citation: Savimbo Inc. (2023). The Savimbo Indicator Species Biodiversity Methodology (ISBM): Executive Summary.* [*https://isbm.savimbo.com*](https://isbm.savimbo.com)

Full methodology: Burbank, D., Lopez, J., Jamauca, L., & Lopez Rojas, A.I. (2023). Indicator species biodiversity methodology. <https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10435.00805>. Current Cercarbono-certified version: ISBM v1.2, approved under the Cercarbono Biodiversity Certification Programme (CBCP).

*The ISBM methodology is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0*\
*International (CC BY 4.0). Anyone — academic, NGO, community, project-developer,*\
*or commercial — may freely use, adapt, and build on the methodology, with*\
*attribution.*

*"ISBM" and "Savimbo" are trademarks of Savimbo Inc. and are not licensed*\
*under CC BY 4.0. Applying the methodology is free under that license; using the*\
*ISBM name or seal to brand, market, or sell a certification service requires a separate trademark licensing (royalty) agreement with Savimbo Inc. Certifiers: contact* [*eco at savimbo.com*](mailto:eco@savimbo.com)

</details>


# Front Material


# Contents

#### [Executive summary](/)

#### [Index of tables](/front-material/index-of-tables)&#x20;

#### [Index of figures ](/front-material/index-of-figures)

#### [ Introduction ](/introduction)

#### [Acronyms and Abbreviations](#acronyms-and-abbreviations)

#### [Terms and Definitions](#terms-and-definitions)

#### [1. Getting started ](/getting-started)

#### [2. Overall description](/overall-description)

#### [3. Principles](/project-description/principles)

#### [4. Eligibility criteria](/project-description/eligibility-criteria)

#### [5. Project boundaries](/project-description/project-boundaries)

#### [6. Baseline assessment ](/baseline-assessment)

#### [7. Project scenario ](broken://spaces/Ym3eXmtwXdwnNldRSyuo)

#### [8. Calculation ](/calculation)

#### [9. Safeguards  checklist](/project-description/effective-participation/safeguards-checklist)

#### [10. Risks and uncertainty ](/project-description/implementation-plan/risks-and-uncertainty)

#### [11. SDG contributions](/sdg-contributions)

#### [12. Grouped projects ](/project-description/project-boundaries/grouped-projects)

#### [13. Monitoring plan](/monitoring-plan)

#### [References ](/references)

#### [Appendix ](/appendices)

#### [Frequently asked questions ](/faq)

#### [Disclaimer](/disclaimer)

#### [Document history](/document-history)


# Index of figures

[**Figure 1**. One year of data loaded to open source code for biodiversity credit calculations](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/COsL16hrQX8IpByh7Rsc#figure-1.-one-year-of-data-loaded-to-open-source-code-for-biodiversity-credit-calculations)

[**Figure 2.** Steps in applying the ISBM approach](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/KjIpgsefwcAYzJtwKMOV#figure-2.-steps-in-applying-the-isbm-approach)

[**Figure 3.** Global living planet index (WWF 2022)](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/M6hQaYIwQH3uqYWS0jH7#figure-3.-global-living-planet-index-wwf-2022)

[**Figure 4a**. Diagram of spatial areas of BCP](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/8Lo4ZWnsaIysqFPiiT1W#figure-4a.-diagram-of-spatial-areas-of-bcp)

[**Figure 4b**. Project area with satellite mapping](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/8Lo4ZWnsaIysqFPiiT1W#figure-4b.-project-area-with-satellite-mapping)

[**Figure 5.** Temporal delimitation of the BCP](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/Q3InCvaUHABsx5GvzF00#figure-5.-temporal-delimitation-of-the-bcp)

[**Figure 6.** Indicator species observations with geocode and date-time stamp ](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/TW1tQ7wSaSrracP5ryQN#figure-6.-indicator-species-observations-with-geocode-and-date-time-stamp)

[**Figure 7.** Biodiversity credits appearing and disappearing over time with different species' observations](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/qjpo9j7t2EpJM7cwl9BV#figure-7.-biodiversity-credits-appearing-and-disappearing-over-time-with-different-species-observati)

[**Figure 8.** Union of multiple observations to calculate crediting area from home range](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/gGy2yptVa6ev9tqN07zI#figure-8.-union-of-multiple-jaguar-observations-to-calculate-crediting-area-from-home-range)

[**Figure 8a.** Division of a crediting area by a grouped-project boundary](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/gGy2yptVa6ev9tqN07zI#figure-8a.-division-of-a-crediting-area-by-a-grouped-project-boundary)

[**Figure 9.** Union of observations that overlap in time-space to calculate crediting](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/0kitnsjozpAvA46xKYmB#figure-9.-union-of-observations-which-overlap-in-time-and-space-to-calculate-crediting)

[**Figure 10.** Biodiversity credits appearing and disappearing over time with different species' observations](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/0kitnsjozpAvA46xKYmB#figure-10.-biodiversity-credits-appearing-and-disappearing-over-time-with-different-species-observat)

[**Figure 11.** Summing overlapping partial integrity scores](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/QqFJtdCzkyrmvPDU84hu#figure-11.-summing-overlapping-partial-integrity-scores)

[**Figure 11a.** Summing overlapping full and partial integrity scores](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/QqFJtdCzkyrmvPDU84hu#figure-11a.-summing-overlapping-full-and-partial-integrity-scores)

[**Figure 12.** Indicator species selection example for Colombia](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-selection#figure-12-indicator-species-selection-example-for-colombia)

[**Figure 12a:** Indicator species integrity score example for Colombia](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-integrity-score#figure-12a-indicator-species-integrity-score-example-for-colombia)

[**Figure 13:** Jhony Lopez and students tracking biodiversity indicator species in the Putumayo Amazon](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/kzLnLl1kiZcoXYhejo1F#figure-13.-jhony-lopez-and-students-tracking-biodiversity-indicator-species-in-the-putumayo-amazon)


# Index of tables

[**Table 1.** Eligibility criteria for ISBM](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/fmTPRFmAVU0X2cAYr2sC#table-1.-eligibility-criteria-for-isbm)

[**Table 2.** Comparison of VBCs issued with normalized Ecosystem value](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/GoF1DuLugVqclmsJE1pn#table-2.-comparison-of-vbcs-issued-with-normalized-ecosystem-value)

[**Table 3.** Ecosystem value for VBCs](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/GoF1DuLugVqclmsJE1pn#table-3.-ecosystem-value-for-vbcs)

[**Table 4.** Accepted ecosystem categorization schemas ](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/jzgaXpczHGAYrrjxSHSb#table-4.-accepted-ecosystem-categorization-schemas)

[**Table 5.** Drivers and causes of direct biodiversity loss. ](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/6r8fs4mMVpYBxPXHPXar#table-5.-drivers-and-causes-of-direct-biodiversity-loss)

[**Table 6.** Example of simple monitoring plan ](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/aQfW8ftVfzxm2e0bGk8r#table-6.-example-of-simple-monitoring-plan)

[**Table 7.** Emerging standards (certifying bodies in the context of the ISBD).  ](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/Cd81ebxvYIJ6GqwNcNdb#table-7.-emerging-standards-certifying-bodies-in-the-context-of-the-isbd)

[**Table 8.** Additional requirements for documentation of land stewardship under Colombian law.](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/f5v0ojYO7uRCivEJJNMC#table-8.-additional-requirements-for-documentation-of-land-stewardship-under-colombian-law)&#x20;

[**Table 9.** Ecosistem value for VGZ](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/eKi6fiwzALWs3VDjKtjq#table-9.-ecosistem-value-for-vgz)

[**Table 10.** Species richness and biodiversity risk in Colombia](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/3AoMULLBhZOxGsFOaUkI#table-10.-species-richness-and-biodiversity-risk-in-colombia)

[**Table 11.** Species chosen as indicators for biodiversity crediting.](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/pages/rm3d5mJZOUSQ6jewDwyF#table-11.-species-chosen-as-indicators-for-biodiversity-crediting.-note-please-scroll-right-for-full)


# Acronyms and abbreviations

|        |                                                                 |
| ------ | --------------------------------------------------------------- |
| BCP    | Biodiversity Crediting Project                                  |
| BCPP   | Cercarbono's Biodiversity Certification Programme Protocol      |
| CBCP   | Cercarbono's Biodiversity Certification Programme               |
| CBD    | Convention on Biological Diversity                              |
| eDNA   | Environmental deoxyribonucleic acid or environmental DNA        |
| IEP    | Independent Experts Panel                                       |
| ILO    | International Labour Organization                               |
| IP     | Indigenous Peoples                                              |
| ISBM   | Indicator Species Biodiversity Methodology                      |
| IUCN   | International Union for Conservation of Nature                  |
| iVBC   | Innovative Voluntary Biodiversity Credit                        |
| KML    | Keyhole markup language                                         |
| LC     | Local Communities                                               |
| MRV    | Monitoring, reporting and verification                          |
| NBSAP  | National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plan                |
| NGO    | non-governmental organization                                   |
| PMP    | Project Management plan                                         |
| SDGs   | Sustainable Development Goals                                   |
| UNESCO | United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization |
| VBC    | Voluntary Biodiversity Credit                                   |
| WWF    | World Wildlife Fund                                             |


# Terms and definitions

The following terms are relevant to this methodology. For definitions, refer to the Terms and Definition of the Biodiversity Certification Program of Cercarbono, available at [www.cercarbono.com](http://www.cercarbono.com), section: Documentation.&#x20;

Other terms related specifically to biodiversity science are described below:

**Biodiversity hotspots:** A biogeographic region characterized by exceptionally high levels of species richness and a significant degree of habitat loss. These areas are recognized for their extraordinary concentration of endemic species, meaning species that are found nowhere else in the world.

**Conservation:** There is a technical argument that this methodology falls under the definition of ‘preservation’ in many environmental contexts. “Conservation seeks the proper use of nature, while preservation seeks protection of nature from use." For simplicity, and readability with a non-technical IP and LC audience we have used the term conservation throughout ([Becker and Ghimire 2003](https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol8/iss1/art1/)).

**Date-time stamp:** Data that indicates a specific date and time when an event occurred or when a particular record was created or modified.

**Ecosystem connectivity:** Connectivity (i.e. ecological connectivity) is the unimpeded movement of species and the flow of natural processes that sustain life on Earth. It may thus also refer to continuous ecosystems often connected through ecological corridors. There are two types of connectivity: structural (in which the continuity between ecosystems is identified) and functional (in which the movement of species or processes is verified).&#x20;

**Ecosystem integrity:** An ecosystem is generally understood to have integrity when its dominant ecological characteristics (e.g. elements of composition, structure, function, and ecological processes) occur within their natural ranges of variation, and extinction, and can withstand and recover from most perturbations.

**Ecosystem services:** The benefits people derive from ecosystems.

**Ecosystem value:** The planet-wide value of an ecosystem in the context of global biodiversity loss. Often referred to as “significance” in other contexts.

**Geocode:** Latitude and longitude values that uniquely identify a particular point or area on a map in decimal degrees format.&#x20;

**Home range:** The specific geographic area or territory that an individual animal typically occupies and uses for its essential activities. It represents the spatial extent within which an individual carries out its daily life functions such as foraging, mating, seeking shelter, and defending resources.

**Indicator species:** In this methodology, this term is specifically defined as inclusive of the more precise academic terms for sentinel species (indicative of environmental disturbances or pollutants), umbrella species (representative of a larger ecosystem for conservation management), endangered, locally endangered, or threatened species (at risk of extinction in the near future), and rare species (not commonly found or with a limited population its natural habitat).&#x20;

**“In situ” conservation:** The conservation of ecosystems and natural habitats and the maintenance and recovery of viable populations of species in their natural surroundings and, in the case of domesticated or cultivated species, in the surroundings where they have developed their distinctive properties.

**Monitoring period:** This is sometimes called crediting time and most projects will have a minimum monitoring timeframe of one years. Monitoring period should not be conflated with Unit time (one month) or the duration of an observation (60 days).&#x20;

**Net gains in biodiversity:** It correspond to the difference in gains in biodiversity values from the baseline of the project compared to the ones obtained during the implementation of the conservation project. Note: not covered by this version of the methodology which is conservation-only (see [Scope](/overall-description/scope)).&#x20;

**Risk of extinction:** The probability that a species will go extinct in a given period of time.

**Species:** Group of individuals or natural populations that are actually or potentially interbreeding, reproductively isolated from other similar groups by their physiological properties (reducing incompatibility between parents or sterility of hybrids, or both).

**Species richness:** The population of different species present in a particular area or ecosystem. It is a measure of biodiversity that quantifies the diversity of species within a given habitat or geographical region, but it does not speak to the abundance or distribution of the species.

**Species distribution:** The geographic area or range where a particular species is found and occurs naturally. It includes all the locations and habitats where individuals of a species are predicted to exist.&#x20;

<br>


# Getting started

Clear and transparent instructions for biodiversity crediting from an IP or LC project

**The instructions below provide the necessary steps for biodiversity crediting projects (BCPs) to demonstrate ongoing conservation outcomes by monitoring indicator species.** We detail the design and implementation of conservation-first ecosystem projects, projects that aim primarily to avoid the loss of intact regional biodiversity in biodiversity hotspots or equivalent ecosystems.&#x20;

It contains clear incentives for IP or LC to participate in, and benefit from these projects, thus reducing human predation through hunting or trafficking activities. The methodology delivers eligibility for third-party validation and results-based payments under emerging global market mechanisms. Initiatives must:

*(Note: Savimbo's requirements might differ slightly from that of individual crediting bodies. Each accreditation body such as* [*Cercarbono* ](https://www.cercarbono.com/)*adopting the standard might slightly alter this list and should be consulted directly for projects seeking certification rather than simply MRV.)*

* [ ] Design within the framework of the ten [Principles](/project-description/principles).
* [ ] Meet [Eligibility and inclusion requirements](/project-description/eligibility-criteria).
* [ ] Get [Baseline](/baseline-assessment) biodiversity measures for their ecosystem(s) from public data:
  * [ ] [Agents and drivers](/baseline-assessment/analysis-of-agents-and-drivers-of-biodiversity-loss) of biodiversity loss
  * [ ] Baseline [biodiversity richness](/baseline-assessment/baseline-biodiversity-optional) (if available)
  * [ ] [Ecosystem value](/baseline-assessment/baseline-ecosystem-categorization) and boundaries from a recognized source.
  * [ ] [Indicator species](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-selection) that qualify for monitoring, justification, and characteristics
  * [ ] Indicator species [integrity score](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-integrity-score)
* [ ] Describe their [Project](/project-description) in a PMP with site-specific data including:&#x20;
  * [ ] [Project boundaries](/project-description/project-boundaries) in time and space including jurisdiction(s), land rights, contracts, any ecosystem/jurisdictional segmentation, and potential leakage area.
  * [ ] [Implementation plan ](/project-description/implementation-plan)and methods,
  * [ ] [Monitoring plan](/monitoring-plan) and methods,
  * [ ] Indicator species [Observations](/project-description/implementation-plan/indicator-species-observations) in raw data (geocodes may be private).
  * [ ] Alignment with [Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)](/sdg-contributions)
* [ ] Continuously [calculate](/calculation) credits using the open-source code
* [ ] Continuously [monitor and report](/monitoring-plan) via crediting bodies/registries or MRV purchasers

We remain hopeful and determined that this methodology will have the intended effect of directly empowering the people with the biggest global impact on conserving biodiversity.

#### **Figure 2. Steps in applying the ISBM approach**

<figure><img src="/files/pBPhshslFqU2qXwqWf5m" alt=""><figcaption><p><strong>Figure 3.</strong> Steps in applying the ISBM approach</p></figcaption></figure>


# Introduction

Introduction to the biodiversity credit methodology

The Savimbo Indicator Species Biodiversity Methodology (ISBM) provides a simplified framework that protects resilient ecosystems. Central to the methodology is direct payment to Indigenous Peoples (IP) and local communities (LC), who are the on-the-ground land guardians.&#x20;

The methodology outlined in this paper may seem overly simplified to those accustomed to Western ways of thinking about science and measurement. But the aim of our methodology is to implement a solution *now*. Furthermore, its simplicity is backed by current understandings of complexity theory, ecological science, and Indigenous knowledge. Most importantly, it offers an immediate and scalable response to the urgent problem of biodiversity loss. Immediate action is key. Once a species is extinct, it can never be restored. Disrupted ecosystems take generations to restore. Therefore, this methodology prioritizes immediate action over all else. As earth systems science progresses, we expect to update the methodology.

The United Nations cites biodiversity as humanity’s best defense against climate change. According to IPEBS ([WWF 2022](https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/recognizing-indigenous-peoples-land-interests-is-critical-for-people-and-nature)), more than a million species are in danger of extinction within the next decade. Furthermore, [greater than 80% of the conserved biodiversity on earth is stewarded by Indigenous peoples](https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/recognizing-indigenous-peoples-land-interests-is-critical-for-people-and-nature). Unfortunately, these people are excluded from accessing existing carbon markets due to technical, economic, or socio-cultural factors ([World Wildlife Foundation 2020](https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/recognizing-indigenous-peoples-land-interests-is-critical-for-people-and-nature);[ National Geographic n.d](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/can-indigenous-land-stewardship-protect-biodiversity-).; [Gordon 2022](https://www.energymonitor.ai/policy/carbon-markets/the-interwoven-fortunes-of-carbon-markets-and-indigenous-communities/); [Andrés Bermúdez Liévano 2023](https://www.lasillavacia.com/historias/silla-nacional/two-indigenous-communities-excluded-from-a-carbon-project-in-their-ter/)).&#x20;

ISBM is a streamlined methodology, to meet one need: immediate activation of local and Indigenous people on the ground for conservation of primary and/or intact forests and intact biodiversity hotspots. To meet this market need, this methodology can be easily and immediately deployed. ISBM provides an immediate stopgap to preserve the habitats that are in danger today. It also appropriately remunerates Indigenous Peoples and small farmers for their work in preserving biodiversity ([Buys 2007](https://books.google.com.co/books?hl=en\&lr=\&id=bIbu--faGGgC\&oi=fnd\&pg=PR5\&ots=7z-EbwlBzf\&sig=wTbJ1xQGMsc3rjq7PfEWJtkpm_A\&redir_esc=y#v=onepage\&q=population\&f=false)).&#x20;

One of the most comprehensive reports on the economics of biodiversity notes: “From a financial perspective, just as diversity within a portfolio of financial assets reduces risk and uncertainty, so biodiversity increases nature’s resilience to shocks, and thereby reduces risks to the ecosystem services on which we rely… Reduce biodiversity, and the health of ecosystems generally suffers.” ([Christianson and Center for American Progress 2016](https://www.americanprogress.org/article/how-the-united-states-can-fulfill-its-critical-forest-pledges/)). The review also notes that quantifying the biosphere in economic terms is misleading: if the ecosystem collapses, life on Earth ceases, at which point the entire financial system is useless.&#x20;

The biosphere isn’t valuable because of its economic value. It’s valuable because, without it, there is no life on Earth.

<br>


# The urgency of targeted biodiversity conservation

Species extinction rates are more than 100X higher than any time in the last tens of millions of years

Given the current climate crisis, it is necessary to raise awareness about the benefits of wildlife conservation for humanity since human actions have modified their habitats, generated overexploitation of natural resources and polluted ecosystems causing the extinction of many species, the Amazon has been strongly affected during the last 50 years, increasing its temperature by one degree and decreasing 20% of its primary forest cover, which represents a turning point of death of the Amazon ([Nobre et al. 2016](https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1605516113); [Bochow and Boers 2023](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.add9973)), without taking into account the fact that wild species are forms of life that evolve and are a fundamental part to maintain the balance in each of the ecosystems that we have today and are sustaining the planet, added to the little recognition that Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities have for their long and effective task of in situ conservation, is how this proposal was born.

According to the World Wildlife Foundation, over the past 50 years, the planet has lost approximately 70% of the wild animal population ([WWF 2023](https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/69-average-decline-in-wildlife-populations-since-1970-says-new-wwf-report)). Extinction of species has occurred throughout the history of the planet. Compared to the past tens of millions of years, extinction rates of species are 100-1,000 times the average. And extinction rates are still rising ([Ritchie et al. 2022](https://ourworldindata.org/biodiversity)).&#x20;

#### **Figure 3. Global living planet index** [**(WWF 2022).**  ](https://wwf.panda.org/discover/knowledge_hub/all_publications/living_planet_index2/)

<figure><img src="/files/b8vG2gP7RrnmaB2wTgNC" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

Fortunately, a large percentage of the world’s biodiversity is preserved and protected today by an overwhelmingly untapped resource: Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Approximately 27% of the Amazon is occupied by Indigenous territories, which also contain the lowest rates of deforestation ([Josse et al. 2021](https://www.theamazonwewant.org/amazon-assessment-report-2021/)). Therefore, by including these people, we can protect these rainforests. A more inclusive methodology also addresses social inequalities. A booming demand for biocredits provides a market opportunity for investors as well as the people on the ground.


# Simplicity, complexity theory, and biodiversity

Earth systems science applied to biodiversity credits

This methodology breaks away from conventional scientific approaches, firstly, by recognizing climate as a complex system that now exhibits properties of a chaotic system. Therefore, this methodology is based on emerging science and theory regarding complex adaptive systems. Secondly, this biodiversity methodology does not attempt to classify and measure all of the species in an ecosystem. An estimated 7 million of the world’s species have not been characterized ([Mora et al. 2011](https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001127)). Finally, this methodology does not make the mistake of adapting carbon-crediting methodologies and trying to apply them to biodiversity.

The planet is in crisis and this methodology prioritizes clear and immediate action that provides measurable results. Today’s best planetary science also supports this earth systems science approach. &#x20;

Complex adaptive ecosystems maintain their resilience, that is, their ability to self-heal. In such systems, small changes can have oversized effects. Disruption can irreversibly knock them out of balance, and small conservation efforts can have butterfly effects much larger than the sum of their parts.&#x20;

By tackling these measurement challenges head-on, ISBMs approach provides a robust, nuanced perspective on biodiversity and ecological health. We strive to optimize our methodologies and remain receptive to ongoing scientific developments in the field.

ISBM is both grounded in complexity theory and also respects and aligns with Indigenous knowledge systems. Central to our approach is the selection of 3-30 indicator species in each bioregion. These species, encompassing a diverse mix of trees, birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, are chosen for their sensitivity and rarity, serving as living barometers of ecosystem health.

This approach eliminates the need for invasive and exhaustive scientific surveys in high-value ecosystems that are under-researched. As an example, two of our pilot sites in the Tropical Andean biodiversity hotspot discovered unrecorded high-value species during the first year of project implementation ([Bush Dog](https://www-eltiempo-com.translate.goog/colombia/otras-ciudades/captan-a-dos-perros-venaderos-en-el-putumayo-una-especie-canina-silvestre-en-extincion-802429?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=es&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp) in Villagarzón pilot [(Tobon 2023)](https://sciwheel.com/work/citation?ids=16124441\&pre=\&suf=\&sa=0), and[ Green Anaconda](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/23/americas/worlds-biggest-snake-amazon-intl-scli-scn/index.html) on Waorani pilot [(Woodyatt 2024)](https://sciwheel.com/work/citation?ids=16124449\&pre=\&suf=\&sa=0) ). We cannot afford to wait to quantify to conserve. Instead, this methodology is direct enough to be carried out by Indigenous and local communities and aligns with traditional ways of life and wisdom about preserving their environment.

Furthermore in the ISBM, projects are rewarded not for activities, or for *ex-ante* projections, but for *ex-post* outcomes [(Wilburn 2023)](https://sciwheel.com/work/citation?ids=16124366\&pre=\&suf=\&sa=0). Outcomes are measured and reported on an ongoing basis. This logic is consistent with complexity science as evidence shows that iteration for an outcome is more effective in designing changes for complex systems which often exhibit randomness, nonlinearity, and tipping points in systems-level change ([Resnicow and Vaughan 2006](https://ijbnpa.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1479-5868-3-25)).

By rewarding outcomes, in the form of indicator species, we increase real-time incentives for participants. This also frees BCPs to experiment and utilize all available means to achieve desired results. Further positive extensions of conserved habitat or indicator species are directly coupled to VBC crediting and thus promptly rewarded.


# Inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and local communities by design

The ISBM was written by and for Indigenous and local peoples

The ISBM has been co-developed over one year with an on-site collaboration of biologists, conservationists, and Indigenous small farmers who live in the Putumayo Amazon, technologists, and direct involvement of representatives from five Indigenous nations (Kamëntsá, Cofán, Pasto, Emberá Chami, and Inga). Each of these groups represents an essential contribution to its relevance (See detailed description in [Appendix H](/appendices/appendix-h-indigenous-authors), [(Zanjani et al., 2023)](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343523000453?via%3Dihub).&#x20;

To truly preserve biodiversity hotspots and functional rainforests requires a tremendous amount of work with both IP and LC, respecting cultural differences in perspectives of time and trust. But these groups have been excluded both by design, and ignorance — inclusion requires more than invitation and extends to investment, tools, and information [(Cheikosman, 2023)](https://www.weforum.org/publications/recommendations-for-the-digital-voluntary-and-regulated-carbon-markets/). Methodologies that are overly complex or structurally exclusive can be inadvertently harmful to IP and LC through financing corrupt behaviors or individuals [(Indigenous Environmental Network n.d.)](https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SB007_call_for_input_indigenous_Indigenous%20Environmental%20Network.pdf). But more importantly, they are simply ineffective as the people who best know how to preserve these species are the ones least consulted in markets intended to have that effect [(Estrada et al. 2022)](https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abn2927).&#x20;

This methodology was written by, and for, IP and LCs, and its impact is directly related to that focus.


# Biodiversity methodology benefits

Savimbo's approach offers unique benfits

Benefits of the ISBM approach:

* Capacity for immediate deployment.
* Bridging of communication between modern science and Indigenous ecosystems understanding.
* Simple and straightforward implementation.
* Understandable, unified remuneration protocol.
* Verifiable and scientifically provable evidence of biodiversity.
* Inclusion of populations that are vulnerable and have never before been able to benefit from the financial system.
* Consideration of the complexity of primary forest, based on scientific understanding of complexity theory.
* Downstream benefits to other ecologies that depend on maintaining resilient primary rainforests and other primary ecosystems.

Bridging modern and Indigenous perspectives for the preservation of the planet is the primary driver of the ISBM. Bringing together these forces is our best hope for the immediate preservation of the natural treasures and ecosystem services that are essential for human and planetary survival.

<br>


# Overall description

Purpose, scope, objectives, and limitations for the biodiversity methodology

This methodology is written for the general public to understand and to provide a framework for projects that want to implement VBCs. It provides project-level guidance and examples of how to implement the biodiversity methodology. It is intended to add to the mechanisms for global conservation of biodiversity by introducing or adhering to the following elements:&#x20;

* Adherence to [Principles](/project-description/principles) of completeness, reliability, conservatism, consistency, evidence, accuracy, and transparency.
* Reliance on public, verifiable data for ecosystem characterization ([Baseline assessment](/baseline-assessment)). &#x20;
* Intentional simplification of the primary data required from a project ([Project description](/project-description)) for IP and LC inclusion.
* An interoperable [Unit](/calculation/unit-calculations) for biodiversity crediting that collates well with other projects.&#x20;
* Automated [Calculation](/calculation) of ISBM VBCs using open-source software.&#x20;
* Credits can be used for certification and commodities sale, or merely as MRV for outcomes-based funding.&#x20;


# Objectives

Objectives of the indicator species biodiversity methodology

* Rapid implementation of economic models for IP and LC-led species conservation.
* Facilitate the inclusion of, and funds to, vulnerable populations and minorities who have a strong conservation history.
* Contribute to international biodiversity targets through voluntary actions by corporations, philanthropists, and any other parties who need transparent outcome metrics.
* Contribute to the national conservation goals of each country and their species inventories.


# Scope

Scope of indicator species biodiversity methodology

This methodology can be applied by any natural or legal person, public or private, that intends to establish a BCP that relies on indicator species monitoring. ISBM allows biodiversity preservation projects to qualify for payments for results or similar compensations, as well as to contribute to international mitigation in the framework of voluntary projects.&#x20;

The methodology cannot be used for offsets. We are [fundamentally opposed](/appendices/appendix-i-letters-of-support/miguel-chindoy-indigenous-leader) to [biodiversity offsetting](https://www.propublica.org/article/biodiversity-offsets-guinea-world-bank-group-chimpanzees-outbreak).&#x20;

The methodology is applicable to ISBM projects located in countries that have ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity ([Convention on biological biodiversity n.d.](https://observatoriop10.cepal.org/en/treaty/convention-biological-diversity)). Projects should align with local regulations and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans ([UNDP 2023](https://www.undp.org/press-releases/nbsap-forum-20-launched-support-action-and-collaboration-nature)). However it can be applied with permission in other countries.&#x20;

This methodology is applicable when a project is or is not in an overlapping situation with an NBSAP. In the overlap scenario, it allows for consistent monitoring between the ISBM baseline scenario, the project scenario, and the NBSAP.

The CBD activity ([Norden et al. 2015](https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1500403112)) covered by this methodology:&#x20;

* Conservation of biological diversity corresponds to the maintenance of intact biodiverse ecosystems that could have been eroded by hunting or habitat loss and is given because of the sum of the hectares that show full integrity during the resulting period in a baseline scenario that contains IUCN-threatened species, or IUCN threatened habitats under national or international standards.&#x20;

The scope of this methodology is designed for simplicity and rapid deployment. The first iteration of the methodology includes only conservation activities.  Future versions are likely to include restoration,  habitat management, or climate change-related activities under the CBD.

<br>


# Limitations

Limitations of the indicator species biodiversity methodology

This methodology does not seek to fully quantify biodiversity in its crediting area. Instead, it seeks to provide a fair, transparent, and usable proxy metric for the conservation of ecological zones which are known to be high-value targets for planetary health.&#x20;

While this methodology can show the extension of conserved ecosystem as rare and endangered species extend their habitats, and activity, it should not be used to show gains in ecosystem integrity (degraded ecosystem improvements). Which will fall under other methodologies that ideally can interoperate with our [Unit](/calculation/unit-calculations).

This methodology is not designed for use for a particular species. Instead, it is encouraged for projects to collect data from as many qualifying species as possible to demonstrate an intact ecosystem in many taxonomic kingdoms.&#x20;

As a standalone metric for conserved biodiversity, this methodology is designed to stack or bundle with other important ecological assets. Including soil, air, water, carbon, and equity. However, while it is possible for the presence of biodiversity to infer the presence of intact soil, water, and carbon flows, this methodology should not be used to quantify such inferences which would require specific ecological metrics that fall outside its bounds.<br>


# Project description

Data needed from an IP and LC project for crediting

The project description defines site-specific, project-generated data that is unique to the ecosystem, and IP and/or LC implementing the project.&#x20;

The calculation of VBCs is closely tied to the presence of indicator species within project boundaries and by extension a conserved ecosystem, not only for habitat but for biodiversity populations.&#x20;

Thus projects are rewarded not for activities, or for projections, but for outcomes, on an ongoing annual basis.&#x20;

The steps to follow for a successful BCP are outlined in the [Getting started](/getting-started) section.  They are intentionally simple because the methodology is outcomes-driven.


# Principles

Principles for biocredit projects and their operability at project level

The principles listed here aim for a fair representation and credible accounting of VBCs achieved by BCPs.

The principles set out the basis for the justifications and explanations required in this document and the BCP should refer to the relevant principles and how they have been applied according to Cercarbono’s Protocol and the guidelines of the CBS.&#x20;

1. **Accuracy:** Measurements that the BCPs align with or are reasonably close to the actual values of nature.&#x20;
2. **Coherence:** The results of biodiversity conservation in both the baseline and project scenarios must be comparable over time. Any changes in data, scope, calculation methods, or other factors that are relevant to the time series need to be clearly documented. The calculations performed by the BCP must be reproducible and technically validated so that they can generate consistently well-supported results.&#x20;
3. **Comparability:** The results obtained by the BCP activity should be comparable against the use of methodologies, guidelines, and protocols, among others, such that the estimation and calculation of biodiversity conservation achieved by the BCP can be independently assessed and comparable.&#x20;
4. **Completeness:** All significant data sources generated by the BCP shall be included, as appropriate to the type of program or project.&#x20;
5. **Conservatism:** Conservative assumptions, values, and procedures should be used to ensure that biodiversity losses are not underestimated and that biodiversity conservation is not overestimated. On the feasibility of using two values of the same parameter at the same scale, the most conservative one should be used.
6. **Consistency:** The assumptions, values, and procedures used by the BCP for the calculation of VBCs must be technically sound, consistent, comparable, and reproducible.
7. **Simplicity:** The methodology is designed to be easy to use, understand, and validate for local and Indigenous people and by the corporate, consumer, and financial clients who buy the VBC. Using streamlined and vetted science to efficiently solve for nature’s complexity.&#x20;
8. **Empowered participation and fairness:** Human, as well as environmental sustainability, is critical to climate impact. The methodology prioritizes full participation and consent of marginalized communities by their traditions, as well as appropriate compensation.


# Principles of working with IP and LC

International standards of working with Indigenous Peoples

Many of these principles are equally applicable to LC and we encourage a higher standard of accountability to these communities where appropriate. However, it is worth noting that IP have specific protections at the international level that must be recognized as outlined in United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN DRIP) ([United Nations 2007](https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf))

As this methodology is designed for by, and for, Indigenous Peoples, projects on Indigenous lands should also demonstrate intentional adherence to [Global Alliance demands](https://globalalliance.me/about/demands/.) in the design, including:

* **Land rights:** The rights of Indigenous peoples over the lands they occupy must be recognized.
* **Free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC):** Any intervention in IP territories must undergo a process of free, prior, and informed consent.
* **Direct funding:** Direct access to climate funding.
* **Protection of life:** IP conservation leaders must not continue to be criminalized or assassinated.
* **Traditional knowledge preservation:** Policies developed in IP territories must consider traditional knowledge, which needs to be incorporated into climate change strategies.

Projects must implement a fair and equitable way of distributing project funds to the actual individuals on the ground. The technology for funds disbursement must have safeguards against corruption and eliminate middlemen and other potential diversions or dilutions of funds from the people who are actually preserving the ecosystem. The methodology is designed to preserve endemic biodiversity by enabling Indigenous communities to become stewards of the ecosystem and deploying small farmers relying on traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyles to conserve the jungle and monitor for indicator species.&#x20;

Finally, BCPs must show a plan for equitable distribution of access to data from the project including promotional materials, project data about ecosystems and biodiversity, video and photographic data, and photographs of participants with IP and LC communities involved using FAIR and CARE guidelines ([Carroll et al. 2021](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00892-0)).


# Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria for projects wishing to use this methodology

The Indicator Species Biodiversity Methodology (ISBM) is applicable to projects that meet the following eligibility criteria:

#### **Table 1. Eligibility criteria for ISBM**

<table data-header-hidden><thead><tr><th width="178"></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Criteria</strong></td><td><strong>Description</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Project activities</td><td>Conservation initiatives aiming to maintain the “in situ” conditions” of biodiversity, avoiding losses in biodiversity. The conservation activities prevent the partial or total loss of an ecosystem, population or species, or the extinction of an endemic and or threatened species.</td></tr><tr><td>Implementation entity</td><td>Entities implementing the projects can be any recognized legal entity, but they should have a clear mandate from the local IP and/or LC to represent the project in their area.</td></tr><tr><td>Land rights</td><td>Proof of land ownership, possession, stewardship, or land-use rights must be legally valid and compliant with Cercarbono’s program requirements. BCPs must have documentation from all land-rights holders for project implementation.</td></tr><tr><td>Identification of stakeholders and beneficiaries</td><td>All IP and LCs must be identified, and their inclusion in remuneration from the project transparently disclosed.</td></tr><tr><td>Vulnerability</td><td>The project area is vulnerable to or on a trajectory towards biodiversity loss due to degradation and/or deforestation if no program is implemented.</td></tr><tr><td>Prior funding or stacking</td><td>As addressed in BCPP additionality section. The location to be conserved has not received previous funding through mechanisms that overlap in time or duplicateconflict with the funding to be allocated by biodiversity credit. Projects may only stack VBCs with carbon crediting if they can clearly demonstrate they are doing additional activities (over and above what they are doing for carbon).</td></tr><tr><td>Project Scale</td><td>The minimum project geography must encompass an area that is the size of the natural range of an individual of the indicator species that qualify for validation of biodiversity. Projects can include adjacent or non-adjacent properties with a trajectory to create contiguous areas.</td></tr><tr><td>Geographical location</td><td>No limitations. This methodology was developed with tropical rainforests in mind but it can be adapted with appropriate evidence for other geographies.</td></tr><tr><td>Legal projects</td><td>Projects must comply with all relevant local, regional, national, and international laws and regulations.</td></tr><tr><td>Project duration</td><td>Projects should be viable for the long-term future, preferably for a maximum of 30 years, but IP and LC contracts may be structured as autorenewing yearly, and cancellable after one year.</td></tr><tr><td>Governance</td><td>Governance of the project should be driven by a collaborative approach with IP and LC and transparency into all aspects of the project.</td></tr></tbody></table>


# Land ownership and law

Proving legal rights over the land being protected

Participants in the biodiversity crediting system must prove their legal rights to the land. Credits may go to owners and stewards of the land as well as individuals and organizations with other types of rights to the land (ie. hunting rights). All parties with legal rights to the land must be rewarded for preservation rather than exploitation of the land. The projects should provide a description of the property rights and land area involved.&#x20;

Land rights can vary from site to site, and must follow jurisdictional requirements. This methodology is specifically designed to allow IP and LCs with incomplete land rights to participate in conservation activities if they can provide clear proof of land tenancy. A sample land validation protocol is provided for the Colombian national jurisdiction ([Appendix B](/appendices/appendix-b-sample-legal-proof-of-land-control)).

The following types of legal rights are recognized by the ISBM:

* Legal ownership in the form of title, or&#x20;
* Land use rights (for example, hunting rights or logging contracts), or
* Stewardship (local groups allowed to occupy and sustain themselves on the territory).

The BCP must demonstrate or obtain the expressed written authorization of an individual, public or collective organization, holder, or administrator of the land and boundaries on which the project activity is implemented. If more than one type of legal right applies, all parties must provide authorization.  In the case of privately owned land, express proof must be provided by the owner or holder of the land authorizing the BCP to be carried out.&#x20;

The ISBM offers the provision for legal stewardship rather than necessitating outright ownership of the land, based on political, social, and cultural arguments in historically biodiverse zones. From a cultural perspective, many IPs simply do not recognize the rights of humans to “own” natural resources. On numerous occasions, ISBM co-originators have emphasized that the land cannot be owned only stewarded. In other cases, the government of the country may be maintaining legal rights to the lands and prohibiting full legal ownership by Indigenous peoples. In the absence of legal title to land, proof of guardianship or land stewardship can be used by the BCP, provided necessary documentation is submitted (For an example, see [Appendix B](/appendices/appendix-b-sample-legal-proof-of-land-control)).


# Additionality

Characterization of the project's need for biodiversity crediting

General additionality of this methodology must be demonstrated by applying the decision tree that appears in the current version of the Cercarbono's [Biodiversity Certification Programme Protocol](https://www.cercarbono.com/biodiversity-certification-programme/) and covers financial, normative, and regulatory surplus additionality scenarios, to demonstrate that the biodiversity conservation is directly related to the project activity(ies) and not an external source.

The additionality of actions measured by methodology in particular is simplified to enable IP and LC inclusion.

This methodology judges outcomes from the perspective of other species. Humans may make marginal improvements in degraded ecosystems, and certainly, for severely degraded ecosystems this can easily be a 200%-fold, or 300%-fold improvement. However, restored ecosystems can never be fully available to the complete variety of native species in the way that undisrupted ecosystems are.&#x20;

Thus, for projects occurring in high-biodiversity, high-threat ecosystems, additionality is inherent in the [Ecosystem characterization](/baseline-assessment/baseline-ecosystem-categorization) and [Value normalization](/calculation/value-calculations). For example, any intact ecosystem on an IUCN red list, or biodiversity hotspot ecosystem is inherently additional due to its threatened status.&#x20;

The [Integrity calculations](/calculation/integrity-calculations) in this methodology are meant to establish acceptable proof of a conserved ecosystem. Thus instead of providing evidence for a change, they provide reasonable evidence of no change which is inherently additional in a threatened ecosystem.&#x20;

In the context of conservation, where external sources have validated that an ecosystem is under threat, additionality merely needs to demonstrate that the project maintains the presence of biodiversity and that activities are not duplicated by other sources.


# Project boundaries

Boundaries of the biodiversity crediting project in time and space

Projects have spatial and temporal limits. The use of grouped projects is encouraged under this methodology which was designed for lateral spread and viral behavior change among, and between, IP and LC.&#x20;

The main input for identifying project boundaries is land enrolled in the BCP and thus eligible for crediting, and the dates of that enrollment. We will address each in turn.&#x20;


# Spatial limits of the BCP

Simplifying mapping for IP and LC participants

BCPs do not need to provide complex spatial data, such as [habitat mapping](https://www.space-intelligence.com/habitatmapper-landcover-mapping/) data to be eligible under this methodology ([Space Intelligence, n.d.](https://www.space-intelligence.com/habitatmapper-landcover-mapping/)). Many ecosystem classification systems and the tools for that classification are incomplete, untested, or financially and technically exclusive.  Thus we have intentionally simplified technologies and tools for describing projects spatially.&#x20;

However, the spatial limits of the BCP must be explicitly defined in the PMP for land rights, Indigenous rights, and crediting algorithms.&#x20;

### Data layers

A BCP may contain three spatial data layers: areas, indicator species observations, and segments. These must be identified and delimited.

* **Observations** are comprised of the union of home ranges of indicator species generated during a BCP ([Calculation](/calculation/area-calculations)).
* **Areas** allow for the macro division of the BCP, to separate surrounding areas from those where observations can be credited ([Calculation](/calculation/area-calculations)).
* **Segments** can be used for projects that overlap two different ecosystems (ie. ocean , coastline, and mangrove), or two different jurisdictional areas (ie, different landowners).

### Observations data layer

This data layer is generated by direct observations of the union of home ranges of indicator species during project implementation ([Area calculation](/calculation/area-calculations))

### Project area data layer

There are distinct project areas within a BCP, which may contain intact ecosystems as well as adjacent land, or ecosystems with some level of disruption.

Project areas are described below and depicted in [Figure 4a](https://isbm.savimbo.com/project-description/project-boundaries/pages/8Lo4ZWnsaIysqFPiiT1W#figure-4a.-diagram-of-spatial-areas-of-bcp).&#x20;

* **Reference area** is the geographical region or ecosystem(s) where the analysis of [agents and drivers](/baseline-assessment/analysis-of-agents-and-drivers-of-biodiversity-loss) of biodiversity loss is carried out, and [indicator species](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-selection) are defined. It should be bounded by micro-watersheds overlapping or adjacent to the BCP area. It is the broadest region of the BCP and includes all the other areas. The reference area must be defined in a geographic information system. It must include habitat areas and may or may not include non-habitat areas. The reference area is not subject to monitoring but must be re-evaluated in case of a reworking of the baseline scenario.&#x20;
* **Project area** is the legally enrolled land within the BCP. This is the area where the BCP has permission or contract to issue biodiversity credits within ([Eligibility criteria](/project-description/eligibility-criteria)). It is explicitly dedicated to biodiversity conservation, under contract with the BCP, and where the VBCs will be generated and rewards distributed. In grouped projects, land plots cannot overlap.
* **Crediting area** is the intersection of [indicator species observations](/project-description/implementation-plan/indicator-species-observations) and *project area*. Crediting areas may be segmented for ecosystems (different indicator species), value (different ecosystem threat classifications), or jurisdictional (crossing the border between two legal plots) reasons.&#x20;
* **Potential leakage area** is radically simplified for IP and LC inclusion to the area home ranges of species observed within, but extending *beyond* the Project area, animals likely ranging beyond crediting areas, this signal can be easily monitored from ongoing project data. If the analysis of agents and causes of biodiversity loss defines further drivers a BCP may decide to expand this area and describe and monitor a leakage management area for preventive action (See [Additional monitoring requirements](/monitoring-plan/additional-monitoring-requirements)).
* **(Optional) Project activities area** this optional area can be described by BCPs but is not required. One aim of the methodology is to allow for a wide, and fluid range of locally-determined activities and reward for outcomes — thus stimulating experimentation from IP and LCs who know their ecosystems better than outside agents.&#x20;

Since PI and CL often have small plots, this area will not always be contiguous and may consist of several separate patches within the reference area. Each of these patches must contribute to the project's conservation objectives, and their combined size defines the project area.

#### Figure 4a. **Diagram of spatial areas of BCP**

<figure><img src="/files/ghux4QdWO6KnTTfJO6JT" alt=""><figcaption><p><strong>Figure 4a.</strong> Diagram of spatial Areas of BCP with addition of the indicator species observations layer demonstrating creditable areas, buffer zone, total project area, and project boundary </p></figcaption></figure>

In developing your project, it's crucial to distinguish between the reference area and the *project area or crediting area*. The *reference area* refers to the entire geographical extent of the project, which might include both areas designated for conservation and other regions, such as infrastructure, human settlements, or areas that do not contribute to the project's biodiversity conservation objectives.

Some BCPs may obtain written permission to use indicator-species observations generated outside the *project area*, where home ranges extend within the *project area* but all observations must fall within the *reference area* as described below.&#x20;

As LCs frequently have small land plots, *project area* may not always be contiguous and could consist of multiple separate patches within the *reference area*. Each of these patches should contribute to the project's conservation goals, and their combined extent defines the *project area*.&#x20;

IP projects may be grouped with neighboring LCs in grouped projects. This is encouraged when all parties agree as it contributes to conservation outcomes. This difference does not require segmentation as it is merely a difference in land ownership, but it will require different inclusion parameters and FPIC protocols (See [Appendix K](/appendices/appendix-k-how-to-do-fpic)).&#x20;

In summary, crediting area is confined to the legally enrolled land, which is covered by a union of indicator species home ranges normalized to a circle. ([Area calculations](/calculation/area-calculations)). Home ranges that overlap legally enrolled land compose an important metric, the potential leakage area ([Spatial limits](/project-description/project-boundaries/spatial-limits-of-the-bcp)).

### Segments data layer

Projects that have substantial differences within the project area will need to be segmented for crediting. The most common reasons a project must be segmented are the following:&#x20;

* **Ecosystems** may change within the project area. For instance a large project that crosses ocean, to coastline, to mangrove swamps will have completely different ecosystem baseline classifications and indicator species.&#x20;
* **Threat** many projects may protect the borders of ecosystems with different threat levels, and thus different crediting values. (see [Value calculations](/calculation/value-calculations)). Indicator species observations must be segmented for accurate crediting.&#x20;
* **Jurisdiction** while projects that overlap countries borders must credit separately under Cercarbonos standard, grouped projects may overlap regional boundaries with different governing parameters such as states.

#### Figure 4b. Project area with satellite mapping

<figure><img src="/files/kacaeDC8HQz1i8TB1AAz" alt=""><figcaption><p><strong>Figure 4b.</strong> Project area for grouped project with satellite mapping showing segmentation by biodiversity hotspot boundaries.</p></figcaption></figure>

### Mapping guidelines

Please follow these guidelines when mapping your project, and determining its boundaries:

* **Ecosystems:** In line with the focus on maintaining and enhancing biodiversity within functional intact ecosystems, the boundary should primarily encompass regions that maintain their ecological processes. If the project contains more than one ecosystem, it needs to be segmented by ecosystem ([Baseline ecosystem characterization](/baseline-assessment/baseline-ecosystem-categorization)). &#x20;
* **Geographic description:** BCPs must provide a detailed geographic description of the project area in the PMP. This should include information about its physical characteristics (e.g., topography, climate), ecological features (e.g., ecosystem types, key species), and human aspects (e.g., land use, local communities). Describe any factors that might influence the project's implementation or outcomes.
* **Maps:** Include clear and detailed maps of the project and activity areas. Maps should include the project's geographic boundary and important features within it. Features could include habitat types, locations of key habitats, areas of particular conservation interest, ecosystem boundaries, and human settlements or infrastructure. Whenever possible, maps should be produced with GIS software or handheld GPS devices to ensure accuracy and clarity.
* **Boundary justification:** Provide a justification for the chosen boundary. Explain how the boundary aligns with the home range of the chosen indicator species and encompasses a functional intact ecosystem. Discuss any considerations or challenges encountered in defining the boundary, and how these were addressed.
* **Indigenous lands:** Include clear information about Indigenous lands included within or near the project area. Indigenous lands have different requirements for legal enrollment and must clearly delineated (See [Appendix K](/appendices/appendix-k-how-to-do-fpic)) . &#x20;


# Temporal limits of the BCP

Clear timing of the biodiversity crediting project

The temporal limits of the BCP must be explicitly defined in the PDD. VBCs may only be issued for conservation outcomes during the period determined by these limits. VBCs can be earned retroactively, see below.&#x20;

The temporal limits are the result of the long-term need for conservation against biodiversity loss, balanced against the contractual hesitance on the part of IP and LCs, the scientific limits of prediction in complex systems, acceptable market pricing, and the fundamental impermanence of biodiversity itself.&#x20;

The methodology was written to allow for annual crediting based on evidence of continued presence of indicator species, rather than an assumed future state. Temporal limits are defined by six different periods ([Figure 5](https://isbm.savimbo.com/project-description/project-boundaries/pages/Q3InCvaUHABsx5GvzF00#figure-5.-temporal-delimitation-of-the-bcp)).&#x20;

* **BCP start date:** The date on which the first on-the-ground actions were initiated, which led to conservation results. 5 years prior to the validation of the PMP if project activities are well documented and have constituted effective and proactive conservation.
* **Historical period:** Period in which ecosystem function, native indicator species, and drivers of biodiversity loss have been characterized. This period should not be less than five years before the project start date, and be justified for the stated CBD activities.
* **Baseline period:** Period in which agents and drivers, ecosystem data, and indicator species public data is monitored for changes. Baseline reassessments are required every 5 years and
* **BCP duration:**  Time range (in years) for the conservation contracts that are in place. Contracts with a maximum duration of 30 years are cancellable after 1 year. These 30 years can occur in three consecutive accreditation periods of 10 years each. Predicted biodiversity loss in the absence of intervention is optionally estimated during this period as data may be slim, and these projections are scientifically limited. The starting year of this period should coincide with the project start date where the first BCP interventions are carried out in the territory.&#x20;
* **Results period (VBC crediting period)**: Range of time (in years) over which BCP activities and the results of those actions are monitored in terms of observation of indicator species. The duration of this period is equal to the duration of the project activity and may not be less than one year.&#x20;
* **Verification times:**  The periods of time within the results period in which the issuance of VBCs is certified/verified based on the indicator species observational data. Baseline reassessments are required every 5 years and a maximum interval of 3 years between successive verifications is allowed.&#x20;

  .&#x20;

#### Figure 5. Temporal delimitation of the BCP

<figure><img src="/files/RGNnFAcmFrknUtXpIN0q" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>


# Grouped projects

Designing for viral behavior change among IP and LC conservationists and their neighbors

This methodology was specifically designed for behavior change and lateral spread between and among IP and LC, whether adjacent smallfarmers, around the borders of game parks, and between Indigenous groups and their smallfarming neighbors. Thus grouped projects are encouraged, and the design of grouped projects are specifically addressed.&#x20;

Grouped projects benefit biodiversity as animals range outside the borders of conserved areas, and ecosystem connectivity is a clear global conservation target [(Vilar et al. 2020)](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/aqc.3269).&#x20;

Projects can begin as, or convert to grouped projects, at any point in their progress. It is understood that  IPs have an international right to [*ongoing* consent](https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf), and both groups LCs [desire shorter-term contracts ](https://isbm.savimbo.com/appendices/appendix-i-letters-of-support/miguel-chindoy-indigenous-leader)specifically so they have the freedom to adjust to changing scientific standards or undesirable business relationships. Thus projects are allowed to reduce crediting area as long as the [1-year minimum](/project-description/project-boundaries/temporal-limits-of-the-bcp) crediting period has been met. &#x20;

Biodiversity is enhanced at the intersection of ecosystems, so it is possible a grouped project in the same geographic region may extend laterally to cover new ecosystems or indicator species. In this case, the project must provide segmentation and adjust the [Project description](/project-description) and [Baseline assessment](/baseline-assessment) if applicable. For instance, a wetland project extends into marine ecosystems, and when those projects are grouped, it enhances both environments. However, the indicator species may not be the same for those types of adjacent grouped projects. &#x20;

Once a BCP has implemented scalable infrastructure for the monitoring and reporting, scaling should be fairly straightforward. Updated Project boundaries can be provided during verification times if the [Monitoring plan](/monitoring-plan) remains internally consistent.

As a note, given 5 year retroactivity, and clear monitoring data in the Leakage area, there is a strong financial incentive for neighboring lands to convert to conservation, and claim retroactive crediting. This is by design, should be encouraged, and contributes greatly to the 20% growth in conserved areas and behavior change in hunting of rare animals (jaguar and harpy eagle) witnessed in the [pilot project](/appendices/appendix-h-indigenous-authors) for this methodology. &#x20;

In BCP projects using this methodology in de novo sites, it is strongly encouraged to start with a small area, prove the model sufficiently to IP and LCs first with tangible results then grow laterally year-over-year based on conservation successes and earned-trust.


# Implementation plan

How to implement a biodiversity crediting project

This methodology is applicable in resilient ecosystems with intact biodiversity that are under threat of a loss in biodiversity without intervention, or financial additionality. Projects should demonstrate a capacity to preserve endemic biodiversity by enabling IP and LC to become stewards of the ecosystem and deploying staff relying on traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyles to conserve the jungle and monitor for indicator species.

Each of the project activities must be under the responsibility of the project developers, and compliant with certification standards if applicable.&#x20;

Implementation plans have been intentionally simplified, as the primary data from a project is not a plan, but an outcome. Where possible, BCPs should provide a clear description of:

* Stakeholder relationships and analysis&#x20;
* Technical feasibility given available monitoring equipment
* Financial feasibility and costs associated with monitoring
* Legal feasibility within jurisdictional boundaries
* Risks and uncertainties
* Capacity and expertise, including IP and LC representation&#x20;
* Governance, including IP and LC representation


# Measurement approaches

How to use the ISBM measurements effectively

The ISBM methodology requires primary data for an indicator species observation. Primary data that qualifies under this methodology must be able to identify an indicator species accurately, and have a geocode, and a date-time stamp.&#x20;

Monitoring techniques that are not capable of delivering an accurate location for a species via triangulation or direct capture (ie, eDNA which could be generated anywhere along a watershed, untriangulated audio recordings) are excluded from this methodology. Identification techniques that are incomplete or inaccurate (i.e. uncharacterized DNA) are also excluded. However, some experimental approaches such as infrared drone may prove valid and useful and we do not preclude the use of techniques that meet the technical requirements.

Direct (video camera) AND indirect (e-DNA from monkey feces) observations are admissible in this methodology as long as the species being tracked can be geolocated by the indirect observation. For instance, feces from a spider monkey with a home range of 64km could not geolocate a tree whose fruit was found in the feces to sufficient accuracy, unless the crediting area extended beyond 4km in all directions of the observation, but it *could* accurately geolocate spider-monkey presence.

Raw data will require some post-processing with the identification of indicator species within the observation. And may require further processing such as auto-labelings of recordings, or triangulation of sonar.&#x20;

Observations must include:

* **Verifiable unique, primary evidence** of the presence of the individual species using appropriate equipment for the particular type of plant or animal. All evidence must be collected first-hand by the participants in the project, or neighboring sites within the spatial and temporal project boundaries ([Project boundaries)](/project-description/project-boundaries) and cannot be extrapolated from unaffiliated second- or third-party sources.
* **Geotagging and time-tagging of the evidence.** For areas where geotagging and time tagging are technically impossible, or financially unfeasible for the project, trusted participants/biodiversity guardians may provide written notarization of the observation time and location.
* **Species identification**. Ideally verified by a third-party such as iNaturalist.

The equipment chosen for the evidence is determined by the project itself. For example, in jungle areas, game cams may be the only viable means to use without disrupting the environment, and high-humidity might limit the use of audio-recording devices.  In the ocean, sound recording devices may be more practical for detecting whales. In state-managed parks, animals may already be tagged. ISBM recommends each project choose the technology that is least disruptive to the wildlife in their project areas.

It is important and relevant to note that this methodology has been democratized by a reliance on primary data. In this context, the raw data must be unique, of a high-quality, and accurately represent the BCP.


# Indicator species observations

Data generated from a indicator species project used in crediting

Indicator species observations require raw data (audio recording, video, or photo) date-time stamp, and geocode in decimal degrees format.&#x20;

For rare, threatened, trafficked, or endangered indicator species projects are encouraged to mask geocodes for public PMPs through free sites like [iNaturalist ](https://www.inaturalist.org/signup?return_to=https://www.inaturalist.org/aboput)or [Earthranger](https://www.earthranger.com/), and arrange private review by crediting bodies.&#x20;

#### **Figure 6. Indicator species observations with geocode and date-time stamp**&#x20;

<figure><img src="/files/aScJHK5u9C9TdQ0MYg43" alt=""><figcaption><p><em><strong>Figure 6b.</strong> Indicator species observations with geocode and date-time stamp.</em> Note: geocodes have been hidden.</p></figcaption></figure>

It should be noted that automated data such as satellite telemetry for game cameras is prohibitively expensive for most IP and LC projects. Therefore, the vast majority of projects will require trusted human coders to add geocode and date-time stamp metadata to observations. However, this does not fundamentally differ from the requirements for carbon studies in quantifying carbon load and is controlled for by independent IEP analysis of project data and  IEP site visits.&#x20;


# Risks and uncertainty

Ambiguity in project implementation

Indicator species are assumed to be impermanent in their very nature. And we acknowledge we are working in a complex, chaotic system. Thus under the ISBM methodology, credits are issued based on achieved outcomes alone and leakage (if relevant) is implemented at the program level ([Project areas](/project-description/project-boundaries) and [Monitoring plan](/monitoring-plan)).&#x20;

However, the PMP should include a pragmatic assessment of risk and sources of uncertainty in project metrics. It is recommended to acknowledge at least the following sources of uncertainty:

* **Uncertainty in the calculation process**: Probability of making errors in data entry, calculation, or interpretation of results.
* **Implementation uncertainty**: Project execution always involves some risk in terms of the ability of the team to carry out the program. Projects may encounter unforeseen obstacles, staffing problems, or other types of project management issues.
* **Technical monitoring device uncertainty**: how accurate is your chosen methods and what error do they produce?&#x20;
* **Biodiversity science uncertainty:** Biodiversity science is an evolving field, and projects often rely on external sources and incomplete science for indicator species selection, ecosystem classification, and the ability of the species to represent the ecosystem.
* **Risks in natural disturbances** (eg. forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, and droughts)&#x20;
* **Risks of human-induced events** (e.g. fires, acts of terrorism, and war).


# Effective participation

Ensuring full consent and active participation of Indigenous peoples and local communities

This methodology was written by, and for, IP and LC, and its impact is directly related to that focus.&#x20;

The ISBM has been co-developed over one year with an on-site collaboration of biologists, conservationists, and Indigenous small farmers who live in the Putumayo Amazon, technologists, and more than five [Indigenous groups](https://www.savimbo.com/indigenous) (Kamëntsá, Cofan, Pasto, Emberá Chami, and Inga). Each of these groups represents an essential contribution to its relevance (See detailed description in [Appendix H](/appendices/appendix-h-indigenous-authors)).&#x20;

To truly preserve biodiversity hotspots and functional rainforests requires a tremendous amount of work with the IP and LC, respecting cultural differences in perspectives of time and trust  [(Stewart and Gosling et al., 2021)](https://sciwheel.com/work/citation?ids=14951058\&pre=\&suf=\&sa=0). Methodologies that are overly complex or structurally exclusive can be inadvertently harmful to IP and LC through inadvertently financing corrupt behaviors or individuals. But more importantly, they are simply ineffective as the people who best know how to preserve these species are the ones least consulted in markets intended to have that effect.

*“Incumbent power structures have excluded diverse perspectives, by design or through ignorance. The facilitation of diverse voices needs more than an invitation. It requires investment, the provision of tools and information to bring all representatives to the same baseline of understanding on varied topics, from the complexities of carbon markets to the intricacies of Indigenous land practices.”* [*(Cheikosman, 2023)*](https://sciwheel.com/work/citation?ids=15064921\&pre=\&suf=\&sa=0)

Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) is a right and requirement that must be respected at all times and should not be framed merely as an “process of FPIC”. This requires that Indigenous Peoples can determine whether and how to be consulted, effective participation in decision-making, and the right to give or withhold their free, prior, and informed consent. A more detailed description of the key elements of FPIC can be found in Appendix H which is not comprehensive and should be tailored to BCP site and participating communities.&#x20;

Please note, the IEP must verify free, prior and informed consent through ground-truthing as outlined in Appendix I . Simply having it on paper or in a standard without detailed implementation guidance is not sufficient.

The ISBM was designed by and for IP and LC. If The BCP projects are not IP or LC run and/or managed they must have an effective participation protocol that includes:

* **A stakeholder map**, an institutional map of the governance structure or institutions and leaders associated with decision-making in the territory, associated with the BCP activities.
* **Consensual decision with local governance structures.** Which must include clear information about the nature, size, pace, reversibility and scope of any activity, including information about possible risks, benefits, should be made available as part of any FPIC process.
* **Mapping of FPIC processes** including a schedule of BCP decision-making meetings.
* **A conflict management protocol** which includes handling of petitions, complaints, claims, and requests, and their traceability
* **A document of agreement**, signed by the local community representative parties for the development of the BCP. In this case, community representativeness is given, as a minimum, by explicit agreement with the local governance structures and represented in their designated leader(s). &#x20;


# Community involvement

How the community benefits from a project, including data!

In addition to the methodology for proof of biodiversity, projects need to show that they have a fair and equitable way of distributing project funds to the actual individuals on the ground. The technology for funds disbursement must have safeguards against corruption and eliminate middlemen and other potential diversions or dilutions of funds from the people who are actually preserving the ecosystem. The methodology is designed to preserve endemic biodiversity by enabling Indigenous communities to become stewards of the ecosystem and deploying small farmers relying on traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyles to conserve the jungle and monitor for indicator species.&#x20;

Finally, BCPs must show a plan for equitable distribution of access to, ownership of, and crediting for data from the project including promotional materials, project data about ecosystems and biodiversity, video and photographic data, and photographs of participants with IP and LC communities involved using FAIR and CARE guidelines [(Carroll et al., 2021)](https://sciwheel.com/work/citation?ids=10929355\&pre=\&suf=\&sa=0).&#x20;

Many projects are the collaboration of public and private parties with IP and LCs. For projects which have public funding (eg. a UNESCO World Heritage site) and a local community involved (i.e. fishing villages protecting and surrounding the site). All parties, their motivation, and funding sources must be clearly identified.


# Capacity for action

Projects stakeholder engagement from the community

The organization executing the project must provide documentation of their capacity to successfully implement and monitor the project in their area. In addition to the legal documents, the team should have demonstrated project management capacities. Ideally, the organization will have IP and LC among the management team. When the project is not run locally or by local people, the project team should provide justification for the remote management and demonstrate the capabilities of the team to execute the project.&#x20;

This methodology places emphasis on IP and LC involvement. Therefore, projects should consider cultural competency in all aspects of working with Indigenous people, from the capture of data all the way through direct payments to the people on the ground. The project execution team must provide details that show their consideration of the full circle of activities, and that they have a clear and transparent plan for implementation of the program with IP and LC.

Capacity for action includes the financial capabilities for the deployment of the project. The project should provide its financial projections and capitalization tables for the organizations involved. When outside investors are involved, projects should be transparent about the return on investment expectation of outside investors. Biodiversity credits for ISBM cannot be used for offsets, therefore the financial expectations of investors need to be aligned with this use of eventual credits. ​The structure of agreements or contracts to ensure administrative capacity should consider [safeguards](/project-description/effective-participation/safeguards-checklist).


# Financial transparency

Projects must have financial transparency regarding their IP and LC relationships

Many ecological crediting programs have been conducted without the inclusion or profit sharing of IP or LC. In the case of biodiversity, the exclusion of IP and LC is directly detrimental to project efficacy as these are the stakeholders most likely to participate in predation activities if their livelihoods are not addressed.&#x20;

It is not within the purview of this methodology to enforce financial equity. There are many subtle, and non-subtle practices that have been deployed against IP and LC around the globe with reverberating economic effects — and many IP and LC communities will struggle to form projects de novo due to a lack of equipment or scientific training.&#x20;

While we hope that the methods we have outlined give IP and LC an equal, or perhaps advantageous playing field for biodiversity crediting, some projects will inevitably arrive for crediting with borderline financial practices. We have reduced the risk for IP and LC by enabling one-year contracts which allow them to seek the best business partners they can find. We are hopeful that financial transparency will reveal any undesirable practices for buyers, and that the market will join us in rewarding more equitable projects. &#x20;

In the case where landowners or BCP project developers are not the same as IP or LC, the BCP must explicitly define these populations and how, when, and in what proportion proceeds from VBCs are distributed to these communities. &#x20;

The value of the VBCs will be determined by the market, as will the percentages that need to be paid to the different parties. The ISBM will not define guidelines but instead requires full transparency of the mechanisms and amounts of remuneration of the different layers. While the different types of rights-holders may get different remuneration, they all have full transparency into the remuneration of the others in the preservation effort.&#x20;

It is within the purview of this methodology to require complete disclosure from projects as to four things:&#x20;

* How much of the company implementing the BCP is owned by IP and/or LC
* How much of the revenue from sale of biodiversity credits is given to IP and/or LC and in what format (pre- or post crediting, net or gross)
* How much  of the expense of project implementation is assumed by IP or LC
* What proportion of staff employed by the project is IP and/or LC,, and how much of project staff salaries is paid to IP and/or LC


# Safeguards checklist

Projects must have clear safeguards and complete the following checklist

It is recommended that the definitions and monitoring systems for safeguards considered in the BCP follow the guidelines that each country includes in their reports in accordance with UNFCCC decision 12/CP19.&#x20;

The implementation of activities and benefit sharing should be transparent and known to the communities and local governance structures in the BCP area. Most project benefits and monetized funding from the gross sale of biodiversity credits should reach communities through sustainable productive enterprises, payments for environmental services, or actions to strengthen local forest governance.

In the case of contracts between technical intermediaries and communities, it is recommended that these should not exceed 30 years, cancellable after 1 year, and with renewal options that honor the will of the communities.

In addition, The BCP must submit the following checklist:

* [ ] **Transparency of costs and market price:** Equality in the division of revenues is not always possible because of differentials in the land rights for certain areas, however, transparency is always achievable. Therefore, projects must put in place processes to ensure all costs associated with the project and the current market price of biodiversity credits are made transparent to all stakeholders. This information should be communicated in a clear and timely manner and allow for open discussions among the stakeholders such that there is no inequality of information access.
* [ ] **Land rights:** The project team is responsible for implementation and reporting on measures to avoid infringing land tenure and land use rights. The BCP should be based on the documented will of communities and landowners and no communities should be participating against their will. Agreements and contracts to demonstrate the administrative capacity of the BCP developer over its monitoring area should not include changes in holdership, possession, or occupation of communities, nor should they establish concession processes between communities and technical partners.
* [ ] **BCP actions should be complementary to national forest objectives:** Where there are conflicts between the national objectives and Indigenous rights, the BCP should include measures to align the interests and operate within the limits of national objectives. The project should cite which of the land's public policy goals it contributes to through the implementation of its activities.
* [ ] **Fair distribution of income:** Income from the project should be distributed in a way that is fair and also properly incentivizes people based on their land rights. It is recommended to utilize mechanisms such as smart contracts to directly distribute funds to individual community members' bank accounts. This will help avoid potential corruption risks and increase transparency. All financial transactions should be traceable and auditable.
* [ ] **Legal safeguards and exit clauses:** Incorporate legal safeguards and clearly defined exit clauses into contracts with IP and LCs, buyers, and investors. This will protect the rights and interests of all parties involved, and allow for safe withdrawal from the project under certain circumstances. Provide explicit provisions for contract revision or renewal.
* [ ] **Indigenous rights:** All agreements, contracts, and remuneration for biodiversity credits must honor the rights of the people who have been the historical possessors of the land. Recognize that the Indigenous groups have the right to take control of their own institutions, ways of life, their economic development or to maintain or strengthen their cultural knowledge, language, religion, etc., in accordance with ILO Convention 169.
* [ ] **Empowerment strategy for IP and LCs:** The innovation of providing income to IP and LCs means that they are being compensated in ways that may be new to them and may have implications in terms of their culture and empowerment. IP and LCs should have access to resources and education that will allow them to understand the implications of these changes so that they can implement an empowerment strategy for local communities, recognizing their vital role in biodiversity conservation. This should include capacity-building initiatives such as financial management and digital literacy training, and ensure respectful, inclusive engagement practices that incorporate local knowledge and preferences. The BCP must report on measures for the maintenance and promotion of the knowledge, practices, and techniques of IP and LCs.
* [ ] **Data accessibility and privacy:** Projects are required to make project data accessible to all stakeholders while respecting privacy and confidentiality obligations. This may require innovative communications strategies, such as providing audio information in Indigenous languages, capacity building for community leaders, and other provisions that ensure that people actually understand the data that they are seeing and also understand what data privacy they are entitled to. Establish clear protocols for data sharing to ensure stakeholders have the necessary information for informed decision-making and accountability.


# Calculation

Calculating biodiversity credits under the indicator species biodiversity methodology

The core of the methodology is this. We have a fungible, traceable, and culturally translatable metric for conserved biodiversity which is interoperable with other biodiversity metrics and methodologies.

A VBC under the ISBM represents 30 days of 1 hectare of a protected ecosystem with a value corresponding to the baseline [ecosystem value](/baseline-assessment/baseline-ecosystem-categorization) (normalized to [four levels](/calculation/value-calculations)). The protection of the ecosystem is determined by the presence of a qualified [indicator species](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-selection) and its [integrity score](/calculation/integrity-calculations). Which if <1.0, may result in fractional crediting.&#x20;

Here is an example site, with one year of data showing an interactive view of this methodology. Following, we will explain the sequential steps required to arrive at this view.&#x20;

#### Figure 7. Biodiversity credits appearing and disappearing over time with different species observations.

<figure><img src="/files/pD7ayqENCwH7z6OX5GWJ" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

It should be noted that calculations are simple in theory, and relatively complex in execution. The complexity has been offloaded to [open-source computer code](/appendices/appendix-g-sample-open-source-code-and-calculation) in order to make the observation points required at a project level simpler.&#x20;

Here we explain the theory and the logic of the computer code but recommend BCPs use automated calculations from a vetted source.&#x20;

However, all calculations can be easily automated, and open-source code for this is available [Appendix G](/appendices/appendix-g-sample-open-source-code-and-calculation) while manual calculations are demonstrated in [Appendix M](/appendices/appendix-m-how-to-calculate-a-biodiversity-credit-by-hand). &#x20;

The calculations are devised to avoid double-crediting under a simplified methodology that does not identify individual species. Any specific hectare of land can only be counted only once at any given time, and cannot achieve a value greater than 1.0, nor will it achieve full crediting if the indicator species found there does not merit it.&#x20;


# Unit calculations

This methodology uses an interoperable unit for biodiversity crediting

This methodology calculates biodiversity and issues VBC credits using an interoperable unit which is also used by other types of methodologies (eg. restoration or impact assessments). This allows for international accounting under Kunming-Montreal and NBSAPs. A full description of the Indigenous-led interoperable unit which has been negotiated with stakeholders cross-market is [here](https://unit.savimbo.com).&#x20;

In brief, the unit is:&#x20;

**A fixed** [**Area**](https://unit.savimbo.com/area) **of one hectare, for a fixed** [**Time**](https://unit.savimbo.com/time) **of one month with measured** [**Integrity**](https://unit.savimbo.com/integrity) **reported on a scale from 0-1. Where full integrity is an ecosystem with every ecological niche available to, and filled by, native species.**&#x20;

The unit is *independently* categorized by its location and assigned a [Value](https://unit.savimbo.com/value) (Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze) representing the underlying biodiversity density and threat of the ecosystem.

This methodology issues conservation biodiversity credits, therefore it is most accurate at the high-end of the Integrity scale, and is concerned with demonstrating *no change*, in the integrity of an ecosystem.&#x20;

The calculation formula for this methodology is:&#x20;

$$
\textrm{VBCs}= \sum\_{a \in A} \sum\_{t=1}^{T}  \textrm{Integrity}\_{a, t}
$$

Variables:

* Where a is the unit area (one hectare)
* Where A is the project area
* Where t is the unit time (one month),  the starting point of a unit time is t=0, and the end of the first unit time is t=1.
* Where T is the monitoring period

### Notes:

* [iVBCs and VBCs.](https://unit.savimbo.com/vbcs-and-ivbcs) Under Cercarbono's adoption of this methodology, and hopefully under others, the first year of this methodology’s adoption under certification bodies it will issue iVBCs.  After which if accepted by the market projects will automatically convert to issuance of VBCs.

The unit and the ISBM methodology were developed concurrently but have since taken on related but divergent paths. As many other types of methodologies began to adopt the unit for alternative biodiversity actions.&#x20;

Next we will discuss calculations of this unit that are specific to this methodology.&#x20;


# Area calculations

Calculating biodiversity crediting area from observations of indicator species

The full credited area for a BCP is dependent on the overlapping home ranges of the observed [qualifying indicator species](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-selection) that lie within the [crediting area](/project-description/project-boundaries/spatial-limits-of-the-bcp) — as determined by the union of individual observations within the same time frame.

Species are complex, dynamic, and diverse. Animals are typically observed at one geocode but have a far larger asymmetric habitat. For the purposes of simplification:&#x20;

* **Each indicator species' publicly-accepted home range area is normalized to a circle** around the central observation point where the species was verifiably observed. For details on this choice, see the [FAQ](/faq). See an example list of home ranges in [Appendix E](/appendices/appendix-e-sample-selection-of-indicator-species).&#x20;
* **Identification of individuals of a species is NOT required by the ISBM**. While it may be relatively easy to accomplish for an indicator species such as a jaguar (based on markings, or more invasively with an implanted radio chip), it becomes prohibitively difficult when taking into account the wide array of species that may qualify for indicator species within an ecosystem. Further, many identification and population calculation techniques are invasive, and/or technically exclusive to IP and LCs.
* **Observations are unioned.** Because individual observations could be one, *or many*, individuals of an indicator species —  *if* the same area contains more than one observation within a 60-day period the area is NOT double-credited, it is equated through a union of the home-range areas (see [Time calculations](/calculation/time-calculations)). Thus the ISBM methodology remains conservation-only, as population growth may be difficult to prove—although it is acknowledged that more sophisticated methodologies may emerge to define and credit these areas.&#x20;

A sample list of indicator species for Putumayo, Colombia with home ranges is provided in [Appendix E](/appendices/appendix-e-sample-selection-of-indicator-species).&#x20;

#### &#x20;Figure 8. Union of multiple jaguar observations to calculate crediting area from home range

<figure><img src="/files/i91gFulpF8ZRV8gp7oCe" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

Please note that species observations involve one data layer. For BCPs with [project areas](/project-description/project-boundaries) such as multiple adjoining land plots, grouped projects, or different segments, this layer might be split for calculations by another data layer.

#### Figure 8a. Division of a crediting area by a grouped-project boundary

<figure><img src="/files/8JLJLkYHABTJbFpKFLJI" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>


# Time calculations

Calculating biodiversity credits over time to avoid double-crediting

An observation from an indicator species has a base duration of 60 days. These days are defined as 30 days prior, and 30 days post the documented observation date-time stamp. The unit by contrast has a base duration of one month, or 30 days. So one observation issues at most *two* credits, one before and one afterward.&#x20;

This time period was chosen carefully based on the periodicity of subsistence lifestyles for IP and LC experts, the cost of monitoring devices for IP and LC, the incompletely characterized effects of electromagnetic fields from tracking devices on the full gamut of species within protected zones, and the potential for hunting or poaching to reduce animal populations during the monitoring period ([Appendix H](/appendices/appendix-h-indigenous-authors)). &#x20;

The system does not allow double-crediting, for observations overlapping in time. Observations occur fluidly throughout the monitoring period. Monitoring groups exhibit hunter-gatherer periodicity in work activities. Furthermore, animals have diurnal and seasonal variation in observed behaviors. The methodology accounts for this, summing observations to standardize crediting in both space ([Figure 9](https://isbm.savimbo.com/calculation/pages/0kitnsjozpAvA46xKYmB#figure-9.-union-of-observations-which-overlap-in-time-and-space-to-calculate-crediting)), and time ([Figure 10](#figure-10.-biodiversity-credits-appearing-and-disappearing-over-time-with-different-species-observat)).

1. The circle(s) representing the credited hectares for the observation points are first assigned a date-range, which may overlap in area with another observation point during the same time period,
2. If observations overlap in time, the area of the observations are unioned for each date,&#x20;
3. The resulting map is then clipped by the project boundaries to calculate the area to be credited,
4. The time period and map are then summed to present the total number of hectares that are available for crediting within that year.&#x20;

#### Figure 9. Union of observations which overlap in time and space to calculate crediting

<figure><img src="/files/btBmHsydt31SU1MXjhI0" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

Just as we credit only once for one hectare, even if more than one species is sighted, we credit only once per day for the hectare, even if there were multiple sightings that occurred with overlapping time periods. For example, if a sighting happened one day after a previous sighting in the same area, only one more day would be accounted for, not 30 days prior or after, because the delta is only that one extra day. This function in mathematics is known as the union of overlapping sets.

#### Figure 10. Biodiversity credits appearing and disappearing over time with different species' observations

<figure><img src="/files/kmPfIt9LLVI7TXQhkIAD" alt=""><figcaption><p><strong>Figure 10.</strong> Biodiversity credits appear and disappear over time with observations of different species.</p></figcaption></figure>


# Integrity calculations

Calculating the Integrity of the crediting area via indicator species with partial integrity scores

As discussed in the [Baseline assessment](/baseline-assessment), indicator species and thus their observation area have an [Integrity score](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-integrity-score) based on their ability to represent the rest of their ecosystem.

We have addressed the union of observations in space and time. While this is relatively uncomplicated for two observations from species that have an integrity score of +1 (fully representative of the ecosystem) it can become complicated in the presence of species that have partial integrity scores.&#x20;

This section explains the theory behind the summation of partial integrity scores, and provides some visual examples.&#x20;

Partial scores can be summed. Where multiple sightings occur, the species indicator scores can be added together, to a maximum of +1. For example, if two indicator species such as a Tapir, with a score of 0.5 were sighted at the same coordinates, on the same day, the combined score would be +1 and a full VBC could be issued for hectares in the overlapping hectares.

#### Figure 11. Summing overlapping partial integrity scores.

<figure><img src="/files/x5KkZw4i1MP3I0rN7yh5" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

Indicator species that offer full integrity, cannot be greater than +1 where they overlap, however a species like a Jaguar that has an integrity score of +1 will achieve the higher score on an overlapping area.

#### Figure 11a. Summing overlapping full and partial integrity scores.

<figure><img src="/files/2MMfp3oXjabV2QddoOeh" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

While partial integrity scores may not offer additional crediting benefit, a full spectrum of data gives projects more validity in their claims to represent an intact ecosystem, and factors into qualitative assessments performed by IEP in their final evaluations.&#x20;


# Value calculations

Calculating the planetary value of the ecosystem issuing a biodiversity credit

Not every ecosystem is created equal. If we apply biogeochemistry science to look at the planet as an organism, some ecosystems are organs (a liver or a kidney), some ecosystems are muscle, skin, or bones ([Boston, 2008](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780444637680007356)). Our planet has crossed 6 of 9 planetary boundaries ([Richardson et al. 2023](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458)), and urgent triage is needed for some ecosystems ahead of others.  The resources represented by biodiversity credits must be directed in order of planetary importance. Especially in the context of unequal access to scientific resources and advocacy for IP and LC guarding critical biozones.

For example, biodiversity hotspots contain a high level of endemic species and have undergone greater than 30% destruction which makes them incredibly high-value for immediate protection ([Kareiva and Kareiva 2017](https://oxfordre.com/environmentalscience/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.001.0001/acrefore-9780199389414-e-95)).&#x20;

To create a standardized metric of ecosystem value from the perspective of all species on the planet, we utilized [12 reputable public classification schemas](https://isbm.savimbo.com/calculation/pages/jzgaXpczHGAYrrjxSHSb#table-4.-accepted-ecosystem-categorization-schemas). BCPs must list their classification under these schemas in the [Baseline ecosystem categorization](/baseline-assessment/baseline-ecosystem-categorization).&#x20;

Under the [VBC unit](/calculation/unit-calculations) issued by this methodology, BCPs must [segment their crediting area](/project-description/project-boundaries) by ecosystem, then normalize the credits issued for each ecosystem to Platinum, Gold, Silver, or Bronze based on the following [Ecosystem value normalization table](#table-2.-comparison-of-vbcs-issued-with-normalized-ecosystem-value).&#x20;

#### Table 2. Comparison of VBCs issued with normalized Ecosystem value

| Type                                                                                                                                                                                              | Unit                                                           | Description                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| ![](https://lh7-us.googleusercontent.com/SdIHr2els-ZHb2dukzMxdffHK4kEMd8L6XQeyLbdsm6UuUpVunklyLRUa9z0fMjN0f-pO8MIOIG_zcP6d3puKJKkKzQAr86Z6wUmOSegR90GdfAwTfbw9tcAfJ_JSGg6tvTDuvliTohYSGqWrEVrCpU) | <p><strong>Platinum</strong></p><p>1 hectare</p><p>30 days</p> | VBCs issued from the highest density, highest-threat locations, ie priority hotspots, critically endangered ecosystems. This is the highest value VBC in terms of the number of species being preserved.                                                                                                                             |
| ![](https://lh7-us.googleusercontent.com/9PKBq231XXk9NzskobAQR_qaURIzkDPRPF_5do6EIs1pmTiYhttMqGu6tJvZwl_LlNK_k15KzIbvfQvSEfOFSrkDh8ejtrdUYECt9IeC03IN931EuqAPgbKERknHLz5CDsRtkEp6y1ddSONJ7fdq3Bk) | <p><strong>Gold</strong></p><p>1 hectare</p><p>30 days</p>     | VBCs issued from high-density locations, endangered species, recognized hotspots. This is a high-priority location that may not have as much urgency as the platinum areas but is still very rich in terms of the species being protected.                                                                                           |
| ![](https://lh7-us.googleusercontent.com/FQiOd-3w9Ywft7PnEDMUktxqGiwpP7NjhATa9ifQ6G8aeSicT-zV8vPgETAZVmtqpel9M5FNHO-yuf2ucqJTUwqx3_rhGYyUw1iakF-kqywlhPp0HEcUJ6djj9U6RkZ_bQh2vKCtJc7NfvbIzNO9Di4) | <p><strong>Silver</strong></p><p>1 hectare</p><p>30 days</p>   | VBCs issued from vulnerable areas but with lower biodiversity. Silver areas may still be pristine, but they are areas that naturally have fewer species living there due to the particular landscape. Silver areas can have significance because of their proximity (within 50 kilometers) to other higher-value biodiversity areas. |
| ![](https://lh7-us.googleusercontent.com/mkYfZpzxfPesRb5tUcCrcdEdhXnZoj3xcmX1PZqEcIOCOaUPYttEWD8V-FLqCP706vKMFSfR_ryQEhn2D_0wOEP7eThjO-F1fLHFLk95EDcbqiJEjeTf5LKAfCE1K9Nlx-gYrgm7o6SLxeLyO4SerTM) | <p><strong>Bronze</strong></p><p>1 hectare</p><p>30 days</p>   | VBCs issued from all other areas. May be of lower concern or lower density of biodiversity. Preservation adds value in terms of biodiversity load, but does not represent planetary ecosystem targets.                                                                                                                               |

Note that the relative monetary value of different value credits will be determined by the market demand for each type of credit and with market standardization, represent publicly recognized priority for preservation.&#x20;

### Ecosystem value normalizations

Please note, this ecosystem normalization table is acknowledged to be incomplete. Even the most respected organizations (IUCN, National Geographic, Biodiversity hotspots, WWF and UNEP among others) have incompletely characterized datasets. This methodology will not attempt to give a complete ecosystem value calculation and will instead utilize external resources to provide this ranking, acknowledging that future versions will have updated categorizations based on wider public review.&#x20;

#### **Table 3.** Ecosystem value for VBCs

| <p><strong>Category</strong><br><strong>Source</strong></p>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               | **Platinum**                                                                                                     | **Gold**                                                      | **Silver**                                                    | **Bronze**            |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------- |
| [Biodiversity hotspots](https://www.cepf.net/our-work/biodiversity-hotspots/hotspots-defined)                                                                                                                                                                                                                             | Inside a biodiversity hotspot                                                                                    | Within 50 km of a recognized hotspot                          | Within 100 km of a recognized hotspot                         | All other locations   |
| [CBD National targets](https://www.cbd.int/nbsap/targets/)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                | Deforestation region 2020 - 2030                                                                                 | Deforestation region 2030 - 2050                              | Within 50km from gold region                                  | No intrinsic ranking  |
| [Holdridge Life Zones](https://reddcr.go.cr/sites/default/files/centro-de-documentacion/holdridge_1966_-_life_zone_ecology.pdf)                                                                                                                                                                                           | Complexity Index ≥270                                                                                            | Complexity Index ≥90 and ≤ 270                                | Complexity Index ≥45 and ≤ 90                                 | Any other value       |
| [Irrecoverable carbon and irreplaceable biodiversity](https://irrecoverable.resilienceatlas.org/map?tab=layers\&layers=%5B%7B%22id%22%3A2162%2C%22opacity%22%3A1%2C%22order%22%3Anull%7D%2C%7B%22id%22%3A2331%2C%22opacity%22%3A1%2C%22order%22%3A1%7D%5D\&zoom=5\&center=lat%3D2.767477951092084%26lng%3D650.9619140625) | High biodiversity, any carbon ranking                                                                            | Medium biodiversity, any carbon ranking                       | Low biodiversity - high carbon                                | Any other ranking     |
| [IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology](https://iucnrle.org/global-eco-typo)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     | 50% probability of collapse within 50 years                                                                      | 20% probability of ecosystem collapse in within 50 years      | 10% probability of ecosystem collapse within 100 years        | Any other probability |
| [IUCN protected areas](https://iucn.org/our-work/protected-areas-and-land-use)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            | Categories Ia, Ib                                                                                                | Category II                                                   | Category III, IV, and V                                       | Any other category    |
| [IUCN Red List of Ecosystems](https://assessments.iucnrle.org/)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           | Critically endangered                                                                                            | Endangered                                                    | Vulnerable or Near threatened                                 | No intrinisic ranking |
| [IUCN Red LIst (of threatened species) - national level](https://isbm.savimbo.com/calculation/www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf)                                                                                                                                              | >1 species naturally occurs in project area and is Extinct in the wild (reintroduction) or Critically endangered | >1 species naturally occurs in project area and is Endangered | >1 species naturally occurs in project area and is Vulnerable | No intrinisic ranking |
| [Ramsar Wetland Classification](https://rsis.ramsar.org/)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 | Ramsar Category I                                                                                                | Ramsar Category II                                            | Ramsar Category III                                           | No intrinsic ranking  |
| [Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World](https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/terrestrial-ecoregions-of-the-world)                                                                                                                                                                                                     | Global 200 Ecoregions                                                                                            | Within 50km of a Global 200 Ecoregion                         | Within 100km of a Global 200 Ecoregion                        | All other locations   |
| [UNEP Forest Biodiversity Intactness Index](https://data-gis.unep-wcmc.org/portal/home/item.html?id=20b950b0dea045d1b0798a307ca9d8c1)                                                                                                                                                                                     | 100% intact forest ecosystem with minimal human disturbance                                                      | 75% intact forest ecosystem with moderate human disturbance   | 50% intact forest ecosystem with high human disturbance       | All other values      |
| [World Heritage List UNESCO](https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             | Natural assets                                                                                                   | Mixed assets                                                  | Cultural assets                                               | All other locations   |
| [WWF for Nature Ecoregions](https://www.worldwildlife.org/biome-categories/terrestrial-ecoregions)                                                                                                                                                                                                                        | 35 global priority places                                                                                        | Within 50km of a global priority place                        | Within 100km of a global priority place                       | All other locations   |

To date, many of the accepted ecosystem classification schemas are incomplete, or periodically updated. Given this limitation, within two competing rates, projects can select the ecosystem value that best serves their project, but must provide justification for their selection in the project scenario when two competing ranks are available.&#x20;

An example value calculation for Colombia is provided in [Appendix C](/appendices/appendix-c-sample-baseline-ecosystem-categorization) .&#x20;


# Baseline assessment

The use of public data in establishing project context

The baseline scenario in this methodology consists of [categorizing the ecosystem](/baseline-assessment/baseline-ecosystem-categorization), [estimating the biodiversity richness](/baseline-assessment/baseline-biodiversity-optional), and estimating the threat of [biodiversity loss](/baseline-assessment/baseline-risk-of-biodiversity-loss). Projects must update their baseline scenario once every five years with current data and [calculations](/calculation/value-calculations) may change as a result.

In the ISBM, unlike carbon projects, VBC calculations are not made from a projected baseline scenario, against a projected project scenario [(Pollock et al., 2020)](https://sciwheel.com/work/citation?ids=10899578\&pre=\&suf=\&sa=0). Rather, this methodology is simplified for direct market access to IP and LC.  In other words, these are not areas that need restoration or improvement, but these areas are in threat of being disrupted or damaged. Maintaining these intact ecologies, rather than changing them, is the appropriate outcome of these projects. The ISBM baseline scenario establishes the global value of, and threat toward, the BCP’s intact ecosystem from all publicly-available sources.  Then the BCP project scenario establishes the crediting area for that intact ecosystem.&#x20;

In this context, historical and projection data is useful, but not required as it may be very difficult to obtain, and prohibitively exclusive to IP and LC-led projects in biodiverse regions with a lack of access to research funding and in-situ researchers ([Appendix C](/appendices/appendix-c-sample-baseline-ecosystem-categorization)).&#x20;

Given the need for conservation prior to full quantification, external standards such as the IUCN Red List of ecosystems and geographically distributed data can serve as proxy metrics where baseline data is unavailable. However, baseline scenarios should be revalidated every five years for updated data.


# Baseline ecosystem categorization

As with other elements of the methodology, ecosystem categorization relies on publicly-available information. Unfortunately, public biodiversity research is often siloed under one classification schema or another. BCPs should identify their ecosystem classification in as many accepted categorization schemas as possible to extend the depth of public data which can be applied to their site.&#x20;

For example, biodiversity hotspots contain a high level of endemic species and have undergone greater than 30% destruction which makes them incredibly high-value for immediate protection ([Kareiva and Kareiva 2017](https://oxfordre.com/environmentalscience/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.001.0001/acrefore-9780199389414-e-95)).&#x20;

Table 3 shows the accepted ecosystem categorization schemes. A sample categorization for Colombia is provided in [Appendix C](/appendices/appendix-c-sample-baseline-ecosystem-categorization).

#### **Table 4. Accepted ecosystem categorization schemas**&#x20;

| **Name**                                                                                                                                                             | **Definition**                                                                                                                                                                                                                     | **Criteria**                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| [IUCN Red List of Ecosystems](https://assessments.iucnrle.org/)                                                                                                      | 509 ecosystem units                                                                                                                                                                                                                | Decline in distribution, decline in composition and structure, restricted geographic distribution, quantitative analysis.                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
| [Biodiversity hotspots](https://www.cepf.net/our-work/biodiversity-hotspots/hotspots-defined)                                                                        | 36 recognized hotspots                                                                                                                                                                                                             | Two strict criteria: Contain at least 1,500 species of vascular plants found nowhere else on Earth (known as "endemic" species). Loss of least 70 percent of primary native vegetation.                                                                                                                                                             |
| [CBD National targets](https://www.cbd.int/nbsap/targets/)                                                                                                           | Defined according to one of the ecosystem classifications or National Classification Systems, developed by countries                                                                                                               | Biome or vegetation Type, climate, biodiversity hotspots (high species richness and endemism), freshwater vs. marine, succession stage (primary / secondary), size and spatial scale (from micro-ecosystems to biomes), functional Roles (carbon sinks, water purification systems, or habitats for endangered species), anthropogenic Influence... |
| [IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology](https://iucnrle.org/global-eco-typo)                                                                                                | 8 realms, 14 biomes                                                                                                                                                                                                                | Realms (climate), biomes (convergent ecological functions), ecosystem functional groups (contrasting assemblages of species engaged in those functions). Designed for monitoring and reporting on ecosystem status, including the assessment of ecosystem services provided.                                                                        |
| [UN-FAO Land cover classification system (LCCS)](https://www.fao.org/land-water/land/land-governance/land-resources-planning-toolbox/category/details/en/c/1036361/) | 20 global ecological zones                                                                                                                                                                                                         | Climate (precipitation, temperature, and the length and severity of dry and cold periods), landform, soil, vegetation, water availability, biotic interactions.                                                                                                                                                                                     |
| [Holdridge](https://www.iucnredlist.org/about/green-status-species)                                                                                                  | 38 life zones                                                                                                                                                                                                                      | Biotemperature, precipitation, potential evapotranspiration (EVP), EVP/P ratio, latitude, and altitude.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |
| [Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World (TEOW)](https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/terrestrial-ecoregions-of-the-world)                                         | 14 biomes, 867 ecoregions                                                                                                                                                                                                          | Climate (temperature, precipitation, and seasonality), geology and soil type, topography, flora and fauna, natural disturbance regimes, and ecological and evolutionary processes.                                                                                                                                                                  |
| [UNEP Forest Biodiveristy Intactness Index](https://data-gis.unep-wcmc.org/portal/home/item.html?id=20b950b0dea045d1b0798a307ca9d8c1)                                | Assesses the impacts of forest management on biodiversity intactness across the globe                                                                                                                                              | Describes the average abundance of a taxonomically and ecologically broad set of species in an area, relative to their abundances in an intact reference ecosystem                                                                                                                                                                                  |
| [IUCN Habitats Classification Scheme](https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/habitat-classification-scheme)                                                           | 18 major, 108 minor habitats                                                                                                                                                                                                       | Biogeography, latitudinal zonation and depth in marine systems.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
| [WWF for Nature Ecoregions](https://www.worldwildlife.org/)                                                                                                          | 8[ biogeographic realms](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogeographic_realm), containing 867 smaller ecoregions. Each ecoregion is classified into one of 14 major habitat types, or[ biomes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biome). | Primarily designed for conservation planning and identifying areas of high biodiversity significance.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
| [Ramsar Wetland Classification](https://www.dcceew.gov.au/water/wetlands/ramsar)                                                                                     | 2,331 Ramsar sites in May 2018 covering over 2.1 million square kilometres (810,000 sq mi).                                                                                                                                        | Recognizes 12 Marine/Coastal Wetlands, 20 Inland Wetlands, 10 Human-made wetlands. Criteria: Sites containing representative, rare or unique wetland types, sites of international importance for conserving biological diversity (based on species and ecological communities, waterbirds, on fish).                                               |
| [World Heritage List UNESCO](https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/)                                                                                                        | It establishes that certain places on Earth have exceptional universal value.                                                                                                                                                      | Sites are chosen that combine the concept of nature conservation with the preservation of cultural sites.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |


# Analysis of agents and drivers of biodiversity loss

The analysis of agents and causes of biodiversity loss builds on the [eligiblity criteria](/baseline-assessment/baseline-biodiversity-optional) and is supported by secondary information collected on socio-economic variables of historical processes of biodiversity loss and habitat degradation. The agents and causes included are those that are associated with unsustainable uses of habitat zones, but also those that show the potential for reversal by project activities in the form of sustainable management or leveraged conservation processes including ethnic factors, cultural conservation, and livelihoods.

The analysis of agents and causes should be an iterative process, updated every five years as information becomes available, to improve the effectiveness of BCP actions (Figure 4).&#x20;

In its first iteration, the main results should be incorporated into:

* A first portfolio of BC activities. This methodology currently only includes conservation activities, but projects are encouraged to describe and define activities they used to achieve their outcomes.&#x20;
* The [spatial delimitation](/project-description/project-boundaries/spatial-limits-of-the-bcp) of the BCP areas, including the final location of the segments of BC activities.
* The [temporal delimitation](/project-description/project-boundaries/temporal-limits-of-the-bcp) of the BCP.

It is recommended that assessments are carried out on an annual basis according to the circumstances of the BCP. This means that the first diagnosis of causes and actors is done in the consolidation of the PDD, and once a year thereafter. Project findings and dialogues at the local level should be incorporated with new information on socio-economic factors, and the actions can be updated based on the annual assessment.&#x20;

The BCP should describe the drivers and causes of direct biodiversity loss, as well as the associated underlying causes that will determine the dynamics of BD activities (Table 2). It is recommended to use a variety of information (e.g., traditional knowledge, IP and LC experts, expert consultation, participatory social assessments, literature review, etc.).

Underlying causes are classified as those related to social, economic, demographic, technological, political, institutional, and cultural factors. The behavior of the underlying and direct causes should be described at the project level.

Clear knowledge of direct and underlying causes will aid BCP developers in designing targets for project activities that are effective, context-based, and IP and LC-informed.&#x20;

#### **Table 5. Drivers and causes of direct biodiversity loss.**&#x20;

| Activity/driver of biodiversity loss                                       | Mapping indicator                                                                                              | Common data sources                                                                                                                                  | <p>Common data sources</p><p>for biodiversity loss (national</p><p>level)</p>                                                                                                                          | <p>Examples of other</p><p>indirect data</p>                                                                                                                                              |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **DIRECT CAUSES**                                                          | <p><br></p>                                                                                                    | <p><br></p>                                                                                                                                          | <p><br></p>                                                                                                                                                                                            | <p><br></p>                                                                                                                                                                               |
| Commercial agriculture                                                     | Habitat destruction, large areas logged, post-harvest land use.                                                | Historical satellite imagery.                                                                                                                        | Traditional biodiversity or habitat inventories/field measurements.                                                                                                                                    | Commodity prices, agricultural censuses, share of gross domestic product, exports, etc.                                                                                                   |
| Subsistence farming, smaller crops, and rotational crops                   | Small, logged areas, usually associated with rotation cycles.                                                  | Historical satellite images with high temporal density or high resolution to determine rotation patterns.                                            | Traditional biodiversity or habitat inventories/field measurements.                                                                                                                                    | Population growth in rural and urban areas, agricultural imports and exports, and land use practices, etc.                                                                                |
| Expansion of infrastructure                                                | Road network, new mines, and built-up areas.                                                                   | Historical satellite images.                                                                                                                         | Traditional biodiversity or habitat inventories/field measurements.                                                                                                                                    | Growth in urban and rural population, infrastructure development programmes, import and export prices of raw materials.                                                                   |
| Climate change                                                             | Coastline changes, desertification.                                                                            | Historical satellite images with habitat mapping.                                                                                                    | IPCC Reports, national reports, remote sensing, and satellite data.                                                                                                                                    | Proxy indicators, comparison with historical records, paleontological data.                                                                                                               |
| Extraction of habitat products for subsistence, local and regional markets | Very small-scale canopy damage, understorey impacts, footpaths.                                                | Land use/land cover maps, remote sensing and satellite imagery, ethnobotanical surveys.                                                              | Biodiversity on-the-ground surveys in areas where products are extracted, scientific research papers, national biodiversity databases, government reports, conservation organizations, etc.            | Land use practices (e.g., agricultural burning), links to other activity data attributable to burning, fire prevention, and natural fires.                                                |
| Subsistence hunting or biological trafficking                              | Very small-scale canopy damage, understorey impacts, footpaths.                                                | Limited historical data. Information from local studies or national proxies. Only long-term cumulative changes can be observed by satellite imagery. | Limited historical data. Information from local scale studies. Community-based monitoring has a key role. Other indirect methods of measuring habitat changes can be employed.                         | Surveys and interviews with local communities, market surveys.                                                                                                                            |
| Other disturbances (e.g., uncontrolled fires)                              | Burn scars and associated impacts.                                                                             | Historical fire-related satellite data, analyzed in conjunction with Landsat-type data.                                                              | Regular estimation of biodiversity loss can be measured consistently for different periods depending on data availability.                                                                             | Vegetation sampling, monitoring indicator species.                                                                                                                                        |
| **INDIRECT OR UNDERLYING CAUSES**                                          | <p><br></p>                                                                                                    | <p><br></p>                                                                                                                                          | <p><br></p>                                                                                                                                                                                            | <p><br></p>                                                                                                                                                                               |
| Economic inequality                                                        | Land conversion and deforestation, resource exploitation.                                                      | National statistical agencies, household surveys, and international organizations.                                                                   | Biodiversity databases like IUCN, GBIF. Socioeconomic surveys that incorporate questions related to biodiversity interactions, Environmental Impact assessments (EIAs) Land use and land cover change. | Land use change and fragmentation, consumption patterns, socioeconomic surveys and household data.                                                                                        |
| Policy failures                                                            | Land conversion and deforestation, habitat fragmentation, resource exploitation, illegal wildlife trafficking. | Land-use change analysis species inventories, habitat quality and fragmentation assessment.                                                          | National and regional environmental agencies , research institutions, NGOs, biodiversity monitoring programs.                                                                                          | Conservation policy analysis evaluating the effectiveness of such policies , stakeholder interviews and surveys, including local communities conservation organizations and policymakers. |
| Weak law enforcement                                                       | Illegal logging and timber trade, protected area invasion, agricultural expansion, mining, etc.                | Land-use change analysis species inventories, habitat quality and fragmentation assessment.                                                          | Government agencies, NGOs,, Customs and borders control agencies , research and academic institutions, public reports.                                                                                 | illegal wildlife trade monitoring, satellite imagery and remote sensing, expert surveys and interviews.                                                                                   |
| Lack of local engagement                                                   | Habitat loss, loss of traditional ecological knowledge,illegal activities, fragmentation.                      | Land-use change analysis species inventories, habitat quality and fragmentation assessment.                                                          | Biodiversity surveys and inventories, community-based monitoring programs, traditional ecological knowledge, community organizations, stakeholder interviews and local surveys.                        | Community-based monitoring, local ecological knowledge social surveys.                                                                                                                    |
| Global demand for resources                                                | Land conversion and deforestation, resource and species exploitation.                                          | Land-use change analysis species inventories, habitat quality and fragmentation assessment.                                                          | Remote sensing and satellite data, Regional and national biodiversity inventories, Global Biodiversity information Facility (GBIF), IUCN.                                                              | Land use and land cover change analysis, global trade data, supply chain analysis, economic indicators, corporate sustainability reports.                                                 |


# Baseline biodiversity (optional)

Species richness, ecosystem characterization, endemic species and other metrics of native ecosystem

Data on biodiversity richness may not be available within ecosystem classification. Where it is available to a project it should be included.&#x20;

However, the ISBM does not require full biodiversity classification, only clear identification of indicator species that both the Indigenous people and global scientists recognize as distinct indicator species.&#x20;

Where possible projects must draw on publicly available sources to characterize species richness and endemic species for the following taxonomic groups: All identified species of trees, vascular plants, amphibians, reptiles, birds, insects, mammals, fish, and fungi.&#x20;

A sample table for Putumayo, Colombia is provided in [Appendix D](/appendices/appendix-d-species-categorization-of-richness).


# Baseline risk of biodiversity loss

Determining baseline risk of loss from public sources

The baseline risk of biodiversity loss can be extrapolated from public data at the level of the ecosystem (i.e., IUCN Red List ecosystem with a threat level of Critically Endangered) or it can be gathered from the list of threatened species native to the region (i.e., UICN Red List of Threatened Species native to the ecosystem). Habitat loss data such as deforestation rates for the zone from Global Forest Watch ([www.globalforestwatch.org/map](https://www.globalforestwatch.org/map/)) can be provided as supporting material.


# Indicator species selection

Selection and characterization of indicator species

Indicator species must be selected using a scientific, data-driven approach that considers local ecology, IP and/or LC needs and traditional knowledge of totemic animals, threat factors, and conservation goals.

Species must have documented sensitivity to environmental changes and an ability to represent the integrity of the broader ecosystem although this may be a partial score (see[ Integrity score](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-integrity-score)).&#x20;

Projects must characterize a full list of potential indicator species for their ecosystem meeting the criteria below. These lists are in the process of being normalized in public databases by independent experts. However, in the initial iteration of the methodology, projects are encouraged to review the list early, with external experts both IP and/or LC and regional academic or conservation biologists prior to implementing a monitoring plan. BCPs should make an effort to collect observations from all qualifying species but are recommended to have 1-3 main species for consistency in tracking and monitoring (see [Monitoring](/monitoring-plan)).&#x20;

### Qualifying categories of indicator species

Eight categories are available for consideration: Sentinel, Rare, Endangered, Umbrella, Trafficked, Keystone, Emblematic, and Endemic. BCPs must provide public research from a reputable source to identify the indicator species.

* **Sentinel species**: Provide published research from a reputable source to identify sentinel species, their reaction to environmental changes, and their ability to serve as a proxy metric for the ecosystem being conserved.&#x20;
* **Rare species**: Provide published research from a reputable source to identify rare species and their ability to serve as a proxy metric for the ecosystem being conserved.&#x20;
* **Endangered species**: Categorize all indicator species for IUCN level ([Appendix E](/appendices/appendix-e-sample-selection-of-indicator-species)), ([www.iucnredlist.org](http://www.iucnredlist.org)). Note that in order to qualify as an indicator species under threat level alone, the species must be IUCN status Critically endangered or Endangered on the subnational, national, or international level.&#x20;
* **Umbrella species**: Provide published research from a reputable source to identify umbrella species and their ability to serve as a proxy metric for the ecosystem being conserved.&#x20;
* **Trafficked species**: Include only those trafficked species that appear on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora ([CITES](https://cites.org/eng/disc/species.php)) list.&#x20;
* **Keystone species**: Provide published research from a reputable source to identify keystone species and their ability to serve as a proxy metric for the ecosystem being conserved.&#x20;
* **Emblematic species**: Provide published research from a reputable source to identify culturally significant species, such as their historical or mythological significance, role in traditional ceremonies or rituals, use in arts and crafts, or their symbolic representation in cultural narratives. IP and LC will often have totemic animals for their ecosystem and this knowledge should not be ignored as it often represents ecological understanding not yet appreciated by Western science. IP and LC also often have early warning signals of species threat which justifies the inclusion of species they put high priority on monitoring.
* **Endemic species**: Identify species as restricted to a particular geographic region and not naturally found anywhere else. Endemic species are important indicators of the uniqueness and ecological significance of a particular region.&#x20;

Many projects may end up identifying qualifying indicator species (e.g., harpy eagle for Colombia) which are rare, and may or may not generate observations. BCPs must take care to be inclusive of high-value species in their dataset of [Observations](/project-description/implementation-plan/indicator-species-observations), but realistic about the selection of species that can be reliably used for monitoring a large area (e.g., jaguar for Colombia). &#x20;

Species must be fully characterized including latin name, common name, IP and/or LC names where applicable, indicator type(s), national and international IUCN threat levels, CITES status, and home range (with scientific references). Please refer to [Figure 12](#figure-12-indicator-species-selection-example-for-colombia) below as an example of the indicator species in Putumayo, Colombia ([Appendix E](/appendices/appendix-e-sample-selection-of-indicator-species)).

#### **Figure 12: Indicator species selection example for Colombia**

<div data-full-width="true"><figure><img src="/files/w00Ng70B3ttkkEUjyqD1" alt="Example of indicator species selection table for Colombia. "><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

Indicator species must also be ranked by their ability to represent the ecosystem with an Ecosystem [integrity ratio](/calculation/value-calculations) between 0-1 where 1 indicates the full capability of representing the ecosystem. These scores must be supported by public data and will be reviewed by the IPE assigned to the project. A sample species list with external data for ratings is provided in [Appendix E](/appendices/appendix-e-sample-selection-of-indicator-species).


# Indicator species integrity score

The ability of indicator species to represent an intact ecosystem

An indicator species integrity score is intrinsic to the species, and its evolved niche in, sensitivity to, and fragility without, its natural ecosystem. It is generated from public data and/or traditional ecological knowledge.

The ISBM is designed to represent intact ecosystems, however, some easily-monitored indicator species may fail to adequately represent the ecosystem they are found in. Species that can live in contaminated systems will have a lower integrity score. Spotting one of those species gives only partial credit because the species could occur in an ecosystem that is not fully intact. However, species that are more representative may be difficult to monitor. To democratize the methodology for IP and LC which may be inexpert, or under-resourced monitors we have introduced an indicator species integrity score which allows for non-idealized observations in lieu of perfected data.&#x20;

&#x20;For instance, many IP may find a tapir easier to locate than a jaguar, and in many Indigenous nations across the Amazon, it is a totemic animal. However, it is not fully representative of an intact ecosystem, so it would have an integrity score of 0.5.&#x20;

After generating a list of [available Indicator species](/baseline-assessment/indicator-species-selection), they must also be ranked by their ability to represent the ecosystem with an integrity score between 0-1.0 where 1.0 indicates the full capability of representing the ecosystem. These scores will be used in [Integrity calculation](/calculation/value-calculations) and must be supported by public data if available, and expert opinion when not, and will be reviewed by the VVB assigned to the project.&#x20;

A sample species list with external data for ratings is provided in [Appendix E](/appendices/appendix-e-sample-selection-of-indicator-species).

#### **Figure 12a: Indicator species integrity score example for Colombia**

<div data-full-width="true"><figure><img src="/files/w00Ng70B3ttkkEUjyqD1" alt="Example of indicator species selection table for Colombia. "><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>


# SDG contributions

Contribution to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

Projects may wish to report their contribution to the UNSDGs. This methodology is specifically designed to preserve the environment with a directive towards financial inclusion and the preservation of local cultures. As a result of the design of each project, different SDGs may be relevant, and it is up to each project to evaluate the need for reporting on the outcomes as they relate to the SDGs.

Any projects reporting on their UNSDG goals must choose a maximum of five SDG focus areas, and include the specific target area by number. For qualification with UNSDG accounting, sub-topics must be specified for every goal. For each target, projects are expected to provide specific metrics and report on the metrics on a regular basis.&#x20;

For example, SDG Goal 12 is "Responsible consumption and production." The project might focus on "12.a — Support developing countries to strengthen their scientific and technological capacities to move towards more sustainable patterns of consumption and production." The metric to accomplish the goal could be the number of camera traps installed to capture indicator species.

<br>


# Monitoring plan

How to maintain a consistent metric for the integrity of an intact ecosystem

The ISBM is unique in that project data for crediting is, in and of itself, proof of monitoring, reporting, and verification. In this context, annual crediting and monitoring are the same activity.&#x20;

It should be noted that the unpredictability of animal tracking frequently leads to lapses in data collection. Because this is a results-only methodology, IP and LC groups can work as frequently or infrequently as they wish to. Although we caution that projects that begin with a large amount of observations, then taper off might be viewed with suspicion by an IEP.&#x20;

It is recommended that projects plan a simple, but sustainable monitoring plan that can be consistently conducted throughout the year, with a budget that accounts for equipment failures. It is better to have consistent sightings in a small area, than lots of sightings that taper off throughout the year.

BCPs should collect data from as many qualifying indicator species as possible. To standardize and scale operations they must select a minimum of 3 species from 2 different kingdoms for ongoing monitoring. &#x20;

We strongly suggest the use of pilot data in designing a monitoring plan as rapid iteration in the initial phases of a project are both desirable and encouraged. When selecting indicator species for ongoing monitoring please consider the following:

* **Clear link to biodiversity objectives:** Choose indicator species that have clear links to stated BCP activities. Ideally, the relationship between indicators and project objectives should be demonstrated by documentation of scientific literature.&#x20;
* **Multiple indicator species:** Natural systems are extremely complex, and even variables that are carefully chosen to reflect conservation may sometimes fluctuate for reasons unrelated to the project. While technically even one indicator species is enough to implement the methodology, monitoring only a few species may increase the risk of failing to document actual biodiversity. Although there is no single ideal number of indicator species to be monitored, each project should manage a balance between choosing too few indicator species and too many. &#x20;
* **Monitoring:** This methodology encourages BCPs to select some indicator species that are not too expensive to monitor, that can be easily monitored by members of the IP and LCs, and that are not dependent on outside experts or equipment. But the inclusion of rare species that are difficult to find provides a more comprehensive view of the ecosystem and should be considered.&#x20;

#### **Table 6. Example of simple monitoring plan**&#x20;

| Timeframe  | Indicator species | Data collection method                                                    | Monitoring frequency | Data storing method                        | Area monitored |
| ---------- | ----------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------- | ------------------------------------------ | -------------- |
| Year 1-5   | 5                 | Cell phones                                                               | Two months           | Airtable                                   | 10k            |
| Year 6-10  | 20                | Camera trap + cell phones                                                 | Two months           | Earth ranger database                      | 20k            |
| Year 11-15 | 30                | Camera trap, cell phones, audio recording                                 | Two months           | Private database connected to Earth ranger | 50k            |
| Year 15-30 | 50                | Camera trap, cell phones, audio recording, and selectively tagged animals | Continous            | Private database connected to Earth ranger | 16k            |


# Monitoring report

Summary of results during the monitoring period

The biodiversity credit calculation is automated and produces a report from observational data.&#x20;

The monitoring period and reports can be as frequently as 1 year, and as infrequently as 5 years and must include:&#x20;

* Changes in [Baseline assessment](/baseline-assessment) if applicable
* Adaptive changes in [Implementation plan](/project-description/implementation-plan)
* Any changes in project boundaries (such as scaling from a [Grouped project](/project-description/project-boundaries/grouped-projects)) with .kml format
* Any changes in Stakeholders, or project governance
* Secure upload of raw project data for indicator species observations
* Comparison report of Crediting area vs Leakage management area in hectares for current vs prior years of project implementation ([Project areas](/project-description/project-boundaries/spatial-limits-of-the-bcp#project-area-data-layer))
* Ideally publically-validated indicator species observations (i.e. iNaturalist)

The BCP shall include, in the monitoring report, a short qualitative summary of the activities carried out during each verification period and their effectiveness in terms of biodiversity conservation.


# Additional monitoring requirements

Projects of greater area or complexity

Where applicable, extended reporting may be necessary, including: ​​

* **Leakage reporting.** Projects that identified a [leakage management area](/project-description/project-boundaries) in their baseline assessment will need to include additional data in their monitoring plan to support the management of these areas.&#x20;
* **Habitat use and habitat change within the BCP area.** It is beneficial to monitor habitat loss, although the technology to do this well (ie. satellite mapping) may be exclusionary to IP and LC. The ISBM is designed to allow indicator species themselves to provide a proxy metric for habitat changes that are difficult to prove otherwise (degradation, noise pollution, poaching, etc.). Observations for indicator species also represent proxy metrics for project activities. Thus project data itself is ex-post tables of activity data by stratum carried out throughout the duration of the BCP. If sites already have this data, we recommend inclusion in monitoring reports.&#x20;
* **Impacts of natural disturbances and other catastrophic events.** Decreases in biodiversity from external forces over which the project proponent has no control including natural disturbances (eg. forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions,  floods, and droughts) or human-induced events (e.g. fires, acts of terrorism, and war) will be reflected in observations and crediting directly. If this occurs BCPs should include a description in their monitoring report. <br>


# Authors

Document authors, contributors, and Indigenous advisors

This methodology is a scientific translation of the traditional ecological knowledge of the Pijao, Pasto, Embera chami, and Cofan communities in the Colombian/Ecuadorian Amazon.&#x20;

Cercarbono, as a voluntary certification standard, has supported the elaboration and delivery of this methodology, developed by Savimbo Inc. and its internal technical team and endorsed by its board of advisors and CEO.

Authors fall into four categories: [Direct authors](#direct-methodology-authors) of the methodology, [Indigenous leaders](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/authors#indigenous-leaders) who have advised on its creation and piloting and independently informed its core tenets, [advocates and scientists](/appendices/appendix-i-letters-of-support) who endorse the methodology, and [reviewers](/document-history) who have publically commented on or otherwise informed its development without direct endorsement.&#x20;

### Direct methodology authors

<table data-header-hidden><thead><tr><th width="375"></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Methodology authors</strong></td><td><strong>Title, affiliation</strong></td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/dreaburbank/">Drea Burbank, MD</a></td><td>CEO, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://es.savimbo.com/blog/jhony-lopez-protector-of-the-jaguars">Jhony Lopez</a></td><td>Biodiversity, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/ana-isabel-lopez-rojas-1a5228138/">Ana Isabel Lopez Rojas</a></td><td>Biologist, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/rebeccarachmany/">Grace Rachmany</a></td><td>Ecology, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/enriquebalp/">Enrique Balp-Straffon</a></td><td>Computer science, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/darina-onoprienko/">Darina Onoprienko</a></td><td>Environment, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/prachs/">Prach Sri</a></td><td>Biotechnology, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://es.savimbo.com/blog/fernando-lezama-the-man-of-visions">Fernando Lezama</a></td><td>Indigenous rights, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/leyner-jamauca1/">Leyner Jamauca</a></td><td>Computer science, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariapaulanavas/">Maria Paula Navas</a></td><td>Biodiversity, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/juan-pablo-rivera-arredondo-36a6001b9/">Juan Pablo Rivera Arredondo</a></td><td>Biogeochemistry, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/griffinflannery/">Griffin Flannery</a></td><td>Impact metrics, Savimbo</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://es.savimbo.com/grower/lisandro-farm">Lisandro Mora </a></td><td>Biodiversity, Savimbo</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Note:** All contributing authors have been included according to[ ICMJE authorship/contributorship criteria](https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html\&sa=D\&source=docs\&ust=1692640291864244\&usg=AOvVaw3-5d-OiRF4t1uTiayaGJzU).

### Independent Indigenous leaders

Leaders appear in order of addition to the independent advisory panel.

<table><thead><tr><th width="205">Name</th><th width="210">Role</th><th width="146">Nation</th><th>Country</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Cipriano Tamaniza</td><td>Territorial leader</td><td>Embera Chami</td><td>Colombia </td></tr><tr><td>José Alberto Garreta Jansasoy</td><td>Governor of the Cofan Indigenous Reservation</td><td>Cofán</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>María Pastora Juajibioy Chindoy</td><td>Former Governor of the Kamentsa People</td><td>Kamëntsá (Camsá)</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Miguel Chindoy</td><td>Legal representative of the Asociación Indígena Agro Pueblos</td><td>Kamëntsá (Camsá)</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Esteban Camilo Rojas</td><td>Governor of the Indigenous Reservation of the Great Pastos Family</td><td>Pastos</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Ana Seneida Payoguaje Payaguaje</td><td>President of the Siona Tarabeaya Community</td><td>Siona</td><td>Ecuador</td></tr><tr><td>Julio Ricardo Solarte Ascuntar</td><td>Human Rights Coordinator - Asociacion De Cabildos Indigenas Del Pueblo Awa Del Putumayo</td><td>Awa</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Hugo Alexander Payaguaje Piaguaje</td><td>President of the Siekoya Remolino Community</td><td>Siekopai</td><td>Ecuador</td></tr><tr><td>Olmer Humberto Salazar Madroñero</td><td>Governor of the Nasa Community</td><td>Nasa</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Ramón Uboñe Gaba Caiga</td><td>Waorani Community Leader in Activist Communication</td><td>Waorani</td><td>Ecuador</td></tr><tr><td>Zoraida Chindoy Buesaquillo</td><td>Environmental leader of the Inga Reservation of Condagua</td><td>Inga Condagua</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Jattopa Rufino Antonio Ponare</td><td>Chieftain and Master of Tradition</td><td>Huottoja</td><td>Venezuela</td></tr><tr><td>Josefa Hernández Pérez</td><td>Leader of Candelaria Commnunity (Priestess)</td><td>Maya</td><td>Mexico</td></tr><tr><td>Patrick Anderson</td><td>Translational leader</td><td>Tlingit</td><td>USA, Alaska</td></tr><tr><td>Benji Ekolu Rodrigues</td><td>Translational leader</td><td>Kanaka maoli (Native Hawaiian)</td><td>USA, Hawaii</td></tr><tr><td>Autu Patrick</td><td>Prince - Batwa comunity</td><td>Batwa</td><td>Uganda</td></tr><tr><td>Demer Gonzales Vasquez</td><td>Coordination indigenous leaders</td><td>Shipibo Konibo</td><td>Perú</td></tr><tr><td>Jayesh Joshi</td><td>Leader from Maharashtra</td><td>Bhil</td><td>India</td></tr><tr><td>Goengalla Yin JummaJumma McLeod </td><td>Spiritual leader</td><td>Jaithmathang</td><td>Australia</td></tr><tr><td>Lyla June</td><td>Historical ecologist</td><td>Diné (Navajo)</td><td>USA</td></tr><tr><td>Datu Lanelio T Sangcoan</td><td>Tribal Leader of the Higa-onon</td><td>Higa-onon</td><td>Phillipines</td></tr></tbody></table>


# References

References updated from doc automation

UPDATE FROM: April 12, 2024

Becker, C. D., & Ghimire, K. (2003). Synergy between traditional ecological knowledge and conservation science supports forest preservation in Ecuador. Creative Education, 8(1). [https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00582-080101](https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol8/iss1/art1/)

Bermúdez, A. (2023, March 30). Carbon project, to heal serious exclusión of indigenous communities. [Https://Www.Lasillavacia.Com/Historias/Silla-Nacional/Two-Indigenous-Communities-Excluded-from-a-Carbon-Project-in-Their-Ter/.](https://www.lasillavacia.com/silla-nacional/two-indigenous-communities-excluded-from-a-carbon-project-in-their-ter/)&#x20;

Bochow, N., & Boers, N. (2023). The South American monsoon approaches a critical transition in response to deforestation. Science Advances, 9(40), eadd9973. [https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.add9973](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.add9973)

Boston, P. J. (2008). Gaia Hypothesis. In B. Fath (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Ecology  (Second Edition, Vol. 1–2, pp. 86–90). <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780444637680007356>

Bouckaert, R., Redding, D., Sheehan, O., Kyritsis, T., Gray, R., Jones, K., & Atkinson, Q. (2022). Global language diversification is linked to socio-ecology and threat status. <https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/f8tr6/>

Carroll, S. R., Herczog, E., Hudson, M., Russell, K., & Stall, S. (2021). Operationalizing the CARE and FAIR Principles for Indigenous data futures. Scientific Data, 8(1), 108. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00892-0](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00892-0)

Cheikosman, E. (2023, March 9). Recommendations for the Digital Voluntary and Regulated Carbon Markets | World Economic Forum (J. Knauer & L. Serota, Trans.). World Economic Forum. [https://www.weforum.org/whitepapers/recommendations-for-the-digital-voluntary-and-regulated-carbon-markets](https://www.weforum.org/publications/recommendations-for-the-digital-voluntary-and-regulated-carbon-markets/)

Christianson, A., & Center for American Progress. (2016, July 3). How the United States Can Fulfill Its Critical Forest Pledges. [Https://Www.Americanprogress.Org/. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/how-the-united-states-can-fulfill-its-critical-forest-pledges/](https://www.americanprogress.org/article/how-the-united-states-can-fulfill-its-critical-forest-pledges/)

Convention on biological biodiversity. (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity | Observatory on Principle . Convention on Biological Biodiversity. <https://observatoriop10.cepal.org/en/treaty/convention-biological-diversity>

Cox, N., Young, B. E., Bowles, P., Fernandez, M., Marin, J., Rapacciuolo, G., Böhm, M., Brooks, T. M., Hedges, S. B., Hilton-Taylor, C., Hoffmann, M., Jenkins, R. K. B., Tognelli, M. F., Alexander, G. J., Allison, A., Ananjeva, N. B., Auliya, M., Avila, L. J., Chapple, D. G., … Xie, Y. (2022). A global reptile assessment highlights shared conservation needs of tetrapods. Nature, 605(7909), 285–290. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04664-7](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04664-7)

Doerr, J. (2018). Measure What Matters (S. Frerich, Ed.). <https://sunbytes.io/app/uploads/2022/04/Measure-What-Matter-John-Doerr.pdf>

Estrada, A., GARBER, P. A., GOUVEIA, S., FERNÁNDEZ-LLAMAZARES, Á., ASCENSÃO, F., FUENTES, A., GARNETT, S., SHAFFER, C., BICCA-MARQUES, J., FA, J. E., HOCKINGS, K., SHANEE, S. A. M., JOHNSON, S., SHEPARD, G. H., SHANEE, N., GOLDEN, C. D., CÁRDENAS-NAVARRETE, A., LEVEY, D. R., BOONRATANA, R., … VOLAMPENO, S. (2022). Global importance of Indigenous Peoples, their lands, and knowledge systems for saving the world’s primates from extinction. SCIENCE ADVANCES, 8(32), 1–19. <https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abn2927>

Fischer, H. W., Chhatre, A., Duddu, A., Pradhan, N., & Agrawal, A. (2023). Community forest governance and synergies among carbon, biodiversity and livelihoods. Nature Climate Change. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01863-6](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01863-6)

Fischer, T., & Knuth, H. (2023, January 19). CO2 Certificates: Phantom Offsets and Carbon Deceit | ZEIT ONLINE. ZEIT ONLINE. <https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2023-01/co2-certificates-fraud-emissions-trading-climate-protection-english/komplettansicht?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Freddmonitor.substack.com%2F>

Gordon, O. (2022, November 16). Carbon markets and indigenous communities: interwoven fortunes. <https://www.energymonitor.ai/policy/carbon-markets/the-interwoven-fortunes-of-carbon-markets-and-indigenous-communities/>

ILO, I. L. O. (1989). C169 - Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169). <https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:55:0::NO::P55_TYPE,P55_LANG,P55_DOCUMENT,P55_NODE:REV,en,C169,/Document>

Josse, C., de Melo Futada, S., von Hildebrand, M., Moreno de los Ríos, M., Oliveira-Miranda, M. A., de Moraes Tenório, E. N., & Tuesta, E. (2021). Chapter 16: The state of conservation policies, protected areas, and Indigenous territories, from the past to the present. In C. Nobre, A. Encalada, E. Anderson, F. H. Roca Alcazar, M. Bustamante, C. Mena, M. Peña-Claros, G. Poveda, J. P. Rodriguez, S. Saleska, S. E. Trumbore, A. Val, L. Villa Nova, R. Abramovay, A. Alencar, A. C. Rodriguez Alzza, D. Armenteras, P. Artaxo, S. Athayde, … G. Zapata-Ríos (Eds.), Amazon assessment report 2021. UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). [https://doi.org/10.55161/KZLB5335](https://www.theamazonwewant.org/amazon-assessment-report-2021/)

Kareiva, P., & Kareiva, I. (2017). Biodiversity hotspots and conservation priorities. In Oxford research encyclopedia of environmental science. Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.013.95](https://oxfordre.com/environmentalscience/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.001.0001/acrefore-9780199389414-e-95)

Kimbrough, L. (2023, December 27). Photos: Top species discoveries from 2023. <https://news.mongabay.com/2023/12/photos-top-species-discoveries-from-2023/#>

Mora, C., Tittensor, D. P., Adl, S., Simpson, A. G. B., & Worm, B. (2011). How many species are there on Earth and in the ocean? PLoS Biology, 9(8), e1001127. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001127](https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001127)

National Geographic. (n.d.). Indigenous peoples defend Earth’s biodiversity—but they’re in danger. Indigenous Peoples Defend Earth’s Biodiversity. Retrieved June 15, 2023, from <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/can-indigenous-land-stewardship-protect-biodiversity->

Nobre, C. A., Sampaio, G., Borma, L. S., Castilla-Rubio, J. C., Silva, J. S., & Cardoso, M. (2016). Land-use and climate change risks in the Amazon and the need of a novel sustainable development paradigm. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(39), 10759–10768. [https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605516113](https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1605516113)

OECD. (2008). OECD Environmental Outlookto 2030. <https://www.oecd.org/environment/indicators-modelling-outlooks/40200582.pdf>

Pollock, L. J., O’Connor, L. M. J., Mokany, K., Rosauer, D. F., Talluto, M. V., & Thuiller, W. (2020). Protecting biodiversity (in all its complexity): new models and methods. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 35(12), 1119–1128. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.08.015](https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/abstract/S0169-5347\(20\)30230-5?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0169534720302305%3Fshowall%3Dtrue)

Rapacciuolo, G., Graham, C. H., Marin, J., Behm, J. E., Costa, G. C., Hedges, S. B., Helmus, M. R., Radeloff, V. C., Young, B. E., & Brooks, T. M. (2019). Species diversity as a surrogate for conservation of phylogenetic and functional diversity in terrestrial vertebrates across the Americas. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 3(1), 53–61. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0744-7](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-018-0744-7)

Rapacciuolo, G. (2024, February 27). Giovanni Rapacciuolo on LinkedIn: Knowledge of species diversity may be sufficient to preserve other dimensions of biodiversity. <https://www.linkedin.com/posts/giorapac_knowledge-of-species-diversity-may-be-sufficient-activity-7168337656769105920-_aOx/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios>

Resnicow, K., & Vaughan, R. (2006). A chaotic view of behavior change: a quantum leap for health promotion. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 3, 25. [https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-3-25](https://ijbnpa.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1479-5868-3-25)

Richardson, K., Steffen, W., Lucht, W., Bendtsen, J., Cornell, S. E., Donges, J. F., Drüke, M., Fetzer, I., Bala, G., von Bloh, W., Feulner, G., Fiedler, S., Gerten, D., Gleeson, T., Hofmann, M., Huiskamp, W., Kummu, M., Mohan, C., Nogués-Bravo, D., … Rockström, J. (2023). Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Science Advances, 9(37), eadh2458. [https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458)

Ritchie, H., Spooner, F., & Roser, M. (2022). Biodiversity - Our World in Data. Our World in Data. <https://ourworldindata.org/biodiversity>

Rodrigues, A. S. L., & Brooks, T. M. (2007). Shortcuts for Biodiversity Conservation Planning: The Effectiveness of Surrogates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 38(1), 713–737. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.38.091206.095737](https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.38.091206.095737)

Ruiz-García, M., Pinedo-Castro, M., & Shostell, J. M. (2023). Morphological and Genetics Support for a Hitherto Undescribed Spotted Cat Species (Genus Leopardus; Felidae, Carnivora) from the Southern Colombian Andes. Genes, 14(6). [https://doi.org/10.3390/genes14061266](https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/14/6/1266)

Song, L., & Barry, J. (2023, June 15). How the World Bank Group Is Enabling the Deaths of Endangered Chimps — ProPublica. Propublica. <https://www.propublica.org/article/biodiversity-offsets-guinea-world-bank-group-chimpanzees-outbreak>

Space Intelligence. (n.d.). Measure And Review Projects With HabitatMapper: Landcover mapping for measuring and reviewing nature-based solutions projects. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from <https://www.space-intelligence.com/habitatmapper-landcover-mapping/>

Stewart, J., Gosling, J., Corrigan, C., Jonas, H. C. J., Vaziri, L. V. Z., & Rubis, J. (2021). Summary of the global spatial analysis. Territories. <https://report.territoriesoflife.org/global-analysis/>

Tobón, A. V. (2023, September 4). Captan a dos perros venaderos en el Putumayo, una especie canina silvestre en extinción. El Tiempo. <https://www-eltiempo-com.translate.goog/colombia/otras-ciudades/captan-a-dos-perros-venaderos-en-el-putumayo-una-especie-canina-silvestre-en-extincion-802429?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=es&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp>

UNDP, U. N. D. P. (2023, May 22). National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs). <https://www.undp.org/press-releases/nbsap-forum-20-launched-support-action-and-collaboration-nature>

UNEP, U. N. E. P. (2003). Convention on biological diversity. United Nations Environment Program. <https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/documents/cop-07-09-en.pdf>

United Nations. (2007). Declaration on  the Rights of   Indigenous  Peoples. 53, 32. <https://sciwheel.com/work/item/16234350/resources/18934593/pdf>

United Nations, U. N. (1992). The Rio Conventions | UNFCCC. <https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-rio-conventions>

Vilar, C. C., Magris, R. A., Loyola, R., & Joyeux, J. (2020). Strengthening the synergies among global biodiversity targets to reconcile conservation and socio‐economic demands. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 30(3), 497–513. [https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.3269](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aqc.3269)

Wilburn, E. (2023). Eric Wilburn on LinkedIn: PACT Framework for NBS Carbon Crediting | 26 comments. <https://www.linkedin.com/posts/eric-wilburn_pact-framework-for-nbs-carbon-crediting-activity-7125798264016130048-VeNa/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop>

Woodyatt, A. (2024, February 3). Gigantic new anaconda species discovered in Amazon rainforest | CNN. <https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/23/americas/worlds-biggest-snake-amazon-intl-scli-scn/index.html>

World Bank. (2006). At loggerheads? agricultural expansion, poverty reduction, and environment in the tropical forests. The World Bank. [https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6735-3](https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/978-0-8213-6735-3)

World Wildlife Foundation. (2022). WWF | Living Planet Report 2022. Worldwildlife.Org. <https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/recognizing-indigenous-peoples-land-interests-is-critical-for-people-and-nature>

WWF, World Wildlife Foundation. (2020, October 22). Recognizing Indigenous Peoples’ land interests is critical for people and nature | Stories | WWF. Worldwildlife.Org. <https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/recognizing-indigenous-peoples-land-interests-is-critical-for-people-and-nature>

WWF, World Wildlife Fund’s. (2023, June 15). 69% average decline in wildlife populations since 1970, says new WWF report | Press Releases | WWF. <https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/69-average-decline-in-wildlife-populations-since-1970-says-new-wwf-report>

WWF, World Wildlife Fund. (2022). Living Planet Index | WWF. <https://wwf.panda.org/discover/knowledge_hub/all_publications/living_planet_index2/>

Zanjani, L. V., Govan, H., Jonas, H. C., Karfakis, T., Mwamidi, D. M., Stewart, J., Walters, G., & Dominguez, P. (2023). Territories of life as key to global environmental sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 63, 101298. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101298>


# Appendices

Project examples, IPLC input, and scientific support

The Appendices in this section are provided to contextualize the information in the ISBM by showing its application to a particular site in Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia, and providing information on how, and why this methodology was developed to serve IP and LC in this region, and scientific support for its wider application among IP and LC around the world. &#x20;


# Appendix A: Biodiversity methodologies comparison table

The WWF has identified 867 terrestrial ecoregions on earth’s land alone. Although the exact number of total existing species is still unknown, currently 1.7 million species have been identified ([Convention on biological biodiversity, n.d.](https://observatoriop10.cepal.org/en/treaty/convention-biological-diversity);[ Mora et al., 2011](https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001127); [W W F, n.d.)](https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/terrestrial-ecoregions-of-the-world). As markets emerge to protect them, there will likely be several biodiversity standards needed to properly value proper possession of this planetary abundance. [Table 7](#table-7.-emerging-standards-certifying-bodies-in-the-context-of-the-isbd) shows emerging standards, including standards from other certifying bodies in the context of the ISBD at the time it was originally written (July 2023).&#x20;

More comprehensive reports have emerged in the interim, including this [comparison table ](https://airtable.com/app8lx6rkX70v13EJ/shrvQcql5iO3M31PY)by Simon Gradeckas at [Bloom Labs](https://sgradeckas.substack.com/p/biodiversity-credit-calculation-overview), and more will likely certainly be added.&#x20;

To our knowledge, we remain [the sole IP and LC crediting methodology globally](https://sgradeckas.substack.com/p/biodiversity-markets-predictions) but we are hopeful this will change as more developers see the need for, and benefits of, IP and LC inclusion in both science and biodiversity projects.&#x20;

#### **Table 7. Emerging standards (certifying bodies in the context of the ISBD).** &#x20;

| Methodology                        | [SUAS-SLU](http://www.biodiversitycredits.se/)                  | [Terrasos](https://en.terrasos.co/_files/ugd/cfa1dc_815f6a56e3024acb9039179a6fc369ee.pdf) | [Plan Vivo](https://www.planvivo.org/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=6504e4df-fa6f-4529-9945-767b5c8252e0) (Replanet, Wallacea) | [Verra](https://verra.org/new-biodiversity-methodology/) | [Regen](https://library.regen.network/v/methodology-library/methodologies-in-review/call-for-public-comment/methodologies-open-for-public-comment/biodiversity-stewardship-tokens) | Cercarbono (Savimbo)                                   |
| ---------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ |
| Scope                              | Boreal forests                                                  | Global                                                                                    | Global                                                                                                                      | Global                                                   | Global                                                                                                                                                                             | Global                                                 |
| Crediting factors                  | Inventories (species richness, population size, remote sensing) | Habitat                                                                                   | 1% Δ metrics (5+ inc. targets, habitat, and ecosystem)                                                                      | Unavailable                                              | Umbrella species                                                                                                                                                                   | Indicator species                                      |
| Activities                         | Conservation, restoration and improved forest management        | Conservation, Restoration, Management                                                     | Conservation, Restoration, Management                                                                                       | Unavailable                                              | Conservation                                                                                                                                                                       | Conservation                                           |
| Certified                          | No                                                              | No                                                                                        | In pipeline                                                                                                                 | In pipeline                                              | No                                                                                                                                                                                 | In pipeline                                            |
| Unit                               | Land (ha)                                                       | Land (10m2)                                                                               | Land (ha)                                                                                                                   | Unavailable                                              | Land (ha)                                                                                                                                                                          | Land (ha)                                              |
| Incorporates traditional knowledge | No                                                              | No                                                                                        | No                                                                                                                          | Unavailable                                              | No                                                                                                                                                                                 | Yes                                                    |
| Land tenure                        | Unavailable                                                     | Ownership                                                                                 | Ownership, Stewardship                                                                                                      | Unavailable                                              | Ownership, Stewardship                                                                                                                                                             | Ownership, Stewardship                                 |
| Crediting period/ issued           | 20 yrs, ha/yrs                                                  | 20 yrs/Milestones                                                                         | 10-50 yrs/XXX                                                                                                               | Unavailable                                              | Every 5 yrs/unlimited renewal                                                                                                                                                      | 2 months/Annually                                      |
| Ecosystem classification           | Unavailable                                                     | IUCN                                                                                      | Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World (TEOW) classification                                                                   | Unavailable                                              | IUCN                                                                                                                                                                               | IUCN, CI biodiversity hotspots, UN-FAO LCCS, Holdridge |
| Issues                             | BC                                                              | VBC                                                                                       | VBC                                                                                                                         | Unavailable                                              | XXX                                                                                                                                                                                | VBC                                                    |


# Appendix B: Sample legal proof of land control

This methodology has been intentionally broadened to include both owners, and stewards of land

Carbon projects have failed in many areas where groups were unable to qualify for legal land rights, but still had control of the land, and thus [continued deforesting illegally](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/14/climate/congo-rainforest-logging.html).&#x20;

Biodiversity is different than carbon, animals are more likely to be hunted or trafficked by parties that have land access, but not necessarily land ownership. Therefore we have broadened the applicability of this protocol to the concept of land control.&#x20;

Land control is defined as, and may encompass: ownership of land, possession of land in a BCP, or stewardship of land in a BCP.  This methodology requires evidence of a BCP presence on, regular visitation to, or management authority over the land enrolled. And project areas must be entitled to receive payments to protect it.&#x20;

A sample protocol for land ownership as compared to land stewardship is provided in this annex for projects working under Colombian national jurisdiction. BCPs must follow national requirements for their jurisdiction.  &#x20;

#### B.1 Colombian land ownership requirements.

Under Colombian law, land can be held in ownership or stewardship. Ownership documents:

* Title: The legal title of ownership of the land. Resguardo titles are issued to Indigenous peoples.&#x20;
* Escritura: A deed which entitles the holder to legal ownership of the land.

The Colombian government requires Escritura or Title as a vehicle for proof of land ownership, and current international certifying standards for carbon markets do as well. &#x20;

#### B.2 Colombian land stewardship requirements.

In addition to ownership, Colombian law recognizes land stewardship, occupancy, or possession  through the Compreventa document.&#x20;

* Compreventa: Purchase agreement which is inadequate to prove legal ownership of the land, but can provide documentation of long-term stewardship for eventual progression to land ownership.&#x20;

A sample mechanism for legal requirements is given below.&#x20;

#### **Table 8. Additional requirements for documentation of land stewardship under Colombian law**

| Document                             | Requirements                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
| ------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Sale document                        | Authenticated or unauthenticated written document in which the sample applicant who acquired the property by sale must contain at least the date of subscription, the name of the seller and buyer, the sale price, the method of payment , the detailed description of the property.              |
| Affidavit of Sound Posession         | Declaration out of court before a notary, and signed by two wittnesses to exercise sound possession.                                                                                                                                                                                               |
| Community certification              | Certificate of being a member of the community action board of the respective jurisdiction where the property is located.                                                                                                                                                                          |
| Land survey                          | Location plan and location of the property. It must have a true description of the property, whether it is the registration page, topographic survey, description of boundaries and/or milestones where the location and area of the property and the surrounding areas are established in detail. |
| Property tax reciepts (if available) | You must prove the payment of property tax in applicable plot for the last 5 years.                                                                                                                                                                                                                |

<br>


# Appendix C: Sample baseline ecosystem categorization

Ecosystem categorization for pilot site in Villagarzón Colombia

This is a simple table to show the ecosystem for a sample BCDP in the Putumayan Amazon. This area has very sparse biodiversity research data due to historical violence and narcotrafficking in the region, which protected it from economic development but made it prohibitively difficult for researchers to access.&#x20;

Note that not all ecosystems will be found under each category.&#x20;

#### **Table 9. Ecosistem value for VGZ**

<table><thead><tr><th width="179"></th><th>Version</th><th width="123">Platinum</th><th width="105">Gold</th><th>Silver</th><th>Bronze</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><a href="https://www.cepf.net/our-work/biodiversity-hotspots/hotspots-defined">Biodiversity hotspots</a></td><td><a href="https://zenodo.org/records/3261807#.X8_HgNhKg2x">version 2016.1</a></td><td>Priority target (ha)</td><td>Recognized hotspot (ha)</td><td>Within 50km (ha)</td><td>Within 100km (ha)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>14543.1</td><td>3135</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://reporte.humboldt.org.co/biodiversidad/2017/cap2/204/#seccion4">IUCN Red List of Ecosystems for Colombia</a></td><td><a href="http://reporte.humboldt.org.co/biodiversidad/2017/cap2/204/#seccion1">Version 2017</a></td><td>Critically endangered</td><td>Endangered</td><td>Vulnerable (ha)</td><td>Least Corcern (ha)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>8031</td><td>9647.1</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://iucnrle.org/global-eco-typo">IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology</a></td><td><a href="https://global-ecosystems.org/explore/groups/T1.1">Version 2.0 (2017)</a></td><td>Major (ha)</td><td>Minor (ha)</td><td>Within 50km (ha)</td><td>Within 100km (ha)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>4070.7</td><td>1074.8</td><td>12532.6</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.cbd.int/nbsap/targets/">CBD National targets</a></td><td><a href="https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1470160X21003605-gr2_lrg.jpg">Version 2021</a></td><td>Deforestation region 2020 - 2030 (ha)</td><td>Deforestation region 2030 - 2050 (ha)</td><td>Within 50km (ha)</td><td>Within 100km (ha)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>1532.2</td><td>0</td><td>16145.9</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://data-gis.unep-wcmc.org/portal/home/item.html?id=20b950b0dea045d1b0798a307ca9d8c1">UNEP Forest Biodiversity Intactness Index</a></td><td><a href="https://data-gis.unep-wcmc.org/portal/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=20b950b0dea045d1b0798a307ca9d8c1">Version 2023</a></td><td>100% intact forest ecosystem with minimal human disturbance</td><td>75% intact forest ecosystem with moderate human disturbance</td><td>50% intact forest ecosystem with high human disturbance</td><td>25% intact forest ecosystem with very high human disturbance</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>14681.2</td><td>2135.1</td><td>575.9</td><td>285.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

<br>


# Appendix D: Species categorization of richness

Sample categorization of species richness for pilot site in Villagarzón, Colombia

Many of the most biodiverse regions in the planet have incomplete, or inaccurate data. Following is a sample table to show species richness, and biodiversity risk for a sample BCP in the Putumayan Amazon. It is incomplete. While the table is simple, the data itself, and data sources are characteristically underdeveloped.&#x20;

Some easy-to-use public data sources for gathering this data include (but are definitely not limited to):

* [iNaturalist](https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=7196\&verifiable=any\&view=species)
* [Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)](https://www.gbif.org/country/CO/about)
* [eBird](https://ebird.org/region/CO?yr=all)

Of note, traditional medicine doctors “taitas” in the region describe a medicinal plant formulary of nearly 3,000 vascular plants, nearly double the characterized vascular plants in Western science for the region.&#x20;

#### **Table 10. Species richness and biodiversity risk in Colombia**

<table data-header-hidden><thead><tr><th></th><th width="110"></th><th width="114"></th><th width="135"></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Taxonomy</td><td># Species</td><td># Endemic</td><td># Threatened</td><td>Zone</td></tr><tr><td>All species</td><td><a href="https://cifras.biodiversidad.co/">75,947</a></td><td><a href="http://reporte.humboldt.org.co/biodiversidad/2018/cap2/203/#seccion3">8,803</a></td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/search/stats?landRegions=CO&#x26;searchType=species">12,594</a></td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Trees</td><td><a href="http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/bccm/v11n1/v11n1a02.pdf">2197</a></td><td><a href="https://ierna.sinchi.org.co/informe/2-plantas-endemicas-de-la-amazonia-colombiana/">280</a></td><td><a href="https://ierna.sinchi.org.co/informe/3-plantas-amenazadas-de-la-amazonia-colombiana/">106</a></td><td>Putumayo</td></tr><tr><td>Vascular plants</td><td><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00126860">1223</a></td><td><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328150251_ENDEMISMO_DE_LAS_PLANTAS_CON_FLORES_EN_LA_AMAZONIA_COLOMBIANA_Endemism_of_flowering_plants_in_the_Colombian_Amazonian_region">346</a></td><td><a href="https://catalogo.biodiversidad.co/search/basic?kingdom=plantae&#x26;department=CO-PUT&#x26;threatUICN=LC&#x26;threatUICN=VU&#x26;threatUICN=EN&#x26;threatUICN=CR">121</a></td><td>Putumayo</td></tr><tr><td>Amphibians</td><td><a href="https://ierna.sinchi.org.co/informe/02-fauna-de-la-amazonia-colombiana-2021/">183</a></td><td><a href="https://ierna.sinchi.org.co/informe/02-fauna-de-la-amazonia-colombiana-2021/">8</a></td><td><a href="https://ierna.sinchi.org.co/informe/02-fauna-de-la-amazonia-colombiana-2021/">11</a></td><td>Wetlands, Putumayo/Caquetá/Amazonas</td></tr><tr><td>Reptiles</td><td><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357989857_Biological_diversity_and_ecological_networks_in_the_Amazon">371</a></td><td><a href="https://ierna.sinchi.org.co/informe/02-fauna-de-la-amazonia-colombiana-2021/">9</a></td><td><a href="https://ierna.sinchi.org.co/informe/02-fauna-de-la-amazonia-colombiana-2021/">14</a></td><td>Amazon rainforest</td></tr><tr><td>Birds</td><td><a href="http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/bccm/v11n1/v11n1a02.pdf">598</a></td><td><a href="https://ipt.biodiversidad.co/sib/resource?r=aicas_fase3#:~:text=23%20especies%20que%20cumplen%20con%20criterios%20AICAs%2C%20especies%20con%20inter%C3%A9s%20global%20y%20nacional%20en%20conservaci%C3%B3n%20(A1%20y%20CO1)%2C%20especies%20representantes%20de%20un%20%C3%81rea%20de%20Endemismo">23</a></td><td><a href="https://catalogo.biodiversidad.co/search/basic?class=Aves&#x26;department=CO-PUT&#x26;threatUICN=LC&#x26;threatUICN=NT&#x26;threatUICN=VU&#x26;threatUICN=EN&#x26;threatUICN=CR">141</a></td><td>Wetlands, Putumayo/Caquetá/Amazonas</td></tr><tr><td>Insects</td><td><a href="https://catalogo.biodiversidad.co/search/basic?kingdom=animalia&#x26;class=Insecta&#x26;department=CO-PUT&#x26;department=CO-AMA&#x26;department=CO-CAQ&#x26;habitat=Humedales_Ci%C3%A9nagas">190</a></td><td><a href="https://repositorio.accefyn.org.co/bitstream/001/43/1/ACCEFVN-AC-spa-1999-Insectos%20de%20Colombia..pdf">12</a></td><td><a href="https://catalogo.biodiversidad.co/search/basic?class=Insecta&#x26;department=CO-AMA&#x26;department=CO-CAQ&#x26;department=CO-PUT">6</a></td><td>Wetlands, Putumayo/Caquetá/Amazonas</td></tr><tr><td>Mammals</td><td><a href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&#x26;pid=S0370-39082013000200009">154</a></td><td>*</td><td><a href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&#x26;pid=S0370-39082013000200009%7D">19</a></td><td>Putumayo</td></tr><tr><td>Fish</td><td><a href="https://catalogo.biodiversidad.co/search/basic?class=Actinopterygii&#x26;class=Actinopteri&#x26;class=Sarcopterygii&#x26;class=Elasmobranchii&#x26;class=Chondrichthyes&#x26;department=CO-AMA&#x26;department=CO-CAQ&#x26;department=CO-PUT&#x26;habitat=Humedales_Ci%C3%A9nagas">46</a></td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>Wetlands, Putumayo/Caquetá/Amazonas</td></tr><tr><td>Fungi</td><td><a href="https://catalogo.biodiversidad.co/search/basic?kingdom=fungi&#x26;department=CO-AMA&#x26;department=CO-CAQ&#x26;department=CO-PUT&#x26;habitat=Humedales_Ci%C3%A9nagas">95</a></td><td>*</td><td>*</td><td>Wetlands, Putumayo/Caquetá/Amazonas</td></tr></tbody></table>

\* No data available, \*\* Estimations only


# Appendix E: Sample selection of indicator species

Example database with indicator species data for pilot site in Villagarzón, Colombia

A sample table of indicator species for our pilot BCP site in Putumayo, Colombia is shown in the table below. And you can copy and use a template for tracking your data:

* 1\) [<mark style="background-color:green;">Signup for Airtable</mark>](<https://airtable.com/invite/r/fxsn6mcE >) for free
* 2\) Copy the [<mark style="background-color:green;">Sample observation database</mark>](https://airtable.com/appCrJEBJX5lDwZ2R/shrTEy84ICs3dIXWm/tblSGRFmIU1FbLIQM/viwaSqv9TqSyU2Jds?blocks=hide) to use for your own BCP

Some easy-to-use public data sources for gathering this data include (but are definitely not limited to):&#x20;

* [International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)](https://www.iucnredlist.org/search/map)
* [World Wildlife Fund (WWF)](https://www.wwf.org.co/?316724/WWF%2DColombia%2Dpresents%2DLiving%2DColombia%2DReport%2D%2D2017)
* [iNaturalist](https://www.inaturalist.org/)

#### **Table 11. Species chosen as indicators for biodiversity crediting.** *Note: Please scroll right for full table.*&#x20;

<table data-header-hidden><thead><tr><th width="165"></th><th width="104"></th><th width="96"></th><th width="87"></th><th width="88"></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Name</td><td>IUCN category</td><td>National threat</td><td>CITES level</td><td>Home range*</td><td>Indicator type**</td><td>Ecosystem integrity ratio</td></tr><tr><td>Jaguar (<em>Panthera onca</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/fr/search/stats?redListCategory=nt">NT</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rec4jqYWMGmTNMmTJ/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">380</a></td><td>Rar, End, Umb, Key, Emb</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Spectacled bear (<em>Tremarctos ornatus</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22066/123792952">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recmHArOb8v1C1vSX/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">150</a></td><td>Rar, End, Umb, Emb</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Harpy eagle (<em>Harpia harpyja</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22695998/197957213">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recw3agg5WgAHzYWA/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">150</a></td><td>Rar, End, Umb, Key, Emb</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Black alligator (<em>Melanosuchus niger</em>)</td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recURoWqYipyOWbMx/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">0.13</a></td><td>Rar, End, Key</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Crested eagle (<em>Morphnus guianensis</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22695998/197957213">NT</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">NT</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recdmVLZHyPutypzl/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">17.3</a></td><td>Rar, End</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Mountain tapir (<em>Tapirus terrestris</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/21474/45174127">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">CR</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix II</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rec7pu9BWdufSVnSj/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">16.4</a></td><td>End, Umb</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Tapir (<em>Tapirus pinchaque</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/21473/45173922">EN</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">EN</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S2007-33642016000200271&#x26;script=sci_arttext">24</a></td><td>End, Umb</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Titi monkey (<em>Cebuella pygmaea)</em></td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/136926/200203263">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recOFxPeD2naiS28H/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">0.5</a></td><td>Rar, End</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Otter (<em>Pteronura brasiliensis</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/18711/222719180">EN</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/reciUEZ3xa5BtZ2Vn/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">19.5</a></td><td>Rar, End</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Anteater (<em>Myrmecophaga tridactyla</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/14224/47441961">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix II</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/reccjNEetzd4YU31Z/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">90</a></td><td>End, Umb</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Charapa turtle (<em>Podocnemis unifilis</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/17825/97397562">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">EN</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/reciNydVaLFrxGPUR/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">420</a></td><td>End, Umb</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Spike (<em>Ocotea quixos</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/192556503/192556553">LC</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">EN</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rectYpnSmB2vTCSu3/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">64</a></td><td>Rar, End</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Cedar (<em>Cedrela Odorata</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/32292/68080590">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">EN</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix III</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rec1mJMnxY6U5Gg3H/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">615.8</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Military macaw (<em>Ara militaris</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22685548/179407584">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix II</a></td><td><a href="http://esearchgate.net/publication/275973154_Estado_del_conocimiento_y_nuevos_aportes_sobre_la_historia_natural_del_Guacamayo_Verde_Ara_militaris">125</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Giant armadillo (<em>Priodontes maximus</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/18144/47442343">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">EN</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recnLenKm0EDdVcua/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">4.5</a></td><td>Rare</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Wattled curassow (<em>Crax globulosa</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22678537/92777596">EN</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">EN</a></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix II</a></td><td><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/19400829211026170">0.963</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Black-and-chestnut eagle (<em>Morphnus guianensis</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22695991/118209977">EN</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">EN</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recdmVLZHyPutypzl/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">0.5</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Yellow pony (<em>Handroanthus serratifolius</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/61985509/145677076">EN</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recz1T08gNMmLYq4P/fldLOV4K3eXX30EPS?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">615.8</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Ribs (<em>Ampelocera albertiae</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/169480988/181628415">EN</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recQYg8JLFk7TStGC/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">100</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Avocado (<em>Persea schiedeana</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/34402/172963980">EN</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recO893LqVWNDRsIy/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">615.8</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Churuco (<em>Lagothrix lagotricha</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/160881218/192309103">VU</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recPRkWVAegIeoTWd/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">11</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Coppery-chested jacamar (<em>Galbula pastazae</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22682206/209328844">LC</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://birdscolombia.com/2021/03/01/jacamar-cobrizo-coppery-chested-jacamar-galbula-pastazae/#:~:text=Se%20estima%20que%20hay%201.1%20y%201.8%20individuos%20por%20km2">1</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Agami heron (<em>Agamia agami</em>)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22697200/93602031">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/26428227">1250</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>(Nymphargus siren)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/54992/85874078">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10531-021-02117-7">0.4</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Gualanday (Jacaranda mimosifolia)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/32027/68135641">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rec2v8pf0WmH1mp77/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">50</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>White barbi hillock (Tayassu pecari)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/41778/44051115">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rec5UDIeCw1WzFMzB/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">200</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Solitary eagle (Buteogallus solitarius)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22695849/179321501">NT</a></td><td><a href="https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/resolucion-1912-de-2017.pdf">CR</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jean-Marc-Thiollay/publication/238747661_Censusing_of_diurnal_raptors_in_a_primary_rainforest_Comparative_methods_and_species_detectability/links/55b79d7108ae092e965726d9/Censusing-of-diurnal-raptors-in-a-primary-rainforest-Comparative-methods-and-species-detectability.pdf">100</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Smoked barbecue (Minquartia guianensis)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/32956/9737660">NT</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recOdLeIhQYGLsVVi/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">8</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Blue kettle (Aburria aburri)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22678440/92773628">NT</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recEE4IhabNkm0fFO/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">1</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Real toucan (Ramphastos ambiguus ambiguus)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22727999/94967701">NT</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recE4j4O7ZByIMbvT/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">450</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Ornate hawk-eagle (Spizaetus ornatus)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22696197/211084620">NT</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://journals.sfu.ca/ornneo/index.php/ornneo/article/download/316/ON%2029%20%282018%29%20153-158.pdf/2342">4</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Mountain cypress (Austrocedrus chilensis)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/31359/2805519">NT</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recudgn696hGdN2tt/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">12.6</a></td><td>End</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>(Hemiphractus bubalus)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/55366/85898639">VU</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://www.biotaxa.org/hn/article/view/37073">0.1</a></td><td>End, Edc</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Green anaconda (Eunectes murinus)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/44580041/44580052">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recCaFMiW22wcM6wA/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">0.4</a></td><td>Rar, Key</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>(Phyllomedusa tarsius)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/55864/11382243">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td>10</td><td>Edc</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>(Lithobates palmipes)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/58689/11812112">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10531-021-02117-7">0.4</a></td><td>Edc</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Capybara (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/10300/22190005">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recOifKHmQUDS2jvs/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">0.2</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Snake 24 (Bothrops atrox)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/44582135/44582154">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/reckKZaOnAgdLkaXZ/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">0.6</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Black toad snake (Bothrocophias hyoprora)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/15204024/15204030">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://www.reptilesofecuador.com/bothrops_lojanus.html">0.6</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Blue yellow macaws (Ara ararauna)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22685539/131917270">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recNsqDjG1J1AOkfS/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">15</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Scarlet macaws (Ara macao)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22685563/163778999">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/reclMjXUIVc5ftCqU/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">15</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Wink (Boa constrictor)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/197462/2486405">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/app/2023/E-Appendices-2023-02-23.pdf">Appendix I</a></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rec8FhQ4tf7K2gyP2/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">790</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Acai (Euterpe oleracea)</td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recNR3oKpfwuPdABK/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">38.5</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Ceiba (Ceiba pentandra)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/61782438/61782442">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/rec2IT5QAZxq75IR6/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">7854</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Milpeso palm (Oenocarpus bataua)</td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recNH0vU7iX1F9Juw/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">452.4</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Wild grape (Pourouma cecropiifolia)</td><td><a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/145590526/145683986">LC</a></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><a href="https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viwTMumzsBXg540Gm/recyR0gdBhGlRRRtl/fld8j7SA4KQyTZLoz?copyLinkToCellOrRecordOrigin=gridView">615.8</a></td><td>Rar</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><br></td><td><br></td></tr></tbody></table>

\*The unit of measurement for the area of ​​life in the case of the taxa of the kingdom Animalia is presented in Km2 and for those of the kingdom Plantae in m2

\*\* Where Indicator type is abbreviated as rare (Rar), endangered(End), umbrella (Umb), keystone(Key), emblematic(Emb), endemic (Edc)

<br>


# Appendix F: Sample indicator-species observations

Sample list of indicator-species observations for pilot site in Villagarzón, Colombia

To be valid an observation must have a species, and primary proof such as photo, video, audiorecording, or geocoding data (not required by this methodology but accepted if made for other reasons).&#x20;

A sample table of species observations for our pilot BCP site in Putumayo, Colombia is shown in the table below. And you can copy and use a template for tracking your data:  (note: geocodes have been removed for animal safety).&#x20;

* 1\) [<mark style="background-color:green;">Signup for Airtable</mark>](<https://airtable.com/invite/r/fxsn6mcE >) for free
* 2\) Copy the [<mark style="background-color:green;">Sample observation database</mark>](https://airtable.com/appCrJEBJX5lDwZ2R/shrTEy84ICs3dIXWm/tblSGRFmIU1FbLIQM/viwaSqv9TqSyU2Jds?blocks=hide) to use for your own BCP

#### **Table 12. Indicator species observations for full crediting.** *Note: geocodes have been removed for animal safety.*&#x20;

<figure><img src="/files/aScJHK5u9C9TdQ0MYg43" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>


# Appendix G: Sample open-source code and calculation

Google Earth Engine demo and access to ISBM code on Savimbo GitHub

Open-source code for biodiversity credit calculations is available to the public at the [Savimbo GitHub](https://github.com/savimbo).&#x20;

We have the intent of making this code easier to use and available to IP and LC projects with an interface which can auto-credit from, and to, a free Airtable database after we begin biodiversity certification in 2024. Free Airtable [sign up ](https://airtable.com/invite/r/fxsn6mcE)is available now.  IP projects can signup for the waitlist on this interface now and obtain Airtable database templates by emailing <ops@savimbo.com>

Demo calculations are also available on  Google Earth Engine has pledged to provide free accounts to Indigenous groups involved in climate change. Noncommercial [sign up](https://earthengine.google.com/noncommercial/) is available.&#x20;

**Figure 11. Google Earth Engine code sample**&#x20;

<figure><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/rVQ0Wv_v9_eXa7qOghqAvJhwResowct17qRiUSD-lO_eatzZqyiNhfpKmprKNcRWdVXXkv2FuYyAetkdA1BzOcf6d7EWeGqmRpKVVMGmk89gLOQd8i1K-Ia4A7ixXu0Xo2XSlovBPF8KPN24COHu6a4" alt=""><figcaption><p><em><strong>Figure 11</strong></em>. Google Earth Engine code sample</p></figcaption></figure>

Code sample, code under external revision.  Can be accessed through Google Earth Engine at this [link.](https://code.earthengine.google.com/e914e4bf1b4fd252f4ad90318ca2371e) Or in Savimbo GitHub at this [link.](https://github.com/savimbo) Contact ***ops at savimbo.co**m* if you would like to be a code reviewer.&#x20;

```markup
// Load plot18 polygon
var plot18_data = require("users/drea/map:plot18_data");
var plot18 = plot18_data.polygon;

// Calculate plot area in hectare
var plotArea = plot18.area();
var plotAreaHectares = plotArea.divide(10000);

// Load jaguar points
var points_jaguar_data = require("users/drea/map:points_jaguar_data");
var puntos = points_jaguar_data.points;
var radios = [];
var sumMultipliedArea = ee.Number(0);

// Define a feature collection to store intersection polygons
var intersectionPolygons = ee.FeatureCollection([]);

// Define the assignedArea function
var assignedAreaFunction = function(offset) {
  var day = startDate.advance(offset, 'day');
  var dayString = day.format('YYYY-MM-dd');
  var feature = ee.Feature(null, { date: dayString, intersectionArea: intersectionArea });
  return feature.set('date_area', ee.String(dayString).cat(' - ').cat(intersectionArea));
};

// Calculate radios and buffers for each point
for (var i = 0; i < puntos.length; i++) {
  var point = puntos[i].geometry;
  var date = puntos[i].date;

  // Calculate the start date by subtracting 30 days
  var startDate = ee.Date(date).advance(-30, 'day');
  
  // Calculate the end date by adding 30 days
  var endDate = ee.Date(date).advance(30, 'day');
  
  // Create a feature with the point geometry and date as properties
  var feature = ee.Feature(point, { date: date });
  
  var pointBuffer = feature.buffer(800);
  radios.push(pointBuffer);
  
  // Calculate intersection with plot18
  var intersection = pointBuffer.intersection(plot18);
  
  // Calculate area in hectares
  var area = intersection.area().divide(10000);
  
  // Get the month and year of the date
  var month = ee.Date(date).get('month');
  var year = ee.Date(date).get('year');
  
  // Generate a label for the month and year
  var monthYearLabel = ee.String(month).cat('-').cat(year).cat(' Hectarias N°');
  
  // Calculate intersection with plot18 for the current point
  var intersectionPlot18 = pointBuffer.intersection(plot18);
  
  // Calculate area in hectares for the intersection with plot18
  var intersectionArea = intersectionPlot18.area().divide(10000);
  var multipliedArea = intersectionArea.multiply(60);
  
  // Add multipliedArea to the sum
  sumMultipliedArea = sumMultipliedArea.add(multipliedArea);
  
  // Define the jaguar range of dates
  var jaguarRange = endDate.difference(startDate, 'day');
  
 // Assign intersectionArea value to each day of the jaguar range
  var assignedArea = ee.FeatureCollection(ee.List.sequence(0, jaguarRange.subtract(1)).map(assignedAreaFunction));
  
  // Print the results for each point
  print('Jaguar:', i + 1);
  print('Date of image capture:', date);
  print('Start Date:', startDate.format('YYYY-MM-dd'));
  print('End Date:', endDate.format('YYYY-MM-dd'));
  print('Total Intersection Area per day in hectares:', intersectionArea);
  print('Multiplied Intersection Area * 60:', multipliedArea);
  print('Assigned Area per day:', assignedArea);
  print('----------------------');
  
  // Add the current point buffer to the map in blue color
  Map.addLayer(pointBuffer, { color: 'blue' }, 'Radio ' + (i + 1));
  
  // Add the intersection geometry to intersectionPolygons
  intersectionPolygons = intersectionPolygons.merge(intersection);
}

// Perform polygon unions to avoid duplicates
var unionPolygons = intersectionPolygons.union();

// Calculate the total area of intersections without duplicates
var totalIntersectionArea = unionPolygons.geometry().area().divide(10000);

// Display the results
print('Total intersection area hectares:', totalIntersectionArea);
print('Plot18 area hectares:', plotAreaHectares);
print('Sum of Multiplied Intersection Area hectares * 60 days:', sumMultipliedArea);

// Add the plot18 layer to the map
Map.addLayer(plot18, { color: 'gold' }, "plot18");
Map.centerObject(plot18);

```


# Appendix H: Indigenous authors

How the indicator-species biodiversity methodology was co-designed with Indigenous Peoples and local communities

Like the Sherpas who [climb Mt. Everest](https://www.tibettravel.org/tibetan-people/sherpa-people.html), jaguar tracking is a highly technical, and respected activity within Indigenous groups. It relies on years of knowledge of animal behavior, strong kinesthetic knowledge, traditional hunting skills, a supranormal degree of fitness, and technical woodsmanship.&#x20;

But for over twenty years, the resources associated with this activity have been transacted through the charitable industry, with high [overhead margins](https://www.lohud.com/story/news/politics/politics-on-the-hudson/2017/11/28/how-much-your-donations-actually-go-charity/108104626/). Without judgment, this is not a good deal for the jaguar trackers. Organizations typically pay Indigenous and local trackers on a day wage, require them to supply their own equipment, and don't give ownership or credit for raw data (video and audio recordings) generated by tracking activities. Because it's a bad deal, these trackers have difficulty convincing their communities that these traditional conservation activities are sustainable in comparison to the modern alternatives; petroleum, mining, logging, urban work, or narco-trafficking.

**This methodology was written to solve the economic problem of conserving biodiversity. To contribute an alternative, direct, climate market to Indigenous groups who conserve primary forests.**&#x20;

The ISBM is the translation of a successful 20-year IP and LC-led conservation program in an IUCN Red List ecosystem to financial markets. Translation occurred over the period of one year. Technology, biodiversity science, and market mechanisms were integrated to project activities with ongoing feedback. The intent was to scale activities, and fund associated livelihoods without disrupting IP or LC values or lifestyles.&#x20;

The project began with unremunerated in-situ photo/video observations of jaguars and the endangered anteosos bear generated by Indigenous conservationist Jhony Lopez in the Columbian Amazo. The area was protected against narcotrafficking, petroleum, and mining interests by grassroots activism at the local, state, and national level by activism from Jhony, Fernando Lezama, and a committed group of local smallholders at a financial loss.

#### **Figure 13. Jhony Lopez and students tracking biodiversity indicator species in the Putumayo Amazon**

<figure><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/F6M1At4RHVlxuH8dvJH5_e--UDpzyee0xPL29joYdjfUylD8kIVxDZgWT7WrSl8U_hiuu7G8_AOWx2TwIU9FnpSR9Utas8tyaC0WZ6jYs7IOCnVzBon6zvyMnVHvaymG7TCW35br40Ka5ofJBErn9B4" alt=""><figcaption><p>Figure 12. Jhony Lopez, conservationist and climate activist. Pasto Indigenous heritage. Students, colleagues, jaguar sign, and grassroots conserved areas. </p></figcaption></figure>

<div><figure><img src="/files/sBvGmIvoB1B4vuFBnVsP" alt=""><figcaption><p>Jeidy Caicedo Jhony's student</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/ljjFRKzY6pSJVG6VabRl" alt=""><figcaption><p>Savimbo biodiversity team</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/3DEdtPRf6xfhpOxWX6YZ" alt=""><figcaption><p>Jaguar track from Colombian Amazon</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/IdWitu76KPPFuGjvoDL2" alt=""><figcaption><p>Jhony Lopez on his protected lands</p></figcaption></figure></div>

They formed Savimbo with Drea Burbank, an MD-technologist in 2022 and began to extend and characterize their biodiversity work with satellite mapping, a program for local youth to learn jaguar tracking and game cameras, taxonomic classification, and geocoding.&#x20;

In assessing the species for the region, the teams of scientists researching this methodology often spent as much as a week actively searching for one specimen of a rare species before finding one. After testing multiple video cameras, the team found that even the highest quality jungle cameras last up to three or four months before the rainforest destroys their functionality and they need to be replaced. The cost of this equipment and the physical labor required needs to be controlled in order to make biodiversity projects economically viable in these locations. Placing the cameras is highly technical work that can only be done only by those who frequent these locations and understand the lifecycles of these species. We discovered that most major biodiversity nonprofits in the region were hiring the same trackers—and that this was a highly technical skillset for IP and LC requiring years of training.&#x20;

It is only by on-the-ground experience in functional ecosystems that the team was able to recognize and manage the challenges of creating a biodiversity methodology that is feasible given the physical challenges of working in these territories.&#x20;

With one-year co-development and ongoing community feedback, the project was expanded to enroll neighboring farms, map the home range of Jhony’s jaguars, and generate ever-fresh data.&#x20;

In 2013 non-certified biodiversity crediting was initiated with Savimbo’s payments system.  Word-of-mouth spread among neighboring farms resulted in local control of hunting groups, and generated interest from several neighboring indigenous reserves, then IP and LC internationally in Suriname, Gabon, and the Ecuadorian Amazon. &#x20;

The ISBM is unique, because it is IP and LC-first, science and markets second, standard. We are also hopeful that this will give it an advantage in terms of scale, implementation, and outcomes.<br>


# Appendix I: Letters of support

Letter of support from scientific experts

We've asked scientists to write letters of support to substantiate our scientific decisions in this methodology. Specifically:&#x20;

* **Biodiversity scientists**. Biologists and specialists in entomology, herpetology, ornithologists, marine science, primatology, and apex predators.&#x20;
* **Advocates.** Organizations with a long track record in preserving species. There are fantastic foundations across the globe with the influence and track record to comment intelligently.&#x20;
* **Indigenous groups and advocates.** Anthropologists, sociologists, ethicists, linguists, and ethnologists who truly understand the lifestyle, needs, and business practices of Indigenous groups and are capable of advocating for them on a global stage.&#x20;

Letters are included before in order of submission.&#x20;

<figure><img src="/files/2VRNYetfFPkkLAyxUCEB" alt=""><figcaption><p>Jhony Lopez and Fernando Ayerbe, Putumayo July 2023</p></figcaption></figure>


# Fernando Ayerbe, Ornithology

Letter of support from Fernando Ayerbe, ornithologist

*Fernando Ayerbe Quiñones* \
*Neiva, Huila* \
*Tel.: 3007365771* \
*CEO Avifauna Colombiana*&#x20;

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD* \
*CEO, Savimbo Inc.* \
*Carrera 6 - Numero #3-21* \
*Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*&#x20;

***Re: Savimbo Biodiversity Methodology Based on Sentinel Species***&#x20;

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*&#x20;

*I am writing to express my support for your proposed biodiversity methodology that utilizes sentinel species as a metric for measuring preserved biodiversity in tropical forests.*&#x20;

*I come from the perspective of a biologist with experience in zoology, advocating for Indigenous knowledge for 15 years in various Colombian ecosystems, engaging in conservation efforts alongside rural communities and creating educational materials focused on these communities.*&#x20;

*There is a critical need for regulation in markets/economy/science/research to support the traditional relationship between Indigenous cultures and the land, allowing for the protection of endangered or undiscovered biodiversity, plants, and medicine.*&#x20;

*I support this methodology because it offers a simple and logical application, facilitates the transmission of traditional knowledge, and aligns with the traditional activities of hunters/gatherers. The development of this methodology could be highly beneficial, not only for the Amazon Piedmont region but also for any area where the role of Indigenous peoples as guardians of biodiversity is endangered and requires special care and attention.*&#x20;

*It is essential that international markets focused on biodiversity provide a means of livelihood and  empowerment for Indigenous peoples who have preserved their ecosystems. For this reason, biodiversity credits are a reasonable and viable way to generate non-hierarchical and decentralized employment in this population sector, which is focused on conserving and protecting forest biodiversity.*&#x20;

*I am familiar with several aspects of the methodology that have been intentionally designed to ensure scientific coherence and market scalability while providing direct market access to Indigenous groups.*&#x20;

* *The methodology will allow for the use of trusted human coders for coordinates and date/time stamps of raw observation point data (video or audio recordings), relying on verification/validation bodies to validate this data.*&#x20;
* *The distribution area of sentinel species will be simplified to a circle with a documented observation point at the center, and the circle's area will be determined based on specific habitat requirements derived from public sources.*&#x20;
* *The methodology will classify rare/umbrella/key/endangered species into four levels   (platinum,  gold, silver, and bronze) based on their ability to represent a conserved biodiversity ecosystem.*&#x20;
* *Individual species identification or density calculations will not be performed. Individual observations will be equated if they occur within a 2-month timeframe and at the same geocoordinates.*

*The reference biodiversity will be calculated from public sources, sometimes for a much broader region, organized by taxonomic kingdom.*&#x20;

*While many researchers have access to much broader scientific tools for quantifying biodiversity, this methodology is sufficient to allow for scientific accuracy, transparency, and standardization across ecosystems and among many different endangered species. Most importantly, it has been designed with traditional ways of life in mind and has been simplified to enable cultural translation and the preservation of traditional knowledge. I believe it establishes a solid standard upon which a robust market can be built, enabling immediate conservation of critical areas worldwide.*&#x20;

*I am available to respond to information requests and willing to provide an independent voice regarding the validity of this methodology.*&#x20;

*Respectfully,*&#x20;

![](https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/QCBjwPZCdrjsEuMZQS_ETltgjY88SM9M9XRYmGHyoXWaLONqK6VTkigdfezhOLLPHDZ8GtECkOzCPShcZ0ij46wfc8KjnsQX60-onJBg_qjm-f5gK5kIVT28PEkfTYROiaT8GUsmcD7VXJSOvNReLPE)

*Fernando Ayerbe Quiñones* \
*C.C.: 4617411* \
*CEO Avifauna Colombiana*<br>

<div><figure><img src="/files/6XCDArDRi7PUNpmneP48" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support Fernando Ayerbe, ornithologist</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/DKurp4fwsI75Aae6E8II" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>


# Ned Hording, Biodiversity

Letter of support from Ned Horning biodiversity expert

*Ned Horning                                                                                                                                                        Middlebury, Vermont USA*                                                                                                                                         \
*<nedhorning@gmail.com>* <br>

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD                                                                                                                                                                  CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                                                                                                    Carerra 6 - Numero #3-21,                                                                                                                               Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*&#x20;

***Re: Savimbo Sentinel species biodiversity methodology***

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*

*I am expressing my support for your proposed biodiversity methodology to use sentinel species as a metric of conserved biodiversity in tropical forests.*

*I am commenting from the perspective of an environmental remote sensing expert with 40 years of experience, with over half of that experience dedicated to research and support of biodiversity and biocultural diversity.*

*During my last two years working for Regen Network Development, PBC, I have worked on alternative approaches to traditional payment for ecosystem services schemes such as the carbon market. For the most part, existing financial schemes to support nature-based solutions are not accomplishing their goals nor adequately rewarding the stewards, often from Indigenous people and local communities, supporting ecosystem regeneration.*

*I support this methodology because its novel approach has a logical, simple framework based on common sense. It is scalable and can be applied in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Developing this methodology would be enormously beneficial, as it could benefit not only the Amazonian Piedmont area but any area where biodiversity is at risk and requires special care and attention.*&#x20;

*Finally, it is of utmost importance to guarantee a means of subsistence to those people who live in these ecosystems so they continue their typically traditional, regenerative practices. For this reason, credits created from this methodology are a sensible and viable way to support regenerative practices to continue conserving and protecting the biodiversity of the forests and their livelihoods.*

*While many researchers have access to state of the art tools to quantify biodiversity, this methodology leverages proven state-of-the-practice methods to allow for suitable accuracy, transparency, and standardization between ecosystems and across many endangered species. It is based on robust scientific research on which a sound market could be built and enable the immediate preservation of threatened areas worldwide.*

*I am available to respond to requests for information and am happy to provide an independent voice for the validity of this methodology.*&#x20;

*Respectfully,*&#x20;

*Ned Horning*&#x20;

*Consultant*

<div><figure><img src="/files/EAMNTNjfhLnofmDlLmdA" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support Ned Horning, biodiversity expert</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/jNZT4emC0eEmKaGmR4bE" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>


# Olber Llanos, Zoologist

Letter of support from Olber Llanos, Zoologist

*Jul 17, 2023*

&#x20;                                                                                                                  &#x20;

*Olber Leonardo Llanos Villegas                                                                                                                                                              Florencia, Caquetá                                                                                                                     3145314923                                                                                                                                     Affiliation*

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD                                                                                                                  CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                                                                  Road 6 - Number #3-21,                                                                                                            Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*&#x20;

*Re: Savimbo Biodiversity Methodology*

*Savimbo INC.* &#x20;

*Through this letter I am expressing my support for Savimbo's biodiversity methodology based on indicator species as a mechanism for urgent and necessary economic change based on the conservation of the Amazon.*&#x20;

*My experience in mammal monitoring in general, as a central axis of conservation I have dedicated more than 10 years in the conservation of big and medium cats, my knowledge in biodiversity has helped Indigenous communities in the lower Caquetá.*&#x20;

*The world needs this methodology because we know and have the capabilities to urgently manage environmental problems and incidents with Indigenous peoples, due to this is the livestock expansion that is affecting cats, peasant communities and endangered species, due to lack of action by the entities that are responsible for monitoring and conserving primary forests.* &#x20;

*He raised his voice in favor of this methodology because it is focused on the conservation of biodiversity, this methodology provides a method that allows to curb deforestation, hunting of feline prey and the displacement of Indigenous communities by agricultural and livestock expansion.  For this reason, biodiversity is a viable way to generate paid jobs that is centralized to the conservation of the Amazon and the entire planet, since in this Amazonian population is centered most of the biodiversity present in the world, because of this as human beings we are obliged to conserve the fauna and flora of the primary forests.*&#x20;

*I understand that the methodology is simple from the scientific rigor but I consider that the commitments that it makes to give compliance and credibility are viable, I am sure that these commitments are of great help and validity because:*&#x20;

* *The methodology will take into account trusted human coders who provide information on coordinates and date/time of observation records (video, audio or photo recordings).*&#x20;
* *For the calculation of the credit, the life area of the indicator species will be simplified into a circle, since the life areas of the animals are irregular, this geometric shape will be used to homogenize the credit calculation.*&#x20;
* *The basis of the methodology is the use of indicator species for the case were included, rare/shade/key/endangered, which are taken into account at different levels.*&#x20;
* *The methodology has coined an INTEGRITY SCORE in order to represent that the presence of one of the indicator species within the area means that it is well conserved and of good environmental quality.*&#x20;
* *The methodology does not contemplate the study of population density or identification of each individual.*&#x20;
* *The methodology will use public sources of data for biodiversity estimates or inherent characteristics of each species, sometimes for a much wider region, organized by taxonomic kingdom.*

*Indigenous communities and farmers who share territory are the main allies in curbing deforestation and conserving biodiversity.*

*I am willing to contribute all my knowledge in the field on issues of handling and installation of camera traps and their photo identification.*

*Cordially*

*Olber Leonardo Llanos Villegas*

*1019037063*

*Biologist-Mastozoologist.*

<br>

<div><figure><img src="/files/UqoGB24MVR867RfhKytM" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support Olber Leonardo Llanos, <em>Biologist-Mastozoologist.</em></p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/4TfnoCBEXAB3TLsGyqEL" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>


# Mike McColm, Ethnology

Letter of support from Michael McCombs, Ethnologist

*Michael McColm, PhD*\
*Development Director, Yakom Foundation*\
2 Barker Close, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4ET, UK \
Casa 6, Calle Terere, Tena, Napo, Ecuador<br>

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD* \
*CEO, Savimbo Inc.* \
*Carrera 6 - Numero #3-21* \
*Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*&#x20;

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*&#x20;

*I am writing in support of the Savimbo methodology, which directly values Indigenous knowledge in general, and which in particular can recognize, how Siekopai routines, and beliefs can be integrated into a program which provides economic incentives for protecting forest and culture. There are various Savimbo activities consonant with their culture of forest excursions, such as camera trapping and video which could be effective at replacing hunting, if these present a comparable or better economic incentive. In addition, the use of Chaos theory provides the best theoretical framework I have seen for developing a culture-based credits program, being able to describe the complex Siekopai culture.*&#x20;

*The Siekopai in Ecuador, numbering about 750 people, maintain 48,000 hectares of some of the most species rich forests in the Amazon. There is a complete suite of Amazon wildlife, including Jaguars and Harpy Eagles, and botanists on average find 200 tree species, 10 cm. in diameter or greater on one hectare permanent plots. Mahogany (Sweitenia macrophylla) a Cites List 2 species is one of the enormous trees found in this important forest. Moreover, there are over 6000 hectares of Morete Palm swamps, and individual Morete trees provide habitat and food for over 800 species of animals.*&#x20;

*I am also writing this letter in support of the Siekopai people to receive financial support for biodiversity credits. From my point of view, the world owes the Siekopai a debt of gratitude. The Siekopai tell us that without their forest they cannot be Siekopai. From Yakum time-series maps we made in 2022, we found that the Siekopai have effectively, and without help, halted a tidal wave of industrial driven deforestation. **In other words without the Siekopai, the 48,000 hectares of forest they protect with their cultural routines, intellectual tradition, and with organized patrols, would have disappeared long ago. Their history, legends, their well-being as Siekopai, deeply depends upon their forest. The Siekopai and their forest due to numerous threats now depend upon the world taking action in an effective manner.***&#x20;

*The 175 Remolino, Siekopai people, who consider themselves in danger of cultural extinction. Their intellectual tradition, their interpretation of the world in general and their daily routines are directly linked to maintaining their forest. In their daily lives, there are many intrusive influences which work to erode their culture and cut their forests, coming from government institutions, petroleum companies, and market forces.*&#x20;

*The Siekopai do have ways to renew and refresh their culture. One way is spending time in the forest. Routine family, individual, or territorial defense group forays into the forests offer good opportunities for photographing and making videos of their forests and the most vital species to generate revenues. The Siekopai also hold an annual cultural renewal event each year in August, during the dry season, when their protective spirits are watching over them from nearby tree tops.*&#x20;

*The Siekopai consider traveling with their family and sometimes with two families their favorite way to spend time. They will travel for 5-7 days at a time on canoes up through the labyrinth of streams which meander across their lands once and sometime twice each month. These trips cross the entire territory and provide for very effective “cultural ecosystem monitoring.”*&#x20;

*While fishing, collecting honey, mushrooms, and medicines in their forests, the Siekopai can “really be” Siekopai, and they refresh and recharge as people, by speaking their language, wearing their traditional tunics and face make-up, and eating Siekopai food. Families also travel with Casabe bread flour which they reconstitute with water to make Casabe bread, to eat with fish and other forest products. There is a constant and lively communication network between families in the community about the status and conservation of the forest and all the life within as a result of these family trips.*&#x20;

*Individuals also enter the forests for one day of hunting of deer and wild peccary. Switching hunting for photography of sentinel species, for income could alter this routine. The Siekopai also maintain extensive fishing nets along their waterways, so while collecting fish on a daily basis, they are also monitoring their forest.*&#x20;

*The Siekopai maintain organized forest patrols and on two occasions over the last five years they have responded as a large group, to expel two groups of armed and violent Colombian invaders. Additionally, the Yakum Foundation has installed internet in the community on which the Siekopai can access Global Forest Watch alerts to also contribute to their monitoring.*&#x20;

*Four years ago Yakum carried out a social mapping project. During the earliest activities we found that young people were quick to master the use of new technology but did not know their forests. In contrast, the community elders knew the forest like the “back of their hand.” Noting both trends, we set up a method of “two way knowledge exchange” throughout this monthly mapping project. The elders would direct the younger field groups one where to go in the forest to photograph and map hundreds of places of cultural importance, and in turn the younger people helped teach the elders how to use GPS units and computer applications for mapping.*&#x20;

*The Siekopai are constantly harassed by oil and African Palm growing companies and miners, which grossly pollute their main river, the Aguarico. Resulting from all the Siekopai cultural and forest protection mechanisms, the tree felling rate inside Siekopai territory is one tenth of the rate outside.*&#x20;

*The Yakum Foundation has been collaborating with the the Siekopai to develop “food forests” based on the ancestral Siekopai home garden models for five years. During 2022 I dedicated time and resources to interviewing the vast majority of the Siekopai in Remolino, verified information with focus groups, and full community assemblies, to construct a detailed understanding of their empirical and interpretive culture, and to develop a Siekopai proposal for cultural and forest conservation.*&#x20;

*I have been an advocate for Indigenous cultural and forest conservation since 1993, and have carried out ethnographic research since the late 1980s, and employed a participant observation method for my PhD dissertation at the University of California for developing a process theory on time in organizations finished in 1992.*&#x20;

*This ethnographic methodology provides us with the knowledge to integrate biodiversity monitoring of key species with Siekopai routines, pacing, beliefs, and culture to guarantee a solid credit initiative. Our Yakum monitoring team is able to set up quantitative and map monitoring to compliment qualitative data.*&#x20;

*In late 2022, Siekopai focus groups and the Remolino community assembly, wrote the language for a forest-culture conservation proposal, for forming a legal association, for receiving potential “credit payments” and an signed agreement to protect their forest and culture. We are also developing community monitoring and reliable community accounting, harmonious with the Savimbo method for credit payments. Yakum has also obtained temporary funding for 18 months, to provide useful “universal” payments 135 adults in Remolino, which has helped us move forward on community accounting reliability.*&#x20;

*Based on Ecuadorian law we think that the Siekopai have rights to receive funds for their protection and their right to enjoy their forests. Yakum will carryout a land tendency study to determine legal-jurisdiction boundaries between Siekopai communities to provide further legal backing for a future proposal.*&#x20;

*The Siekopai will defend their forests with their lives, because without their forests they cannot be Siekopai. We need to act.*

*Sincerely,*

![](https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/QCBjwPZCdrjsEuMZQS_ETltgjY88SM9M9XRYmGHyoXWaLONqK6VTkigdfezhOLLPHDZ8GtECkOzCPShcZ0ij46wfc8KjnsQX60-onJBg_qjm-f5gK5kIVT28PEkfTYROiaT8GUsmcD7VXJSOvNReLPE)

*Dr. Michael McColm* \
*Development Director-Yakum Foundation*<br>

<div><figure><img src="/files/wWsc4JEejpECr6iyfeTS" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/EnxLeqPpMLLnVrjtyN0Y" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div><figure><img src="/files/ip77fhc5g4qXDYBWik2F" alt=""><figcaption><p>Letter of support form Dr. Michael McColm, Ethnologist</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/WmMhukcupfqYTusWhL9p" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>


# Peter Thomas, Anthropologist

Letter of support from Peter Thomas, Anthropologist

*Peter Thomas Lerche, PhD*\
*J r. La Merced 775*\
*Chachapoyas,* \
*Amazonas, Perú*<br>

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD* \
*CEO, Savimbo Inc.* \
*Carrera 6 - Numero #3-21* \
*Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*&#x20;

*Chachapoyas, Perú 02-09-2023*\
&#x20;

*I am sending you this LETTER OF SUPPORT as an anthropologist (Ph.D., Berlin 1985), Peruvian (since 1993) with many years of experience working with Indigenous Amazonian communities.*

*This is not only as the director of the Branch Office of the Ministry of Culture in Amazonas, Peru, but also as the Coordinator of "Nature and Culture International" (NCI) in the United States.*

*During my work with NCI as a Coordinator, in close coordination with approximately 20 Awajún native communities, we established 3 NATURAL CONSERVATION AREAS of approximately 70,000 hectares in total, managed by the Indigenous populations themselves: Pamau Nain, Tijae Nain, and Dase Nain.*

*The Awajún are one of the four subgroups of the Jíbara macro-ethnicity. With approximately 80,000 individuals, they are the second-largest ethnic group in the Peruvian Amazon.*

*Due to the mutual trust established between the Awajún and myself, as a consultant, I have maintained ongoing communication with them to this day.*

*BASED ON THE EXPERIENCES SUMMARIZED ABOVE, I CONSIDER THAT THE SAVIMBO METHODOLOGY, WHICH IS BASED ON INDIGENOUS ANCESTRAL KNOWLEDGE, IS IMMEDIATELY AND INCOMPARABLY MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE USUAL STRATEGIES FOR PROTECTING THE AMAZON ENVIRONMENT.*

*Therefore, I believe that the Savimbo methodology could also be perfectly applied in the future among the Awajún communities.*

*Sincerely*

*Peter Thomas Lerche, PhD*

<figure><img src="/files/37dlMCF6aVnWt7ktSCDU" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support Peter Thomas</p></figcaption></figure>


# Jesús Argente, Marine biology

Letter of support from Jesús Argente, Marine biology

***Name** Jesús Enrique Argente García                                                                                                                        **City State**: Murcia                                                                                                                                                   **Phone number:** +34639283896                                                                                                                  **Affiliation:** Department of Information and Communications Engineering—University of Murcia (Spain).*

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                             Carerra 6 - Numero #3-21,                                                                                                                               Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia* &#x20;

***Re: Savimbo Sentinal species biodiversity methodology***

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*&#x20;

*I am writing to express my support for your proposed biodiversity methodology to use sentinel species as a metric of conserved biodiversity in tropical forests. From my point of view, I think that this methodology can be very interesting for its application and replication in marine and coastal ecosystems around the world. Considering the socio-ecological connection between coastal, and marine terrestrial ecosystems to facilitate an integral conservation of nature and favoring the local populations of a specific territory.*

*I comment from the perspective of a marine biologist specializing in environmental governance and digitization issues in a global blue economy context. From my personal experience in these fields, where I have combined the study of biodiversity, sociology, and technological systems leveraged to the conservation of coastal and marine species and ecosystems for more than 18 years, and consistently promoting the importance of integrating the knowledge and know-how of the local population.*

*There is a deep and immediate need for regulatory markets/economy/science/research that supports the conservation of species that are at risk of disappearing or are still unknown to science.  Mechanisms that enable local populations to take the necessary measures to protect their lands, coast, and seas, the species within them, and ensure their protection.*&#x20;

*I support this methodology because it has a logical and simple framework, with a replicable scientific background. This means that it can be applied in any ecosystem, to locate the umbrella species and, from there, generate projects to protect these species and all those that cohabit with them. It follows that advancing the development of this methodology would be of enormous benefit, as it could benefit not only the Amazonian Piedmont area, but any terrestrial, coastal, and marine area where biodiversity is at risk and requires special care and attention.*&#x20;

*Finally, it is of utmost importance to guarantee a means of subsistence to those people who live in these ecosystems so that they abandon hunting and logging and dedicate themselves to protecting and multiplying the life that surrounds them. Being in permanent contact with the species and possessing a millenary knowledge, inherited from their ancestors, they are undoubtedly the ideal guardians of this treasure of humanity. For this reason, biodiversity credits are a reasonable and viable way to generate nonhierarchical and decentralized paid work in this sector of the population, which consists of conserving and protecting biodiversity.*

*I know several aspects of the methodology, which have been intentionally simplified to allow for scientific consistency, market scale, and direct access to biodiversity markets for local peoples.*&#x20;

* ***The methodology will allow for the use of trusted human coders** for coordinates and date/time stamps for raw data from observation points (video or audio recordings), relying on verification/validation bodies to validate this data.*
* &#x20;***The range of sentinel species will be simplified to a circle** with a documented observation point in the center, and the area of the circle determined by species-specific habitat needs derived from public sources.*
* ***The methodology will equate rare/umbrella/keystone/endangered species**, with four tiers of qualification (platinum, gold, silver, and bronze) based on the species' ability to represent an intact biodiversity ecosystem.*&#x20;
* ***No individual species identification or density calculations will be made**. Rather individual observations will be equated if they fall within a 2-month timeframe and the same geocoordinates.*
* ***Baseline biodiversity will be calculated from public sources**, sometimes for a much wider region, organized by taxonomic kingdom.*    &#x20;

*While many researchers have access to much more extensive tools with which to quantify biodiversity, this methodology is sufficient to allow for scientific accuracy, transparency, and standardization between ecosystems, and across many different endangered species. I believe it is a robust standard on which a sound market could be built, and enable the immediate preservation of critical zones worldwide.*&#x20;

*I am available to respond to requests for information, and happy to provide an independent voice for the validity of this methodology.*&#x20;

*Respectfully,*

&#x20;

![](/files/sofacxhmPThATh6Vw7y3)&#x20;

&#x20;

*Dr. Jesús Enrique Argente García* \
*Marine biologist*\
*Department of Information and Communications Engineering.*\
*University of Murcia, Spain*

<div><figure><img src="/files/Lneo5c2m0VdncpuWshri" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Jesús Argente, Investigator</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/Ypz0oxbhotKEzOmEmnUF" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Jesús Argente, Investigator</p></figcaption></figure></div>


# Sara Andreotti, Marine Biologist

Letter of support from Sara Andreotti, Marine Biologist

11 September 2023

***Name*** Sara Andreotti                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     &#x20;

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                           Carerra 6 - Numero #3-21,                                                                                                                               Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia* &#x20;

***Re: Savimbo Sentinal species biodiversity methodology***

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*&#x20;

*I am writing to express my support for your proposed biodiversity methodology principle that utilizes sentinel species as a metric for measuring preserved biodiversity in marine habitats.*&#x20;

*I come from the perspective of a marine biologist with 15 years of experience in shark population estimates and genetic assessment in South Africa. I have been engaging in conservation efforts with direct communication with local stakeholders, MPAs and governmental departments.*&#x20;

*There is a critical need for regulation in markets/economy/science/research to support the traditional relationship between indigenous cultures and the marine environment allowing for a sustainable and potentially non-consumptive use of endangered or understudied marine biodiversity.*&#x20;

*The careful adaptation of this methodology to the marine environment could be highly beneficial, not only for the South African marine ecosystem, but also as a blue print to make the conservation of marine biodiversity financially viable worldwide.*&#x20;

*It is essential that international markets focused on biodiversity provide a means of livelihood and empowerment for coastal communities while allowing them to preserved their ecosystems. For this reason, biodiversity credits are a reasonable and viable way to generate non-hierarchical and decentralized employment in this population sector, which could focused on conserving and protecting coastal biodiversity.*&#x20;

*Sincerely,*&#x20;

*Dr Sara Andreotti*

Marine Biologist, PhD                                                                                                                                              Lecturer Extraordinary / Researcher                                                                                                                        Department of Botany and Zoology                                                                                                                         Private Bag X1, Stellenbosch University                                                                                                            Stellenbosch 7600, South Africa&#x20;

<figure><img src="/files/BscGZdG4jz69XG479Apq" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>original Letter of support from Sara Andreotti, Marine Biologist</p></figcaption></figure>


# Carolina Romero, Lawyer.

Letter of support from Carolina Romero, Lawyer.

*Oct 03, 2023*

*Diana Carolina Romero Ramirez                                                                                                                        Bogotá, Colombia                                                                                                          <dianacarolinaromero@hotmail.com>*

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD                                                                                                                                       CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                                                                                Carrera 6 - Numero #3-21, Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*

*Re: Savimbo Biodiversity Methodology*

*Savimbo Inc.*

*As a legal professional with expertise in procedural law, contractual law, and legal negotiation, and a master's degree in public management, with over ten (10) years of experience working with rural communities, particularly with Indigenous groups in defending territories and environmental protection areas, I would like to endorse the biodiversity program and methodology proposed by Savimbo Inc., to be developed in Colombian territory, as a project based on the conservation of the Amazon and socioeconomic support for the resident population in the area.*

*Considering that the program includes a conservation agreement between the Company and the owners or occupants of the territories, allowing them as a negotiating tool to be key actors in the arrangement of activities related to the conservation (preservation, use, and management) of certain resources. As a legal professional with extensive experience in legal representation and defense of community interests in Colombia, especially in the Department of Putumayo, I see the opportunity for environmental protection and the transversal growth of the region's economy with SAVIMBO.*

*The methodology is designed to be voluntarily embraced by each owner and/or occupant or leader of Indigenous or farming groups, with significant strengths in generating and restoring connectivity between different properties that were previously isolated by landscape fragmentation, promoting the recovery of watersheds, natural ecosystems, and movement corridors for wildlife. It increases the interest of communities in conserving and improving environmental management on their land, allows socially and economically marginalized Indigenous and farming groups to be protagonists of the program, learn about the importance of caring for their natural habitat, preserves endangered or threatened species, and leaves a capacity installed in the territory for the future implementation of similar processes. Additionally, it promotes conservation activities through the use of a productive language that is more appealing to rural communities and sparks interest in other territories or groups to be part of conservation agreements or similar conservation mechanisms.*

*Furthermore, the biodiversity program has a simple and clear methodology for application by communities with low academic levels but with extensive native, traditional, and natural knowledge, valuable for the purpose of the project. It also has a balanced and fair agreement of wills from a legal perspective, instilling confidence in the linked owners or occupants.*

*The biodiversity methodology established by SAVIMBO in Colombia is in line with Law 99 of 1993 and its regulatory decrees, which creates the Ministry of the Environment, reorganizes the public sector responsible for environmental management and conservation of renewable natural resources, organizes the National Environmental System, SINA, and issues other provisions, harmonizing with environmental general principles and policies. The program is adjusted to the reality of the territories, with a high probability of success in its application, as it was developed according to the peasant and Indigenous knowledge as natural protectors of their territories. It allows landowners or occupants to apply their traditional knowledge, making the development of this methodology easily embraced by Indigenous or farming groups from different territories who can be part of the environmental guardians and protectors of the fauna and flora of their territories.*

*Moreover, several aspects of the methodology have been intentionally designed to allow the inclusion of threatened lands and market scaling while providing direct market access to Indigenous groups and small farmers.*

*The Biodiversity program is more flexible for engagement than the carbon credit program, as it not only allows landowners or property owners to join but also holders, tenants, or administrators of the land subject to the program, as well as individuals or organizations with any direct relationship with the land, without necessarily being the legal relationship of ownership.*

*The biodiversity methodology, in line with the laws and regulations, has prior detailed studies on the existing species in the area and their possibilities of survival, as well as the study of the human resources available for conservation activities and their customs as peoples, where nothing is imposed but adapted to the needs of their population.*

*Within this framework, I must also highlight the work of monitoring the biodiversity that exists in these areas and projecting the appearance of species in the area, with a methodology for photographic and audiovisual registration in accordance with the law and regulations, with authorizations for data processing, assignment of copyright and/or intellectual property.*

*Finally, I will be ready to address any legal inquiries regarding the biodiversity methodology and its legal applicability in Colombia.*

*Sincerely,*

*CAROLINA ROMERO RAMIREZ*\
*Attorney ID 222.665 from the Council of the Judiciary*\
*Director*\
*CR\&ABOGADOS*\
*[www.carolinaromero.com.co](http://www.carolinaromero.com.co)*

<div><figure><img src="/files/4YvSPCS7S8wJWM0yfZh7" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Letter of support from Carolina Romero, Lawyer.</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/MMBmBO4g1LCKmHG4vTHI" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Letter of support from Carolina Romero, Lawyer.</p></figcaption></figure></div>

<figure><img src="/files/C8tJ65WqdJtHsroSPWaX" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Letter of support from Carolina Romero, Lawyer.</p></figcaption></figure>


# Daniel Urbano, Herpetologist

Letter of support from Daniel Urbano, citizen herpetologist.

*Daniel José Urbano Delgado                                                                                                                              Popayán, Cauca, Colombia.                                                                                                                            Fundador Identificación de Serpientes de Colombia.*                                  <br>

*Andrea Burbank, MD.                                                                                                                                                      CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                                                                                 Carrera 6 - #3-21,                                                                                                                                                 Villagarzón, Putumayo, Colombia*

*Dear and respected team at Savimbo Inc. Receive a cordial greeting.*

*I at this moment inform you of my support for the biodiversity methodology proposal proposed by you, using some native species of the Amazon as a conservation metric for the lungs of the world.*

*I write from my profile as a Colombian empirical researcher dedicated for 3 years to the study of neotropical herpetofauna with emphasis on non-Scolecophidia snakes and as Founder and Administrator of the Colombian Snake Identification project and also as Administrator and Director of Human Talent of Fauna of Colombia, positions for which I have been able to get closer to the conservation methodologies of Colombian biodiversity.*

*We, both Savimbo Inc. and the projects I manage. As conservationists, we know that there must be a priority in linking science with native ethnic groups who have been for generations the defenders and regulators of virgin ecosystems which are of vital importance for our conservation objective.*

*Both projects have more than 280,000 people registered in total, myself, and the administrator and founder of Fauna de Colombia, Juan David Franco Ángel, is ready to join this initiative that you had in favor of our wildlife since we see The simple and logical application of science in communities historically excluded from society such as Indigenous people is very important, and this application of its methodology will be of great benefit to the Cisandean region of Colombia due to the participation of citizens in it.*

*We, Daniel José Urbano Delgado and Juan David Franco Ángel, kindly lend us the Facebook database that we have in both projects so that in this way we also have more sentinel specimens to review the health of the ecosystem. Well, we have thousands of records of the vast majority of Colombia's biodiversity. With this loan from the platforms, with an approximate reach of 30,000,000 people a year between the two of us, we will seek to enhance the project for the conservation of our Amazon ecosystem.*

*As project leaders, we would love to communicate with you to expand the information on Savimbo Inc. and the two projects that are under our administration so that we can reach an agreement on possible aid with the sole purpose of sowing the seed of conservation. in each of our inhabitants.*

<br>

*Carefully,*

*Daniel José Urbano Delgado.*

*Colombian empirical researcher, Colombian Fauna administrator, and founder of Colombian Snake Identification.*

<div><figure><img src="/files/Kb3fQftEzmi39xkfur6y" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original Letter of support from Daniel Urbano, citizen herpetologist.</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/xf2NUjnAfhLZtPqWTuUR" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original Letter of support from Daniel Urbano, citizen herpetologist.</p></figcaption></figure></div>


# Ramesh Boonratana PhD, Primatologist

Letter of support from Ramesh Boonratana PhD, Primatologist

*16 November 2023*

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*

*Re: Biodiversity Credit Methodology*

*First and foremost – kudos! As a long-time biodiversity conservation and ecosystem protection practitioner and a strong advocate for IPLC stewardship, I am writing to support the methodology designed to protect biodiversity, specifically tailored to empower IPLC involved in grassroots conservation. I highly endorse the initiative, whose approach is aimed at simplicity, rapid deployment, and direct market access for those pivotal in preserving Earth's biodiversity.*

*The significance of Indigenous stewardship in conserving the world's biodiversity cannot be overstated. This methodology benefits the ecosystems and those who directly safeguard these invaluable ecosystems. Of significance is the issuance of voluntary biodiversity credits (VBCs), which explicitly disallow any form of offseƫng. It further forgoes complex scientific quantification methods, ensuring direct and immediate action without compromising the autonomy and integrity of IPLC communities.*

*By economically incentivizing positive models within IPLC communities, this methodology not only preserves biodiversity but also reinforces traditional ways of life and knowledge preservation, respecting and empowering those whose impact on conservation is unparalleled. This methodology represents a crucial step toward preserving invaluable ecosystems and their intertwined cultures.*

*I support this visionary approach and am eager to witness its profound and positive impact on biodiversity conservation and the empowerment of IPLC communities globally.*

*Yours sincerely,*

*Ramesh Boonratana, Ph.D.*

*Assoc. Prof. Conservation Biology* \
*Regional Vice-Chair for Southeast Asia, IUCN SSC Primate Specialist Group*\
*Editor-in-Chief, Asian Primates Journal* \
*Review Editor, Frontiers in Animal Conservation* \
*Member, IUCN World Commissions on Protected Areas*\
*Member, IUCN WCPA Tourism and Protected Areas Specialist Group*

<figure><img src="/files/09ahKTHNfoRP1NOAMdbb" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Ramesh Boonratana PhD, Primatologist</p></figcaption></figure>


# Theodore Schmitt, Conservationists

Letter of support from Theodore Schmitt, Conservation technologist

*Theodore Schmitt                                                                                                                                                    Seattle, WA USA                                                                                                                                                                       Allen Institute for AI*

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD                                                                                                                                   CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                                                                                     Carerra 6 - Numero #3-21,                                                                                                                                          Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*

***Re: Savimbo Sentinel species biodiversity methodology***

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*

*I am writing to express my support for your proposed biodiversity methodology to use sentinel species as a metric of conserved biodiversity in tropical forests. I am commenting from the perspective of my experience working as a conservation technologist with field conservationists for over ten years.*

*There is a deep and immediate need for financing that supports the conservation of species that are at risk of disappearing or are still unknown to science. Mechanisms that enable local populations to take the necessary measures to protect their lands and the species within them are essential.*

*I support this methodology because it uses a logical and simple framework with a replicable scientific method. This means that it can be applied in any ecosystem to locate the umbrella species and generate projects to protect these species and other species in the ecosystem. Advancing the development of this methodology would be of enormous benefit not only to the Amazonian Piedmont area but to any area where umbrella species can serve as indicators of ecosystem health.*

*It is of utmost importance to guarantee a means of subsistence to those people who live in these ecosystems so that they abandon hunting, logging, and other extractive uses, instead dedicating themselves to protecting and multiplying the life that surrounds them. Being in permanent contact with the species and possessing a millenary knowledge inherited from their ancestors, they are ideal guardians of humanity's natural heritage. Biodiversity credits are a reasonable and viable way to generate nonhierarchical and decentralized paid work in this sector of the population to conserve and protect the biodiversity of the forests.*

*I am aware of several aspects of the methodology, which have been intentionally simplified to allow for scientific consistency, market scale, and direct access to biodiversity markets for local peoples.*

* &#x20;***The methodology will allow for the use of trusted human coders** for coordinates and date/time stamps for raw data from observation points (video or audio recordings), relying on verification/validation bodies to validate this data.*
* ***The range of sentinel species will be simplified to a circle*** with a documented observation point in the center, and the area of the circle will be determined by species-specific habitat needs derived from public sources.
* ***The methodology will equate rare/umbrella/keystone/endangered species** with four tiers of qualification (platinum, gold, silver, and bronze) based on the species' ability to represent an intact biodiversity ecosystem.*
* &#x20;  ***No individual species identification or density calculations will be made***. *Rather, individual observations will be equated if they fall within a 2-month timeframe and the same geocoordinates.*
* ***Baseline biodiversity will be calculated from public sources**, sometimes for a much wider region, organized by taxonomic kingdom.*

*While researchers have access to much more extensive tools with which to quantify biodiversity, this methodology is sufficient to allow for the scientific accuracy, transparency, and*

*standardization between ecosystems and across many different endangered species required to make investment decisions. It is a sufficiently robust standard on which a sound market could be built while being simple enough to be understood by both suppliers and consumers of the information to enable the immediate preservation of critical zones worldwide.*

*I am available to respond to requests for information and am happy to provide an independent voice for the validity of this methodology.*

&#x20;

*Respectfully,*

Theodore J. Schmitt                                                                                                                                               Senior Director of Conservation                                                                                                                             Allen Institute for AI

<figure><img src="/files/s3mWFSQthSfnH9CNJ25M" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Theodore Schmitt, conservation technologist</p></figcaption></figure>

<br>

<figure><img src="/files/H41eq3pyVvOeFKyG9Up9" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Theodore Schmitt, conservation technologist</p></figcaption></figure>


# Anja Hutschenreiter, Ecologist and Tropical Conservationist

Letter of support from Anja Hutschenreiter, Ecologist and Tropical Conservationist

*Anja Hutschenreiter                                                                                                                                                Puerto Morelos, Quintana Roo, Mexico                                                                                                          Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad                                                                                     Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Morelia, Mexico*&#x20;

*Andrea (Drea) Burbank, MD                                                                                                                                 CEO, Savimbo Inc.                                                                                                                                               Carerra 6 - Numero #3-21,                                                                                                                         Villagarzon, Putumayo, Colombia*&#x20;

***Re: Savimbo’s indicator-based biodiversity monitoring methodology***&#x20;

*Dear Dr. Burbank,*&#x20;

*I am writing to express my support for your proposed monitoring methodology to use indicator species as a metric of conserved biodiversity in tropical forests and other ecosystems.*&#x20;

*I am commenting from my perspective as a tropical ecology and conservation researcher, specializing in population monitoring and ecoacoustics. With over six years of experience studying human-modified landscapes in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico and investigating the effects of anthropogenic pressure on forest biodiversity, I am confident that Voluntary Biodiversity Crediting represents a significant opportunity for community-based conservation efforts in the global South.*&#x20;

*The urgent need for regulatory markets and standardized monitoring schemes to support the conservation of species at risk of extinction, along with their habitats, cannot be overstated. These mechanisms empower local communities to implement necessary measures for the protection of their lands and the species inhabiting them, thereby ensuring their long-term conservation. Voluntary Biodiversity Crediting presents a promising avenue for incentivizing and financing conservation initiatives, particularly in regions where traditional conservation funding may be limited. By providing tangible economic benefits to local communities for biodiversity conservation efforts, such mechanisms can foster sustainable land management practices and promote biodiversity conservation on a broader scale.*&#x20;

*I support Savimbo’s methodology because of its comprehensive, transparent and practical approach, which facilitatesthe self-sufficiency and active involvement of local communities, while being based on scientific consensus and the use of open-source tools. This approach ensures applicability across diverse habitats and for various indicator species, thereby promoting the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems.*&#x20;

*Advancing the development of this methodology holds immense potential, extending beyond the Amazonian piedmont area to other tropical forests in the global South and any region facing biodiversity threats. By providing a viable alternative to unsustainable practices such as hunting, logging, and land development, it is crucial to ensure the livelihoods of those living in these ecosystems.*&#x20;

*Local communities, with their deep-rooted knowledge passed down through generations, serve as invaluable stewards of these natural treasures. Biodiversity credits offer a fair and transparent means of generating decentralized employment opportunities in conservation, recognizing the essential role of these communities in safeguarding biodiversity and promoting sustainable land management practices.*&#x20;

*I am aware of several aspects of the methodology, which have been intentionally simplified to allow for scientific consistency, market scale, and direct access to biodiversity markets for local peoples:*&#x20;

* ***The methodology will allow for the use of trusted human coders** for coordinates and date/time stamps for raw data from observation points (video or audio recordings), relying on verification/validation bodies to validate this data.*&#x20;
* ***Range of sentinel species will be simplified to a circle** with a documented observation point in the center, and the area of the circle determined by species-specific habitat needs derived from public sources.*
* ***The methodology will assign values to eight categories of indicator** species (including rare/umbrella/keystone/endangered species). These values will vary based on the species ability to represent an intact biodiversity ecosystem.*
* ***No individual species identification, or density calculations will be made.** Rather individual observations will be equated if they fall within a 2-month timeframe and the same geocoordinates.*&#x20;
* ***Baseline biodiversity will be calculated from public sources**, sometimes for a much wider region, organized by taxonomic kingdom.*&#x20;

*While some researchers may possess more extensive tools for quantifying biodiversity, this methodology provides a sufficient framework for achieving accuracy, transparency, and standardization across various locations and ecosystems, including their respective faunal communities. I consider it to be a robust standard upon which to build a reliable market, capable of facilitating the immediate preservation of critical zones worldwide.*&#x20;

*I am available to respond to requests for information, and happy to provide an independent voice for the validity of this methodology.*&#x20;

*Respectfully,*&#x20;

*Dr. Anja Hutschenreiter                                                                                                                                       Postdoctoral researcher                                                                                                                                                Member of the IUCN SSC Species Monitoring Specialist Group                                                             National Geographic Explorer                                                                                                                                   Head of Conservation Technology at the NGO ConMonoMaya*                                                                          &#x20;

<div><figure><img src="/files/Bo6PJ9kcBbzxRSBPnv3R" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Anja Hutschenreiter, Ecologist and Tropical Conservationist</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/0TNuASCiNJaLf7t8O7kb" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Anja Hutschenreiter, Ecologist and Tropical Conservationist</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/HPcWB6yHTwyc6cKvz8FE" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Anja Hutschenreiter, Ecologist and Tropical Conservationist</p></figcaption></figure></div>


# Miguel Chindoy, Indigenous leader

Letter of support from Miguel Chindoy, Indigenous leader

<figure><img src="/files/FzSnaop1RLbqLPX5OB9i" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure>

*From the mountains and jungles of the world, September 2023*

***UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION – UN.***

***Re: Biodiversity***

***Subject: The voice of the Indigenous peoples of America and beyond.***

*Sirs:*

*Through this medium, we salute the institutions and their authorities present at the event that they periodically convene to discuss and decide on the fate of the common home of humanity and of present and future generations. We salute you as children of the earth, your brothers, and heirs of ancestral knowledge about the historical responsibility of being guardians of nature.*

*We address you in the language that we have learned from nature and the understanding we have acquired of life, where Mother Earth together with its mountains, jungles, rivers, and wastelands speak to us and teach us about the responsibility of being guardians of nature. life. What we express to you is that we have been fulfilling this mission for centuries for free for the benefit of humanity and therefore we feel the right to express the following to you:*

1. ***Without intermediaries.** There be no intermediaries either from governments or from organizations that sell resources for the fair claim of our rights according to the uses and customs of the native peoples because the native peoples are holders of rights that are pre-existing to the constitution and the laws, which, because they are inherent to our existence as peoples, they are prevalent and imprescriptible. Our life has been governed under the guidance of the law of origin because life is superior and prior to any human norm.                  From the different territories where we fulfill our mission of being guardians of life, today we have unified this voice so that we can dialogue and agree within a DIRECT DIALOGUE WITHOUT INTERMEDIARIES between those who own the economic resources and those of us who are holders of ancestral rights for a fair negotiation and responsible*
2. ***One-year term contracts.** The contracts for carbon credits for 20 years or longer, in which some communities have become involved without further information about the impacts; It is inappropriate for the communities. For centuries we have been guardians of the land without any type of contract; Therefore, the owners of economic resources must guarantee that in terms of time, it is what the Indigenous peoples have at their disposal. And given that on the issue of carbon, definitions have already been made and decisions have been made; What we hope is that in the other possible contracts (whether for biodiversity or others) the time will be agreed for minimum periods of one year, renewable if the communities so decide.*
3. ***No compensation.** The fauna existing in Indigenous territories is part of the existing natural order. Animals in their natural habitat do not distinguish borders and are not interested in knowing who is the owner or ruler of the territory in which they live. In that order, compensation for the care of fauna species that are in their habitat should not have restrictions for communities. We do not want a sovereign Indigenous nation to suffer, with its animals being killed, because another nation created biodiversity credits.*
4. ***Expand participation to groups with hunting rights.** We do not share that there are conditions of land ownership under the logic and categories of the dominant system. To be historical guardians of nature we do not need property documents because we have ancestral ownership over the lands; In fact, to be guardians of biodiversity and to access the benefits of this mission, we must not submit to the requirements of the land market.*

*For Indigenous peoples, it is inexplicable that after centuries of mistreatment and abandonment at the same time by the governments in power, we continue to be the ad honorem guardians of nature, from which resources and knowledge continue to be looted; But above all, Mother Earth continues to be treated as a simple commodity. That is why governments, together with commercial companies of natural goods, intend that Indigenous peoples continue to be cheap or free servants of their purposes.*

*For that dialogue and negotiations in a direct and unrestricted manner, which the aboriginal peoples demand, on our part we are organized as SAVIMBO, with our own spokespersons under the guidance of our spiritual guides from each territory. In fact, it is our purpose that as Savimbo we are heard in the different scenarios where decisions are made on these transcendental issues around the protection of nature, which is the protection of our life itself, since direct dialogue is a demonstration of an adequate start of environmental justice.*

*Finally, what we have expressed here is not only the human voice of the children of the earth; It is above all the voice of the plants, the rivers, and the jaguar; whose language has now reached us; In fact, it is our duty to convey that nothing human purposes can go beyond the will of the law of origin, which is the mother law of life.*

&#x20;

*Cordially:*

*Children of the earth, your brothers:*

![](/files/H2r7oV42AuyorYPbgtSh)                                                                                                         &#x20;

*Southern Colombia*

### *Cosigners:*

<table><thead><tr><th width="176">Name</th><th width="225">Role</th><th width="99">Tribe</th><th>Country</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Ramón Uboñe Gaba Caiga</td><td>Waorani Community Leader in Activist Communication</td><td>Waorani</td><td>Ecuador</td></tr><tr><td>Demer Gonzales Vasquez</td><td>President of the Autonomous Territorial Government Organization of the Shipibo Konibo Nation</td><td>Shipibo Konibo</td><td>Peru</td></tr><tr><td>David Mauro Tankamash Juank</td><td>President of the Interprovincial Federation of Shuar Centers - FICSH</td><td>Shuar</td><td>Ecuador</td></tr><tr><td>Datu Lanelio T Sangcoan</td><td><p>Tribal leader of the </p><p>Higa-onon</p></td><td>Higa-onon</td><td>Phillipines</td></tr><tr><td>Jayesh Joshi</td><td>Leader from Maharashtra</td><td>Bhil</td><td>India</td></tr><tr><td>Fernando Lezama</td><td>Taita</td><td>Pijao</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Jhonny López</td><td>Environmental activist</td><td>Pastos</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>José Alberto Garreta</td><td>Governor of the Cofan Indigenous Reservation</td><td>Cofán</td><td>Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Erick Rojas</td><td>Nahuán from the Community of La Unión   </td><td>Henia-Camiare  </td><td>Argentina</td></tr></tbody></table>

<div><figure><img src="/files/csJOvtsyBS3xMrpTwq28" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Miguel Chindoy, Indigenous leader, Kamëntsá tribe, Colombia</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/GpmwWAicyFv06CAKUEDc" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/sqLNuuYKwAM1W16J5D7d" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div><figure><img src="/files/YwNfG51ap0kuiZ4aBOfe" alt=""><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Ramón Uboñe Gaba Caiga, Waorani Community Leader in Activist Communication, Waorani tribe, Ecuador</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/u4e7q3VnbqOkndTkkpvt" alt=""><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div align="left"><figure><img src="/files/xbAi5bVNR2v3IO0BqbcZ" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Demer Gonzales Velasquez, President of the Autonomous Territorial Government Organization of the Shipibo Konibo Nation, Shipibo Konibo tribe, Peru</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/8FAkCXm7hkhfJDhhBHLv" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div><figure><img src="/files/ByvAdq41rZ3E2P4uzwdT" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from David Mauro Tankamash Juank, President of the Interprovincial Federation of Shuar Centers - FICSH, Shuar tribe, Ecuador</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/PsZUvR6IoojgyZZe33q0" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div><figure><img src="/files/GR8utviBX0NnMaagXnsy" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Datu Lanelio T. Sangcoan, Tribal leader of the Higa-onon, Higa-onon tribe, Philipenes</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/gaOl3GCQb18AXvFQmlK7" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div><figure><img src="/files/2NYaReWcJ8JAGP62heFv" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Jayesh Joshi, Leader from Maharashtra, Bhil tribe, India</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/hXY8kJ2LpWQaqfr7KTNm" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div><figure><img src="/files/qBSvIW9xic63VcB1h3qC" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Fernando Lezama, Taita, Pijao tribe, Colombia</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/UOAeRSQiEq5xMhvBpmVW" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/VUMzahKnBqh5wDsbu5Yy" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div><figure><img src="/files/6RwL7t5ZGVKCtf5HSoRO" alt="" width="375"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Jhonny López, Environmental activist, Pastos, Colombia</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/z34jUDZv2YVCJn1WkrmP" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/U0aVc2I9xmuNjCWEBbPw" alt="" width="375"><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>

<div align="left"><figure><img src="/files/pv5Zb6wktpgZDwr0dxhl" alt="" width="188"><figcaption><p>Original letter of support from Erick Rojas, Indiginous leader.</p></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/enmlDhZV5yW9ahZX9REQ" alt="" width="188"><figcaption></figcaption></figure> <figure><img src="/files/gEXOfa35y4GhY74AnENQ" alt="" width="188"><figcaption></figcaption></figure></div>


# Appendix J: Sample uses of biodiversity unit

Examples of alternate uses of the biodiversity unit in other methodologies

We've made a strong call to action for the interoperability of our [VBC *unit*](/calculation/unit-calculations), to corporate disclosure organizations, and multiple crediting bodies. Our hope is that although this methodology is limited in its applicability, an interoperable unit will spur market adoption, innovation in the field, and wider market adoption of biodiversity credits.&#x20;

As described the Unit of a VBC is *Area (ha) x Value (ecosystem value normalized to Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Bronze) x 𝚫 Integrity (where all metrics, methodologies, and certifications lie) / Time (2 months).*

This appendix is to provide examples for why this unit is interoperable, and can be used for any conservation, restoration, eradication, or pollination methodology. The key lies in the fact that normalizing Time, Value, and Area, allows methodologies to converge in their integrity additionality from the perspective of the ecosystem itself.&#x20;

It also controls for industry lobbying by groups with strong financial incentives and better science in ecosystems which have been frankly inaccessible to true animal populations for hundreds of years (i.e. farmland in US and Europe), when compared against IP and LC protecting planetary treasures with little to no resources (i.e. fishing village in Mexico guarding blue whale UNESCO birthing site).&#x20;

* Integrity range is from -1 (moonscaped dead zones) to +1 primary ecosystem in pristine natural condition. (National parks, game parks, UNESCO World Heritage sites, primary Amazon forest, etc.)
* Every competing metric and methodology and the certifiers and disclosures can interoperate here. Conservation, eradication, pollination, restoration, and corporate impacts.&#x20;
* Methodologies, as approved by certifiers, have a standardized or MRV integrity effect. I.e. a methodology perfectly executed moves Integrity up, or credits for it in it's intact state.&#x20;
* Impacts, as approved by regulators, have a standardized or MRV integrity effect. i.e. an impact correctly documented moves Integrity down, and/or fines for its degradation.&#x20;
* Projects can get partial crediting, or demerits for partial effects.&#x20;

Example calculations (with loose estimates) based on this unit include:&#x20;

| Methodology type | Impact                                                                                                                                       |                                                          | Credits issued     |
| ---------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------ |
| Conservation     | 100% conserved Amazon primary forest through an indicator species methodology in a biodiversity hotspot.                                     | 5 ha of 100% intact ecosystem in a Platinum ecosystem.   | 5 Platinum credits |
| Restoration      | Farmland converted to regenerative farming. Log-normalized increase in ecosystem integrity from 50%-> 60% in an IUCN 'Vulnerable' ecosystem. | 100 ha of farmland \* 10% increase in a Silver ecosystem | 10 Silver credists |
| Pollination      | Bees added to central Austin as pollinators. 0.01% increase over 3 mile radius in ecosystem with no intrinsic ranking.                       | 7,321 ha \* 0.01 increase in Bronze ecosystem.           | 73 Bronze credits  |
| Eradication      | Sea urchins pulled from kelp beds in California's kelp forests.                                                                              | 200 ha \* 5% increase in Gold ecosystem                  | 10 Gold credits    |
| Corporate impact | Petroleum drilling in ocean desert.                                                                                                          | 1000 ha \* 5% impact in Bronze ecosystem                 | -50 Bronze credits |
| Corporate impact | Military oil spill in Hawaiian bay.                                                                                                          | 500 ha \* 30% impact in Gold ecosystem                   | -150 Gold credits  |


# Appendix K: How to do FPIC

Key elements of effective free, prior, and informed consent

It is important to note that FPIC will vary significantly for IP and LC depending on local laws, customs, language, and governance structures and therefore must always be individualized. Furthermore, IP and LC have very different laws governing consent. IP have recognition as independent nations and are protected by international law while LC may fall under local governing regulatory authority.

Savimbo strongly recommends that in the case of the ISBM that consent is *experiential.* That tools, training, tracking salaries, and information are first deployed on the ground for a 3-6 month period with no-obligation, and no-strings-attached so that communities have time and experience to learn what they are consenting too, what data they will be sharing, what the work is like, and how a biodiversity crediting project will run. This is especially important when considering appropriate remuneration for tracking activities which are labor intensive and require specialized knowledge for success. This also de-risks project participation for all parties, builds trust, and saves time and resources for all concerned.

As some communities may not have FPIC protocols clearly defined, this time period is also essential for partners to understand how the community functions, who are its leaders, what are its requirements for true consent, and how are they implemented. In some cases, it may be necessary to hire *truly* independent experts to help a community define its desired FPIC protocols before they can be implemented. In our direct experience, any leader who claims to be able to sign individually for an entire community is mistaken at best and care should be taken to determine what the community truly is including the opinion of women and elders who may not be present in initial negotiations with outsiders.&#x20;

Some guides for effective FPIC we recommend include, but are not limited to:&#x20;

* Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) [FPIC Guide](https://rspo.org/wp-content/uploads/RSPO-Free-Prior-and-Informed-Consent-FPIC-Guide-2022_RSPO-GUI-T08-002-V2-ENG.pdf)
* First People's Worldwide FPIC [Due-diligence questionnaire](https://www.colorado.edu/program/fpw/sites/default/files/attached-files/fpic_due_diligence_questionnaire-2.pdf)
* Forest People's Program [Good faith negotiation guide](https://www.forestpeoples.org/sites/fpp/files/publication/2010/09/fppkeyelementsgoodfaithdec08eng.pdf)
* Sirge Coalition [FPIC guide](https://www.sirgecoalition.org/fpic-guide)
* Convention on Biological Diversity[ Mo’ otz Kuxtal Guidelines](https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/8j-cbd-mootz-kuxtal-en.pdf)

For the ISBM, FPIC must also be well documented and ground-truthed, in other words, validated in an independent on-site inspection. See [Appendix L](/appendices/appendix-l-independent-expert-panel-checklist)


# Appendix L: Independent Expert Panel Checklist

Guidelines for IEP evaluation of a ISBM project

This methodology is written for independent use, outside of certification bodies, and also for use with multiple certifiers — each of whom may adjust IEP evaluations as per internal protocols.&#x20;

### IEP composition

An IEP must include at minimum,:

1. A qualified biologist with field expertise in the ecosystem of the BCP.&#x20;
2. A topographer with competent licensing in the jurisdiction of the BCP.&#x20;
3. A legal expert who can validate contracts and land paperwork.
4. (Optional) Translation staff.

### IEP evaluation checklist

A basic checklist for IEP validation includes:&#x20;

**Biology**

* [ ] Are the Indicator species appropriately chosen for the ecosystems involved?&#x20;
* [ ] Are the Indicator species scores extrapolated from public data accurate?&#x20;
* [ ] Is a randomly selected subset of observations accurate to 90%?
* [ ] (Optional) Have iNaturalist validators given observations a "Research grade" level of independent validation?

**Topography**

* [ ] Are maps accurate and internally consistent? Do segments, titles, or ecosystems overlap?&#x20;

**Compliance**

* [ ] Are land titles valid in the jurisdiction in question? If full land title is not involved, has the BCP adequately demonstrated Land control?&#x20;

**Site visit**

* Ground-truthing site verification of FPIC


# Appendix M: How to calculate a biodiversity credit by hand

We DON'T recommend manual calculations. But if you want to do them, here’s how.

Biodiversity credits *can* be calculated by hand, but there is a high probability of error from data overlapping in space and time. Here are simple instructions for how to do this using the free software Google Earth Engine Pro with sample videos.&#x20;

#### **1) Get a KML for your crediting area**

A simple .kml polygon of the [crediting area](/project-description/project-boundaries/spatial-limits-of-the-bcp) in your BCP site can be generated on Google Earth Engine software using geocoordinates.&#x20;

{% embed url="<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xlv_lkUr9o>" %}

#### 2) Create a layer for your indicator-species observation

Create a shape for your [indicator species observation](/project-description/implementation-plan/indicator-species-observations) where the area of the circle equates to the home range of the species in the observation.&#x20;

Tip: For manual calculations, select observations that do not overlap in time as time is the most difficult summation by hand.&#x20;

{% embed url="<https://youtu.be/_xlv_lkUr9o?si=noywAvuZU3NcbMyU&t=75>" %}

**3) Calculate the area credited**

Draw a polygon by hand that gives you the intersection of the crediting area and the observation area. The number of hectares in the area, multiplied by the indicator-species integrity score will be the number of your biodiversity credits.&#x20;

{% embed url="<https://youtu.be/_xlv_lkUr9o?si=ScYvY0V0JacNf2YR&t=195>" %}

**4) Overlapping observations**

&#x20;As described in the [Calculations](/calculation/integrity-calculations) section, overlapping observations with the same date, will have a merged crediting area.&#x20;

Overlapping observations with different integrity scores should achieve the highest integrity score in the merged area.&#x20;

{% embed url="<https://youtu.be/_xlv_lkUr9o?si=9JYAA-G4qFICVM31&t=364>" %}


# Appendix N: How to calculate home ranges

Step-by-step instructions for generating accurate home ranges from public data

Home ranges need to be validated from public data. Accepted sources in order of preference are peer-reviewed research papers, academic theses, public datasets, expert opinion, and NGO/policy reports.

Many rare animals have poor documentation on their characteristics. Most projects will need to satisfy independent expert reviewers for the home ranges they have decided to use. We have strong hopes that this science will become more standardized and open-source in the future. For now, we've established a database that experts are welcome to contribute to to make the science and calculations on home ranges more transparent and robust.&#x20;

### Basic protocols for home range research:

* Home range estimates are reported in sq km.
* Use primary references only.
* If there is no published information on the home range for a species, use information from the closest relative possible.
* Exclude simulation studies and estimates of exclusive (non-overlapping) areas.
* For migratory bird species, report the breeding home range.&#x20;
* Estimates should preferably be based on natural landscapes rather than human-modified areas.
* If possible, report the annual home range (except for breeding home range of migratory birds). If only seasonal home range estimates are reported, calculate and report the average.
* If multiple home range estimates are reported based on different methods, calculate and report the average (mean).
* If a list or table of individual home ranges is provided instead of a reported average, first calculate the average (mean) home range for females and the average (mean) home range for males. Then, calculate and report the overall average (mean) of these two estimates.
* If the list or table of individual home ranges contains fewer than 10 female/male individuals, calculate and report the average (mean). If the list contains 10 or more individuals, calculate and report the median.
* If only minimum and maximum values are reported, calculate and report their average (mean).
* If the reported home ranges do not align with our protocol (e.g., averages without gender weighting), still use the estimates as provided in the article; only calculate means/medians if the authors do not provide any such estimate.
* We will use the average (mean) of reported home range estimates from primary sources for our ISBM, except when there are more than 10 references for a given species, in which case we will use the median.
* For indicator trees, use the mean seed dispersal distance. (Tip, [Tamme et al. 2014](https://sciwheel.com/work/#/items/203877/detail?open-members-panel=true\&collection=665582) provide an extensive database to look up species in [Supplement 1](https://www.esapubs.org/archive/ecol/E095/045/)!) If primary data is not available, estimate from genus or family data, or use [Lososova et al. 2023](https://sciwheel.com/work/#/items/17323736/detail?open-members-panel=true\&collection=665582) or Appendix 3 in [Thomson et al. 2011](https://sciwheel.com/work/#/items/208570/detail?open-members-panel=true\&collection=665582) to extrapolate.&#x20;

### Example database

An example, open-science public database of home ranges for Savimbo projects is reported below. If you want to contribute to researching the characteristics here, we could definitely use the help for a LOT of Indigenous projects. Hit us up! We'll put you to work.&#x20;

{% embed url="<https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/shrNo9DoPlyFF2vIT>" %}


# Appendix O: How to calculate integrity scores

Step-by-step instructions for generating integrity scores from public data

Integrity scores need to be validated from public data. Accepted sources in order of preference are peer-reviewed research papers, academic theses, public datasets, expert opinion, and NGO/policy reports.

Many rare animals have poor documentation of their characteristics. Most projects will need to satisfy independent expert reviewers for the integrity scores they have decided to use. We have strong hopes that this science will become more standardized and open-source in the future. For now, we've established a database that experts are welcome to contribute to, to make the science and calculations on integrity scores more transparent and robust.&#x20;

### Basic protocols for integrity score determination:

* Integrity scores range from 0 to 1.&#x20;
* Species with scores of 1:&#x20;
  * Species that are 'Critically Endangered' according to the global IUCN Red List ***or*** national/regional assessments OR
  * Species documented to be highly sensitive to habitat degradation OR
  * Species that are documented apex predators OR
  * Species listed in CITES Appendix 1 OR
  * Tree species are documented old-growth specialists
* Species with scores of 0.9:&#x20;
  * Species that are 'Endangered' according to the global IUCN Red List ***or*** national/regional assessments OR
  * Species listed in CITES Appendix 2 OR
  * Tree species of the same genus are documented old-growth specialists
* Species with scores of 0.8:
  * Species that are 'Vulnerable' according to the global IUCN Red List ***or*** national/regional assessments OR
  * Species listed in CITES Appendix 3 OR
  * Trees are documented late-successional specialists
* Species with scores of 0.7:
  * Species that are 'Nearly Threatened' according to the global IUCN Red List ***or*** national/regional assessments OR
  * Tree species of the same genus are documented late-successional specialists
* For all other cases, assess integrity scores individually based on the above-mentioned public sources.
* Based on the integrity scores assigned to each reference for a given species, we will use the maximum value for that species in our ISBM.

### Example database

An example, open-science public database of integrity score for Savimbo projects is reported below. If you want to contribute to researching the characteristics here we could definitely use the help for a LOT of Indigenous projects. Hit us up! We'll put you to work.

{% embed url="<https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/shrLCn6mXmRXoIKS5>" %}


# FAQ

Frequently asked questions and answers from the hactivists at Savimbo

####

<details>

<summary>Who are you guys and why did you think you could do this?</summary>

We're [hactivists](https://www.savimbo.com/blog/biodiversity-credits-hacktivists-and-indigenous-groups)! Well, hacktivists from two different cultures. Like the [kindergarteners in *The Culture Code*](https://danielcoyle.com/excerpt-culture-code/)*,* we didn't think — we forgot about our status in the scientific hierarchy — and we just *did*. The truth is, it took the abandonment of our egos, transdisciplinary thinking, overeducated geniuses in two civilizations, twenty years of grinding grassroots activism, some very accomplished data scientists, and the use of Indigenous ecological knowledge to come up with this method. Automating it was just a side benefit for IP and LC. The carbon market hasn't been fair. The biodiversity market can learn from that.&#x20;

If we had a flag, it would read: "This planet is awesome!"

</details>

#### Q: What is a Voluntary Biodiversity Credit?

A Voluntary Biodiversity Credit (VBC) is a unit for the preservation or restoration of biodiversity on a specific area of land. The voluntary part means VBCs cannot be offset. In other words just because you paid for someone to preserve or restore biodiversity somewhere, does mean you have permission to destroy biodiversity somewhere else.&#x20;

Some people and companies will pay to preserve other species just because they care, and they can. A VBC is an easy way for someone who doesn't know you, doesn't live in your ecosystem, to feel safe that they are paying you for a concrete action that is well tracked. Sometimes these are certified, sometimes they are just used as an outcome metric to support actions.&#x20;

The nice thing about using a credit system, is that you can measure biodiversity gains in multiple ecosystems, or with multiple actions. Buyers can buy credits from a wide variety of projects. You could buy credits from increasing pollinators like bees, conservation of intact ecosystems, restoration of ecosystems, or eradication of invasive species.&#x20;

Biodiversity credits are part of the evolution towards recognizing natural resources as an important part of the world economy. Credits just mean that one kind of outcome metric is roughly equal to another.&#x20;

#### Q: What is the unit of your Voluntary Biodiversity Credit?

In short, the [Interoperable Biodiversity Unit (IBU)](https://unit.savimbo.com). We've worked really hard to use a unit which works well in *all* ecosystems, with *all* kinds of actions. So hard in fact that it became its own discrete work product. It even works for tracking ecosystem impacts for people who want to be honest about how they have hurt biodiversity.  Our unit is normalized to: *Area + Integrity + Time* dimensions with an optional *Value  category.*&#x20;

* Area in hectares
* Ecosystem value ([14 schemas](https://isbm.savimbo.com/baseline-scenario/baseline-ecosystem-categorization#table-3.-accepted-ecosystem-categorization-schemas) normalized by experts to [Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Bronze](https://isbm.savimbo.com/calculation/value-calculations#table-4.-ecosystem-rank-for-vbcs)).&#x20;
* 𝚫Integrity where a -1 means a totally destroyed ecosystem, and a +1 means a totally intact ecosystem with no other funding. Partial gains get fractional crediting.
* Time of 1 month

#### Q: Why would a corporation buy a biodiversity credit?

Individuals, governments, non-profits, and businesses are increasingly recognizing the need to invest in planetary health. A healthy ecosystem is important to reduce the risks of doing business, including the risk of natural disasters, social unrest, and regulatory risks. While many people simply want to invest in biodiversity because it is the right thing to do, today, even those with an eye on the bottom line recognize that the stability of their business is dependent on the stability of the underlying planetary resource base. Therefore, biodiversity credits are gaining momentum as either supplements to carbon credits, or as a superior indicator of ecosystem health in some cases.&#x20;

Biodiversity credits are based on complexity science applied to complex dynamic systems. The scientific evidence points to the ability of these systems to self-regulate and self-heal when stewarded according to Indigenous wisdom. By creating verifiable measures to prove the sustained health of the ecosystem, biodiversity credits provide everyone the ability to participate in the restoration and preservation of intact ecosystems.

#### **Q: Are indicator species enough to quantify ecosystems?**

* *"In a Biodiversity Crediting System indicator species do not represent a fuller list or richness within a system nor the functions performed within that system. This is a simple approach that may not represent its true credit value. Everything small and large counts!"*

Indicator species are not enough to quantify ecosystems. They are enough to conserve them. By definition, ecosystems are unquantifiable.&#x20;

Ecosystems like the Tropical Andean Amazon, where this methodology was written are complex, now chaotic ecosystems. We make no attempt to fully quantify them, even the best, most complete, scientific methods we have right now would still be incomplete.&#x20;

This methodology is written to conserve them.&#x20;

We fully support more complete scientific study in our area. Researchers are invited (even shamelessly begged) to come study it! But with almost no scientific work in this area, a 16% deforestation rate, and no other sources of funding, if we waited for full system quantification, there would be no ecosystem left to measure!&#x20;

This methodology is for IP and LCs guarding ecosystems like ours. People who might know everything about it, but in an Indigenous language, or with kinesthenic knowledge. Indicator species are an easy way to communicate across the quantification gap. A proxy metric so everyone can agree the system is worth preserving for study, and that it HAS been preserved.&#x20;

**Q: Why are you just measuring jaguars?**&#x20;

* *"As I understand it’s a Jaguar Protection Plan with the hope of maintaining some Biodiversity."*

Hahaha. There are a lot of jaguars in our material!  Actually, on our pilot site we measure [54 indicator species](https://airtable.com/app8nBhenY8WKKGDW/tbl38uVjTpCJD6qDr/viw9PZpxbus2SVVMo?blocks=hide). A list reviewed by three independent regional biologists with surprisingly few changes. The truth is, we often talk about the jaguar because its an indicator species found throughout the Amazon and its a good example of how the methodology works. Its Rare, Endangered, Umbrella, Keystone, Sentinal, and Emblematic to both Indigenous groups, scientists, and the general public.&#x20;

But we believe all species are important and we also track and credit from rare mammals like the Bush Dog, birds like the Harpy Eagle, trees like the Espingo, and snakes like the Boa constrictor. The truth is a good project should be demonstrating multiple species, and multiple kingdoms of species.&#x20;

But this isn't that hard with IP and LCs because people who really live in harmony with abundant ecosystems naturally tend to be proud of, and want to share, a variety of the wildlife that surrounds them.

We're a playful and curious species at heart. This work tends to bring that out in people. &#x20;

#### **Q: How are you dealing with ecosystem characterization using different ecosystem proxies and taxonomies?**

We're trying to completely eliminate the need for complex ecosystem quantification. It's a barrier to entry for Indigenous groups. Instead, we rely on open data from a number of qualified bodies such as UICN, WWF, and Biodiversity hotspots and universities in our area.&#x20;

The methodology is purposefully designed so that no matter what the ecosystem, the local and Indigenous people can identify indicator species and utilize the methodology. We have been exploring a variety of ecosystems, including marine systems, and are finding that the methodology is robust and can be applied even to very diverse types of ecosystems.

#### Q: What is the motivation behind this methodology?

The ISBM was developed with one purpose in mind: rewarding the true guardians of the biodiverse regions with direct payments so they could scale local services.&#x20;

#### Q: What are the key features of the methodology for IP and LC projects?

The Savimbo Biodiversity Methodology emphasizes the involvement of IP and LC in project implementation and decision-making. It recognizes the importance of trusted human coders for data collection, addresses potential leakage, controls non-permanence, and accounts for risks, uncertainties, and SDG contributions.

Perhaps the best thing for IP and LCs is that the methods here are easy for them to use, but find welcoming support in the scientific, and corporate communities. People naturally understand indicator species and find it easier to communicate about them as a proxy metric than something intangible like carbon.&#x20;

#### Q: How can IP and LC projects benefit from using this methodology?

By adopting the Savimbo Biodiversity Methodology, IP and LC projects can effectively quantify and credit their biodiversity conservation efforts. This can enhance their recognition, credibility, and access to potential financial incentives, supporting the sustainable management of their lands and resources while contributing to global biodiversity conservation goals.

We think they really benefit from direct payments. By choosing a methodology that is fair, transparent, and inexpensive to use they can reduce intermediaries and language barriers and communicate through data that everyone understands.&#x20;

#### Q: What about studies that have shown that giving IP and LC direct payments can corrupt their cultures or create unintended consequences?

Fundamentally, there is no outside authority that should tell IP and LC what is good for them. Savimbo's founders include Indigenous peoples and we consult with our IP and LC global panel on a weekly basis.&#x20;

This methodology was meant to be fair trade, for fair work. The work was done, it should be paid for. It is not our role to determine whether IP and LCs are capable of managing money. We do seek to eliminate interference in IP andLC's affairs and thus restore full autonomy through to determine what they want to do with the money they deserve for their work in preserving the Earth's ecosystems for millennia.&#x20;

We do make transparent tools available to communities for accounting. We think communities with a proven track record of conservation should have full autonomy in funds management. But we also think these communities would benefit from being able to track and demonstrate what they did with the funding so they can get more from other sources, for other types of climate or conservation actions.&#x20;

Biodiversity might be the easiest to start measuring, but it is certainly not the only ecological activity IP and LCs are capable of managing themselves.&#x20;

#### Q: Why don't you use measures of forest health typical to carbon credit systems?

Measurements of forest health today typically measure the size of the forest by looking for signs of deforestation, such as a reduction in the density of the trees, or deterioration of the health of the trees and large fauna around the edges of the forest. These measures are not relevant to biodiversity for several reasons:

1. The ISBM measures biodiversity by measuring the actual species on the land. This is a direct, rather than an indirect, measure of the flora and fauna of the location.
2. By the time there is forest thinning or damage to the edges on satellite, the biodiversity deterioration has often been going on for years, below the canopy and it may be too late to save certain species.
3. The methodologies for these measures, such as satellite imagery, cannot be used by the Indigenous people who are the guardians of more than 80% of the intact biosystems on Earth. To reward the people guarding the land, we need to find measures that can directly credit the people doing the work. Overly technical means of measurement tend to end up benefiting the technology providers, not the actual land guardians.&#x20;
4. ISBM reflects the latest understandings of complexity theory and the actual behavior of complex adaptive systems. By using multiple indicator species, the methodology also takes into account the differences in the ecosystem due to changing weather patterns, seasonal and other types of cycles (for example, animals that come out with irregular patterns, like 17-year locusts). Any of these changes might cause a change in the species being observed within a healthy ecosystem.
5. ISBM can be applied to many types of bioregions. While it was developed in the Amazon jungle, we are researching the application of the methodology as it pertains to marine life. It can also be used in national parks and forests where animals are tagged, in arid zones, arctic areas, and other ecosystems. There is no need to develop new types of measures: anywhere that biodiversity exists is a place where indicator species exist.
6. The methodology creates a common language between IP and LC and the scientific community. By correlating species recognized by the Indigenous people with species recognized by science, we are increasing our common understanding, bridging communities, and expanding the body of scientific knowledge.
7. The ISBM creates peer pressure among the Indigenous peoples and among their tribes for the preservation of indicator species. By rewarding social behaviors and activities for conservation, we create positive peer role models within communities, and between communities. This type of positive social pressure is exactly what is needed to generate long-term outcomes for increasing biodiversity.
8. A large animal (eagle, jaguar) may have a range that also covers adjacent farms, and the ISBM pays the smallfarmers and property owners who are maintaining practices that allow the free roaming of these animals. This means that farmers can potentially make money from observations of indicator species on their neighbors land. Farmers who might see some of the predators as pests now can see them as a source of income. They will also experience peer pressure from their neighbors to tolerate the animals on their land because the neighbors will also get rewarded. This virtuous cycle can expand the potential of these biosystems to survive when animals can co-exist with people. Furthermore, it allows animals to carry other species with them in the form of seeds, insects, and other types of pollinators who can now migrate from a healthy ecosystem to one that is restoring itself.

#### Q: Why is the home range normalized to a circle?

* *"Is the circle overlaid on a land cover or other layer so it includes only suitable species niches/distributions? Otherwise, the circle could be a significant overestimate of the home range for that individual."*

While it is possible to map the home range of any particular individual based on tagging or other sophisticated methods, it can be both invasive, and overly technical. Therefore, for simplicity, fungibility, and market standardization, the ISBM standardizes observations to circular area of publicly acknowledged home range.&#x20;

We recognize that species do not range within a circular area, nor can we know whether they were spotted at the middle or edge of their home range.&#x20;

Other methodologies will likely incorporate more sophisticated sampling. This methodology was written for IP and LC, and recognized experts in the field have [expressly indicated this compromise is acceptable](https://isbm.savimbo.com/appendices/appendix-i-letters-of-support), although this simplification may affect market pricing for these credits.&#x20;

#### Q: Why don’t you identify individual \[jaguars, sharks, etc] it’s so easy!

Because while it might be easy for a jaguar, or a mountain gorilla, its NOT easy for a harpy eagle, a sea turtle, etc. And we’re writing a methodology that works globally, for IP and LC.&#x20;

We accept that this means we will lose the ability to prove population growth, and density at a sophisticated level, and believe this compromise may also affect market pricing. Because of this compromise, the methodology accounts for multiple observations of animals by creating a union of the territories in which the indicator species are sighted. We cannot know, because we didn’t ask, if two observations are the same jaguar, or two jaguars. When two observations overlap, the area in which they overlap is paid once, not twice.

#### Q: Is the Savimbo methodology open source or privately licensed?

The Savimbo ISBM methodology is the intellectual property of Savimbo Inc., which has made it open-source and free for the public to use [along with its code](https://github.com/savimbo/biocredits-calc). We ask that you cite us, credit us, and the [methodologies authors](https://isbm.savimbo.com/front-material/authors) fully in any scientific use.&#x20;

We are working with a number of certifiers, projects, scientists, and global regulators to spread the methodology as widely as possible. Our intent was never to restrict use to Savimbo smallfarmers and Indigenous groups, but instead to shift climate markets in favor of [Savimbo's growers](https://www.savimbo.com/growers), with the understanding that many projects might use the methodology who were unaffiliated.&#x20;

Savimbo is [a B-corp](https://www.savimbo.com/about/#structure).&#x20;

* The for-profit arm [Savimbo Inc.](https://www.savimbo.com/about) does receive some royalties for the use of the methodology depending on the certifier. We accept capital there to expand the methodology or its technical services.&#x20;
* The non-profit arm [Empulsive Ink](<https://www.empulsive.ink >), accepts [donations](https://donate.stripe.com/00g4iQeSXfwN3wk14c?locale=en&__embed_source=buy_btn_1O8RKNBzObJNiHwFR18OZwZD) for the time and expenses of our independent panel of Indigenous leaders who also comment on biodiversity crediting, and biodiversity markets internationally. These arms are separate and operate independently. Not all of our independent leaders are proponents of biodiversity crediting, or affiliated with Savimbo projects. (Legal name Empulsive Inc. in 88-1869344)

#### Q: Why don’t you have a buffer pool in this methodology?

* &#x20;*“Do you need to deal with a buffer pool? You only address permanence by mentioning the inherent impermanence of biodiversity. With a reduced emphasis on permanence, when would a buffer pool be needed?”*

The ISBM does not require a buffer pool. Our methodology has tangible credits, based on achieved outcomes.&#x20;

However, some of the crediting bodies that use our methodology do assign a buffer pool based on the length of a project or other factors.&#x20;

**Q: How should projects select indicator species in this methodology?**

Indicator species are selected based on their ability to represent the ecosystem and the availability of public data supporting their ratings. Species have to be acceptable both to the scientific community and the IP and LC (who use different taxonomies). The selection process takes into account factors such as species' ecological roles, sensitivity to habitat changes, and public data availability.

**Q: How many indicator species should a project select?**

A project needs to have characterized all the available indicator species in their ecosystem, and show data from three indicator species in two taxonomic kingdomes to be valid.&#x20;

However, Savimbo recommends data from 15-30 species of different types for the project. On the ground, the IP and LC will use those species that are most meaningful to them, but it may be that because of changes in seasons or weather, certain species will be more abundant during different periods of time. Furthermore, adding additional species prevents over-compensation for one species, and it brings awareness to the richness of the ecosystems.

**Q: Trees don't move. Why would they qualify as an indicator species?**

Trees and plants are biodiversity too. Trees chosen as indicator species should be those that are particularly rare or sensitive to a myriad of factors. For example, certain plants require pollinators who would not be present if there is significant damage to the air quality. Furthermore, during the initial monitoring period, our Indigenous teams were able to identify species of plants and trees that had never before been identified in the global community.&#x20;

The methodology gives IP and LC the incentive to provide information on rare and sensitive flora that may have gone undiscovered otherwise. Often these species are not high in carbon load, and in some instances, they have been cleared for invasive species that were higher in carbon load.&#x20;

By issuing biodiversity credits for rare native species, we help projects that were better ecologically for the zone, make as much or more revenue than projects that only focused on trees for their carbon value.&#x20;

#### Q: How is non-permanence controlled in the methodology?

Non-permanence is an inherent characteristic of biodiversity. We do not believe that promises about future outcomes lead to good changes in behavior. We believe that we need to reward what is, regularly and in good faith to show that species are worth preserving.&#x20;

We often compare this to riding in a taxi. The taxi driver might only get paid for one ride at a time, but he takes care of his car because that is how he makes his living. We are paying for a biodiversity load one year at a time, but we work with IP and LC who take care of their species because that is how they have already learned to live.&#x20;

#### Q: Is hunting forbidden in the methodology?

We do not tell IP and LCs how to manage their land. Instead, we ask them to show clearly that any hunting occurring on the land has not impacted animals at a population level to qualify for crediting. Most Indigenous groups and local communities we work with have lived for thousands of years as hunter-gatherers without hurting their ecosystems.&#x20;

We defer to them for population management, and reward evidence of adequately managed populations.&#x20;

#### **Q:** Does the biodiversity methodology align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?

Yes, the Savimbo Biodiversity Methodology aligns with the SDGs. Projects following this methodology are required to report their contributions to the SDGs using their certifiers tooling. We also encourage the use of the [Ecological Benefits Framework](https://www.canyouchangethefuture.org), which we have found helpful for ecologically complex projects.&#x20;

#### Q. What might future iterations of the methodology include?&#x20;

We do see the potential for negative integrity scores for invasive species in future. But not in this version of the methodology.&#x20;


# Document history

Document, version, and methodology history

This methodology has undergone independent public and private feedback since its inception and continues to recieve periodic updates. Several certification bodies have considered adopting it and they will adapt it for use within their crediting frameworks leading to "forks". The Savimbo version remains publically available, with expanded sections for projects not seeking accreditation, or using the methodology for outcomes tracking or MRV alone.&#x20;

### File versioning (Savimbo version)

<table><thead><tr><th width="92">Version</th><th width="209">Date</th><th width="169">Name</th><th>Description</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.0</td><td>June 11, 2023</td><td>Savimbo</td><td>Savimbo internal draft</td></tr><tr><td>1.0</td><td>Jun 22, 2023 - Oct 11, 2023</td><td>Savimbo public consultation</td><td>Savimbo public consultation</td></tr><tr><td>1.1-S</td><td>Nov 5 - 2023</td><td>Savimbo revision</td><td>Savimbo revision based on Cercarbono feedback</td></tr><tr><td>1.2-S</td><td>Mar 22 - 2024</td><td>Savimbo revision</td><td>Savimbo revision based on Cercarbono public comments</td></tr><tr><td>1.3-S</td><td>April 18 - 2024</td><td>Savimbo revision</td><td>Unit revision based on cross-market negotiations (Time -> 1 month, Integrity scale -> 0-1.</td></tr></tbody></table>

### Methodology versions

<table><thead><tr><th width="149">Version</th><th width="209">Last updated</th><th width="169">Name</th><th>Description</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Savimbo</td><td>Nov 5, 2023</td><td>1.1-S</td><td>Public IPLC version maintained with additional parameters for projects who will not seek certification but instead deliver MRV data directly to buyers or sponsors</td></tr><tr><td>Cercarbono</td><td>Nov 5, 2023</td><td>1.1-C</td><td>Savimbo ISBM adapted for use within Cercarbono biodiversity crediting program</td></tr></tbody></table>

### Public reviewers

This document has incorporated feedback through a number of public and private reviewers. Public reviewers whose comments informed revisions are listed in order of contribution, however they remain independent and are not responsible for the final content.&#x20;

<table data-header-hidden><thead><tr><th width="375"></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/galena-woodhouse-5503b1125/">Galena Woodhouse</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td>Fernando Ayerbe</td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/ned-horning-a406414/">Ned Horning</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/karl-burkart-5716b01/">Karl Burkhart</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/serota/">Lauren Serota</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/olber-leonardo-llanos-villegas-061292118/">Olber Llanos</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/renata-leite-pitman/">Renata Leite Pitman</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/sara-andreotti-b044106/">Sara Andreotti</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://yakum.org/about-us/">Michael McColm</a></td><td>Advocacy reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-thomas-lerche-0b0854201/?originalSubdomain=pe">Peter Thomas</a></td><td>Cultural reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/jes%C3%BAs-argente-aa62473/">Jesús Argente </a></td><td>Marine scientific reviewer, Independent </td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/alvaro-vallejo-b0058b294">Alvaro Vallejo</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/zimbo/">Ramesh Boonratana PhD</a></td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/carolina-romero-912047139/">Carolina Romero </a></td><td>Legal reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td>Daniel Urbano</td><td>Scientific reviewer, Independent</td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.weforum.org/">World Economic Forum</a></td><td>Revisor científico, Independiente </td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.biodiversitycreditalliance.org/">UN Biodiversity Credit Alliance</a></td><td>Revisor científico, Independiente </td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://www.planvivo.org/">Plan Vivo</a></td><td>Revisor científico, Independiente </td></tr></tbody></table>


# Disclaimer

We are dedicated scientists, but we are not an independent certifying body!

This document is provided "as is" for informational purposes only, and the authors and contributors make no representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability, or completeness of any information contained herein. The information provided does not constitute legal, financial, or other professional advice, and should not be used as a substitute for professional advice. This document does not establish any legal rights or responsibilities, and it does not modify or supersede any statutory obligations under applicable laws and regulations. The implementation of this methodology may involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions, and the authors and contributors shall not be held responsible for any losses or damages, direct or indirect, that arise from its use. Prior to implementing this methodology, we recommend seeking appropriate legal, financial, and technical advice. We also recommend verifying the latest versions of all applicable laws, regulations, and best practices. Any action you take upon the information in this document is strictly at your own risk, and we will not be liable for any losses or damages in connection with the use of this document.


# Practice guide

<h2 align="center">You guys asked! We're working on it!</h2>

<p align="center">Give us a bit, but in the meantime you can always ask Chiron about HOW to start crediting Indicator species. </p>

<p align="center"><button type="button" class="button primary" data-action="ask" data-icon="gitbook-assistant">How can we help?</button><a href="https://ask.savimbo.com/" class="button secondary" data-icon="paper-plane">Ask Chiron</a></p>

&#x20;

&#x20;

<table data-view="cards"><thead><tr><th></th><th></th><th></th><th data-hidden data-card-cover data-type="image">Cover image</th><th data-hidden data-type="content-ref"></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><h3><i class="fa-map-location" style="color:orange;">:map-location:</i></h3></td><td><h3>Land &#x26; Maps</h3></td><td>Land rights, topography, and more</td><td><a href="/files/JDld6bOnn3VSeSzkRbNL">/files/JDld6bOnn3VSeSzkRbNL</a></td><td><a href="/pages/XvdaniKQcuMdlkDOigqg">/pages/XvdaniKQcuMdlkDOigqg</a></td></tr></tbody></table>

&#x20;


# Getting started checklist

Everything you need to do to go from sign-up to a published site.

New here? Follow these steps to get up and running as quickly as possible.

{% stepper %}
{% step %}

#### Create your workspace

Your workspace is your home base. Give it your company or team name — you can change this later.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

#### Invite your team

Head to **Settings → Members** and invite colleagues by email. Assign roles based on what they need to do: editors can create and edit content, reviewers can comment, and admins can manage settings.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

#### Create your first project

Click **New project** from your workspace dashboard. Choose a template or start from scratch.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

#### Add your content

Start writing pages, or import existing content from Markdown files, a URL, or a supported third-party platform.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

#### Customise your site

Add your logo, set your brand colours, and configure your navigation under **Settings → Appearance**.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

#### Publish

When you're ready, hit **Publish**. Your site will be live at your platform subdomain — or set up a custom domain to use your own.
{% endstep %}
{% endstepper %}

{% hint style="success" %}
Done all of the above? You're all set. Check out the rest of the help centre if you run into anything, or use the **Ask** button to chat with the assistant.
{% endhint %}


# Camera trap placement guide for biodiversity monitoring

Height, angle, and trail selection that actually catch wildlife on camera.


# Setting up your camera trap: Configuration basics

Get your camera trap capturing clean, usable data from day one.


# Camera trap batteries & SD cards

What lasts in the field. Battery life and storage capacity for long, unattended deployments.


# Camera trap monitoring: Frequently asked questions

Quick answers to the questions that come up most in the field.

<details>

<summary>When am I charged?</summary>

You're charged on the date you first subscribed, then on the same date each month or year depending on your billing cycle. You can see your next charge date under **Settings → Billing → Overview**.

</details>


# How to do geocode averaging

The least expensive way to do accurate maps in the jungle

You can change your plan at any time from your workspace billing settings. Changes take effect immediately.

### Geocode averaging step by step

{% stepper %}
{% step %}

#### Choose the way you're going to get your&#x20;

There are lots of different ways to get the geocode, different applications have different error rates.&#x20;
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

#### Get comfortable

You are going to have to take the point multiple times in sequence. 30 minutes in the same spot is the Savimbo minimum. So bring a book, a timer, and get comfortable.&#x20;
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

#### Transcribe a good list!&#x20;

XXXX
{% endstep %}
{% endstepper %}

When you upgrade mid-cycle, you're charged a prorated amount for the remainder of the current billing period. Your next full charge will be on your regular billing date.


# How to document land control in Colombia

Documenting land control is different for different jurisdictions

*Disclaimer: We are not lawyers, so this is not legal advice. We can refer to our partners who are great community and customary land-rights lawyers in any country we are working in.* &#x20;

Below, we are sharing our *current* company protocols in Colombia. This is *our* paperwork checklist that our community concierge advocates assemble for partnering Colombian land-rights lawyers to document land control, help grassroots farmers get their rights to the land they live on and farm.&#x20;

#### Colombian land ownership requirements.

Under Colombian law, land can be held in ownership or stewardship. Ownership documents:

* **Title:** The legal title of ownership of the land. Resguardo titles are issued to Indigenous peoples.&#x20;
* ***Escritura***: A deed which entitles the holder to legal ownership of the land.

The Colombian government requires Escritura or Title as tje vehicle for proof of land ownership, and current international certifying standards for carbon markets do as well. &#x20;

#### Colombian land stewardship requirements.

In addition to ownership, Colombian law recognizes land stewardship, occupancy, or possession through the Compreventa document.&#x20;

* ***Compreventa***: Purchase agreement, which is inadequate to prove legal ownership of the land, but can provide documentation of long-term stewardship for eventual progression to land ownership.&#x20;

A sample mechanism for legal requirements to progress a compraventa to a title is given below.&#x20;

#### **Table 8. Additional requirements for documentation of land stewardship under Colombian law**

| Document                             | Requirements                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
| ------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Sale document                        | Authenticated or unauthenticated written document in which the sample applicant who acquired the property by sale must contain at least the date of subscription, the name of the seller and buyer, the sale price, the method of payment , the detailed description of the property.              |
| Affidavit of Sound Posession         | Declaration out of court before a notary, and signed by two wittnesses to exercise sound possession.                                                                                                                                                                                               |
| Community certification              | Certificate of being a member of the community action board of the respective jurisdiction where the property is located.                                                                                                                                                                          |
| Land survey                          | Location plan and location of the property. It must have a true description of the property, whether it is the registration page, topographic survey, description of boundaries and/or milestones where the location and area of the property and the surrounding areas are established in detail. |
| Property tax reciepts (if available) | We must prove the payment of property tax in applicable plot for the last 5 years.                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |


# Contributing to the platform

Help improve the platform by contributing feedback, bug reports, and ideas.

We build this platform with our community. There are a few ways you can contribute and help shape what we build next.

### Reporting bugs

Found something that's not working as expected? We want to know.

When reporting a bug, please include:

* A clear description of what happened vs. what you expected
* Steps to reproduce the issue
* Your browser, operating system, and plan
* Screenshots or a screen recording if relevant

You can report bugs via the community forum or directly through [support](https://example.com/support).

### Suggesting features

We track feature requests in the community forum under the **Ideas** category. Before submitting, search to see if your idea already exists — if it does, upvote it rather than creating a duplicate.

A good feature request explains:

* The problem you're trying to solve
* How you're currently working around it (if at all)
* Why you think it would be useful to others

We review and respond to ideas regularly, and use upvotes to help prioritise our roadmap.

### Writing about us

If you've written a blog post, tutorial, or made a video about the platform, we'd love to see it. Share it in the **Showcase** category on the forum — popular community content gets featured in our newsletter and social channels.

### Participating in research

From time to time we invite users to participate in user research sessions — interviews, usability tests, and surveys. If you'd like to be considered, opt in under **Settings → Account → Research participation**.