Methodology Standards (Paris Agreement Alignment) and Other updates

This note summarises the release of the new Gold Standard for Global Goals (GS4GG) Paris Alignment Requirements, Methodology Standards and other updates including Batch 1 methodologies published for public consultation. These documents are part of a broader initiative to align GS4GG methodologies with the requirements of the Paris Agreement and regular updates.

1 Paris Agreement Alignment

Requirements for Paris Agreement Alignment

Scope: Mandatory procedural framework for transitioning all GS4GG activities to PA-aligned methodologies.

Overview This core standard operationalises the transition to the Paris Agreement era. It mandates that all carbon credits (GSVERs) with a vintage of 1 January 2026 and onwards must be quantified using PA-aligned methodologies.

Key Mandates & Timeline

Mandatory Cut-off: The use of non-PA aligned methodologies for issuance of GSVERs ends strictly on 31 December 2025.It would mean that GSVERs Vintage 2026 onwards can only be issued with a PA aligned methodology.
Sunset Clause: New projects wishing to use non-PA aligned methodologies for design certification and pre 2026 vintage issuance can submit project for preliminary review until 30 June 2026.
PA-Alignment Design Change: Existing projects shall undergo a mandatory “PA-Alignment Design Change” validation to be eligible for 2026+ vintages.
Deferred Issuance: If a required PA-aligned methodology is not yet published when a project is ready for verification, the project enters “Deferred Issuance” status. This pauses issuance but does not penalise the project; credits are issued retroactively once the methodology is available and applied.
VVB Requirements: Auditors (VVBs) must undergo specific PA-alignment training and examinations to be authorized to validate these transitions.

Guidance Paris Agreement Alignment

Scope: Informational guidance, explanations, and roadmap for the alignment process (non-normative).

Overview This document complements the Requirements for Paris Agreement Alignment by explaining the “why” and “how” of the transition. It provides practical context on how the methodological changes will affect project operations and credit volumes.

Key Insights for Stakeholders

Impact on Credit Volumes: Stakeholders should anticipate a reduction in the volume of credits issued for PA-aligned vintages. This is due to stricter requirements such as:
Regulatory Surplus: Deducting reductions already mandated by national policies.
Downward Adjustment (DAF): Mathematically reducing baselines to ensure ambition.
Broader Leakage Scope: Increased likelihood of deductions from upstream/downstream emissions.
Targeted Validation: The mandatory “PA-Alignment Design Change” is not a full project re-validation. It is a targeted assessment focusing strictly on the changes required to meet the new requirements (e.g., new baseline calculations, DAF application). Refer to methodology specific Validation and verification requirements for further details on scope of validation.
Voluntary Early Adoption: Projects can choose to switch to PA-aligned methodologies early (e.g., for 2024 or 2025 vintages) to demonstrate high ambition. However, this decision is irrevocable—once switched, a project cannot go back.
Managing Delays: The guidance aims to reassure developers that “Deferred Issuance” is a safety net, not a penalty. Projects should continue monitoring according to their existing plans while waiting for new methodologies to ensure no data gaps occur.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): More information and answers to questions raised to date can be found in the Paris Alignment FAQs . Email help@goldstandard.org if a question is not already covered.

2 methodology standard

Requirements for Baseline Determination in Methodologies

Scope: Criteria for establishing crediting baselines in GS4GG methodologies.

Overview: This standard defines how to set a “Crediting Baseline”—the reference level against which emission reductions are measured. The core principle is that baselines shall be set below Business-As-Usual (BAU) levels to encourage increasing ambition over time.

Key Approaches: Methodologies shall select one of three mandatory approaches to determine the baseline:

Best Available Technology (BAT): Using the most efficient, economically feasible technology available in the region as the baseline.
Ambitious Benchmark: Setting the baseline based on the average performance of the top 20% (or better) of comparable activities.
Existing Actual or Historical Emissions: Using historical data, but only when combined with strict downward adjustments to ensure the baseline decreases over time.

The “Step-Wise” Process: Methodology Developers shall follow a five-step process:

Select one of the three approaches above.
Quantify the initial baseline emissions/removals.
Apply Downward Adjustment: Reduce the baseline further to account for uncertainty and ensure ambition (using a Downward Adjustment Factor).
Identify Conservative BAU: Determine what would have happened in the absence of the project (considering policies and targets).
Compare: The final crediting baseline is the lower of the Downward-Adjusted Baseline and the Conservative BAU.

Requirements for Addressing Leakage in Methodologies

Scope: Requirements for identifying, avoiding, and quantifying leakage emissions.

Overview “Leakage” refers to unintended greenhouse gas emissions that occur outside the project boundary as a result of the project activity. This standard ensures that projects do not simply shift emissions elsewhere (e.g., protecting a forest in one area causing deforestation in a neighboring area).

The Three-Tiered Approach Methodologies shall mandate a strict hierarchy of actions:

Identify: List all potential sources of leakage, such as:
Baseline Equipment Transfer: Old equipment being moved and used elsewhere.
Resource Competition: Using scarce resources (e.g., biomass) that forces others to use higher-emission alternatives.
Diversion of Production: Reducing service levels that leads to production shifting elsewhere.
Avoid or Minimise: Implement project design features or applicability conditions to prevent leakage from happening.
Calculate and Subtract: If leakage cannot be fully avoided, the remaining negative leakage must be quantified and subtracted from the project’s total emission reductions.

3 methodology tools

Downward Adjustment Factor (DAF) Determination Tool

Scope: Methodology for calculating the specific factor used to adjust baselines downwards (for emissions) or upwards (for removals).

Overview This tool operationalises the “Downward Adjustment” requirement from the Baseline Determination Standard. It provides a standardised mathematical framework to calculate a specific percentage (the DAF) by which a project’s baseline must be adjusted to ensure it is ambitious and aligned with the Paris Agreement’s net zero goals.

Key Features

Ambition-Driven Calculation: The DAF is primarily based on a country’s National Net-Zero Target. It calculates a linear reduction pathway from 2021 to the country’s target year.
Ambition Floor: To prevent low ambition, the tool compares the country’s DAF against a “Comparison Group” of similar peers (based on GDP, HDI, and climate vulnerability). The higher of the two values is used.
Absolute Floor: If no specific target or group exists, a minimum global fallback DAF of 1.25% applies (based on reaching global net zero by 2100).
Fixed Application Periods: DAF values are fixed for 5-year cycles (e.g., 2026–2030) to provide certainty for developers, with default values provided in the tool’s Annex.

Common Practice Analysis Tool

Scope: Standardised quantitative procedure for conducting common practice analysis to demonstrate additionality.

Overview This tool removes subjectivity from additionality assessment by providing a strict, quantitative framework to determine if a project’s technology or practice is already “common” in the market. If a project is deemed “common practice” according to these metrics, it is not eligible for carbon credits.

Key Features

Quantitative Thresholds (Fmax): Uses “Technology Maturity Categories” (TMC) based on innovation diffusion curves to set strict percentage limits for common practice:
TMC-1 (Nascent): Novel technologies (very low threshold).
TMC-2 (Early Adopter): Viable but barriers exist.
TMC-3 (Early Majority): Rapid growth phase (higher threshold).
Two Assessment Approaches:
Stock-Based: Measures the total cumulative installed units (best for mature/slow markets).
Flow-Based: Measures the rate of recent adoption/sales over the last ~3 years (best for fast-moving markets).
Equity Provisions: Recognises that market penetration in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) faces higher systemic barriers. Therefore, these regions are assigned higher thresholds (allowing higher market penetration while still being considered “additional”).
Methodology-Level Analysis: To increase efficiency, the tool allows for a common practice analysis to be conducted once at the methodology level (valid for 3 years), saving individual projects from repeating the complex assessment.

Article 6.4 /PACM Methodology Tool – TOOL Investment Analysis

Scope: Adoption of PACM Tool for Investment Analysis and Withdrawal of CDM Tool 27

Effective Date: Immediate

Gold Standard announces the immediate adoption of the new Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM) Tool: Investment Analysis (A6.4-AMT-002-v01.0) for use under GS4GG. This tool replaces the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Tool 27 (“Investment Analysis”), which is hereby withdrawn for GS4GG certification purposes.

Action Required: All project developers must use the new PACM Tool for Investment Analysis for all future submissions requiring financial viability assessment. Submissions currently under review using CDM Tool 27 may proceed, but all new requests for Preliminary Review or Validation shall apply the PACM tool. This update ensures that financial additionality assessments remain robust and aligned with the latest PA aligned standards.

Article 6.4 /PACM Methodology – Eligible PACM methodologies applicable under GS4GG

Scope: Approval of the first Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM) methodology and associated tools for application under GS4GG.

Overview: Gold Standard has approved the PACM methodology, A6.4-AMM-001: Flaring or use of landfill gas for application under GS4GG. The approval applies to the methodology and associated PACM tools for activities that capture landfill gas (LFG) and flare and/or use it to produce energy (heat, electricity) and/or use to supply consumers through natural gas distribution network. This PACM methodology officially replaces the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) methodology ACM0001 for new projects under GS4GG.

Approved Eligibility Conditions:

Activities associated with methane avoidance, including from the flared biogas fraction, and activities involving substitution of non-renewable fuel are eligible only where the developer demonstrates that the system is designed to make use of recovered biogas for energy services, including heat and/or power generation.
Flaring-only activities are NOT eligible.
Backup or safety flares are eligible only up to ≤10% of recovered methane annually for the first crediting period. Any fraction above this threshold is subject to either:
a minimum 10% annual baseline contraction, or
ineligibility for the excess flared volume.

Methodology Tools: The following PACM tools shall be applied as required by methodology:

A6.4-AMT-001: Common practice analysis
A6.4-AMT-002: Investment analysis
A6.4-AMT-003: Emissions from solid waste disposal sites
A6.4-AMT-004: Project emissions from flaring
A6.4-AMT-005: Mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream

Transition/Validation and Verification requirements:

New projects: All new landfill gas projects submitted for Preliminary Review must apply A6.4-AMM-001 and its associated tools effective immediately.
Existing projects: Existing projects shall transition to the PACM methodology for all vintages from 2026 onwards. This transition will require a PA-Alignment Validation as part of the issuance process for 2026+ credits.
The validation and Verification requirements for mid-CP transition will be released soon by Gold Standard soon.

4 Activity Requirements

Agriculture Activity Requirements

Scope: Eligibility and certification requirements for agricultural projects (crops, livestock, agroforestry).

Overview This document sets the rules for agricultural projects seeking GS4GG certification. It defines what types of activities are eligible (e.g., soil organic carbon, methane reduction) and establishes safeguards to ensure projects contribute to climate security without causing harm (e.g., protecting wetlands and native forests).

Key Eligibility Criteria

Allowed Activities: Includes increasing soil organic carbon (SOC), agroforestry, silvopasture, and activities that reduce methane or N2O from livestock and crops.
Land Eligibility: The project area must not have been deforested or defined as a wetland in the 10 years prior to the project start date (with limited exceptions).
Secured Titles: Developers must demonstrate clear ownership of carbon credits, legal land titles, and rights to agricultural products.

Core Principles

Safeguards: Projects shall strictly maintain buffer zones around water bodies (e.g., 5-15m width) and protect existing native tree species.
Additionality: Projects shall prove they are not business-as-usual using one of three options:
Approved Tools: Using standard GS4GG additionality tools.
Positive List: For projects in specific low-income regions or using specific practices (e.g., native crop species in agroforestry).
Activity Penetration Rate: For small projects (<60,000 tCO2e/yr) where the practice is adopted by less than 5% of farmers in the area.

5 Methodology Consultations

Animal Manure Management and Biogas Use (Version 2.0)

Consultation period: 22 Dec 2025 – 05 Feb 2026

Scope: Gold Standard invites feedback on the updated Methodology for Animal Manure Management and Biogas Use (Version 2.0) and its associated documents. This update aligns the methodology with the Paris Agreement (PA) and sets the requirements for PA-alignment validation and 2026+ issuances.

Key Updates (V2.0) & Documents

A. Methodology V2.0 (Core Rules) [Link]

Baselines: Standardises quantification using IPCC approaches and Methodology standards prescribing PAA requirements.
Ambition: Integrates “Downward Adjustment Factors” (DAF) to align with host country Net-Zero goals.
Safeguards: Mandates aerobic handling of digestate to prevent leakage, with penalties for non-compliance.

B. Requirements for PAA validation and verification [Link]

Pathways: The guidelines establish two main pathways for projects moving to the Paris Agreement Aligned (PAA) Version 2.0. Projects can choose between a “Mid-Crediting Period” transition (Gap Validation) or a “Crediting Period Renewal” transition (Full Validation). Gap Validation focuses on new PAA requirements without re-validating the whole project design, while Full Validation involves a complete compliance review.
Grace Period: Grace Period for Existing Project Design: To support a smooth transition and avoid treating the update as a full re-validation, existing projects benefit from broad grandfathering provisions until CP renewal. This exemption covers originally approved technical specifications (e.g., thermal efficiency), baseline data (e.g., retaining Option B defaults), and consistency checks for existing cohorts. This approach ensures that while projects shall adopt new PAA accounting rules (like DAF), their fundamental design parameters remain valid during this window to prevent disruption.
Guidelines for Validation Bodies (VVBs): Explicit instructions are provided to VVBs to prevent “scope creep” during Mid-Crediting Period transitions. The guidelines define a targeted “Gap Validation” scope, strictly limiting assessment to the new PAA requirements (the “PAA Delta”) and prohibiting the re-validation of unchanged, previously approved project aspects.

C. Supplementary Information (Link)

Leakage: This document confirms that peer-reviewed literature was used to inform the decision to establish a tiered assessment for digestate storage leakage. It provides the evidentiary basis for applying a conservativeness factor in cases where aerobic conditions are not verified, citing specific studies on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from digestate.
Embodied Emissions: The document synthesizes findings from Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) literature to derive and justify conservative default deductions for digester construction, ensuring alignment with cradle-to-gate accounting principles.

Feedback: We welcome feedback on all aspects of the proposed updates and the accompanying documents. Please submit your comments via the feedback form by 05 Feb 2026.

Metered & Measured Energy Cooking Devices (MECD) (Version 2.0)

Consultation period: 22 Dec 2025 – 05 Feb 2026

SCOPE: Gold Standard invites stakeholders to provide feedback on Version 2.0 of the Methodology for Metered & Measured Energy Cooking Devices (MECD). This comprehensive update aligns the methodology with the Paris Agreement (PA) requirements.

Key Updates & Documents

A. Methodology V2.0 x

CTEC Mandate (100% Metering): The methodology explicitly defines “Continuously Tracked Energy Consumption” (CTEC) as the core eligibility criterion. It mandates the direct measurement of energy or fuel for 100% of project devices, strictly prohibiting sampling for project energy consumption.
Enhanced Baselines: Introduces a mandatory 5-step baseline setting procedure. This includes “Back-Calculation” methods capped by conservative per-capita thresholds (PCAP) to prevent over-crediting, and stricter uncertainty adjustments (90/10 rule) for baseline parameters.
Ambition & Conservativeness: Integrates the mandatory “Downward Adjustment Factor” (DAF) to align baselines with host country Net-Zero goals. It also introduces methods to account for the “Rebound Effect” (stove stacking) by limiting credits strictly to the metered energy service delivered.
Expanded Scope: Explicitly covers a wider range of modern technologies, including electric pressure cookers (EPCs), induction stoves, and metered LPG/bio-ethanol systems, provided they meet strict lock-in risk criteria.

B. Transition Guidelines (V&V Requirements)

Structured Transition Pathways: The guidelines define clear pathways for existing projects (all previous versions) to transition to V2.0:
Mid-Crediting Period (Mid-CP): Projects may undergo a targeted “Gap Validation” at their next verification. This focuses on applying new PAA calculation rules (e.g., DAF, Caps, Embodied Emissions) without re-validating the entire project design.
Crediting Period Renewal (CPR): Projects must undergo a “Full Validation” against all V2.0 criteria, including updated baseline surveys.
Grandfathering of Fixed Parameters: To support stability, parameters fixed ex-ante in the registered PDD (such as the Baseline Fuel Mix) are grandfathered until the end of the current crediting period. However, these parameters must still undergo a “Consistency Check” against new user data and apply new uncertainty adjustments immediately upon transition.
Immediate updates: Certain PAA integrity measures must be applied immediately upon transition for vintage 2026+ credits, regardless of the pathway. These include the Downward Adjustment Factor (DAF), Baseline Caps (P_CAP), and deductions for Embodied Emissions.

C. Supplementary Information (Evidence Base)

Embodied Emissions: Synthesizes Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) literature to establish a conservative default deduction. This ensures “cradle-to-gate” emissions from manufacturing and transport are accounted for.
Leakage: Reviews scientific evidence to justify a default market leakage deduction where “de minimis” leakage cannot be rigorously proven.
Lock-In Risk: Provides a detailed analysis of technology lifespans and grid compatibility. It establishes exemptions for short-lived technologies like Electric Pressure Cookers (<10 years) while imposing strict “High Burden of Proof” requirements for fossil-fuel-based technologies (e.g., LPG) to ensure alignment with long-term decarbonization goals.

3. Feedback: We welcome feedback on all aspects of the proposed updates, particularly on the CTEC monitoring requirements, Baseline Cap thresholds, and Embodied Emissions defaults. Please submit your comments via the feedback form by 05 Feb 2026.

Simplified Methodology for Clean and Efficient Cookstoves (SMEC) Version 4.0

Consultation period: 22 Dec 2025 – 05 Feb 2026

Scope: Gold Standard invites stakeholders to provide feedback on Version 4.0 of the Simplified Methodology for Clean and Efficient Cookstoves (SMEC). This major revision fundamentally restructures the methodology to align with the Paris Agreement (PAA). While retaining its applicability to micro-scale projects (<10,000 tCO2e/yr), it introduces rigorous direct measurement requirements to insure robustness in its quantification approaches.

Key Updates & Documents

A. Methodology V4.0 (Core Rules)

Fundamental Calculation Shift: The methodology abandons the “Efficiency Ratio” method used in previous versions. Credits are now calculated based on the difference between the Unadjusted Baseline (or Minimum Service Level) and the Measured Project Fuel Consumption.
Mandatory Project KPTs: To support this new calculation method, biennial Project Kitchen Performance Tests (P-KPTs) are now mandatory to measure actual fuel use. Water Boiling Tests (WBTs) are retained solely for eligibility screening, not for emission reduction calculations.
Ambition & Conservativeness: Integrates the mandatory “Downward Adjustment Factor” (DAF) to align with national Net-Zero goals. It also introduces strict per-capita Baseline Caps (e.g., 1.25 tonnes/person/year for wood) and a mandatory Hawthorne Effect adjustment to prevent over-crediting.
Standardised Leakage: Simplifies accounting by mandating conservative defaults deduction for market leakage and deduction for embodied emissions.

B. Transition Guidelines (V&V Requirements)

Structured Transition Pathways: To facilitate the shift for existing activities, the guidelines define two pathways:
Mid-Crediting Period (Mid-CP): Projects may opt for a “Gap Validation” at their next verification. This targeted assessment focuses strictly on the new PAA calculation rules (e.g., P-KPT adoption, DAF, Caps) without re-validating the entire project design.
Crediting Period Renewal (CPR): Projects transitioning at renewal must undergo a “Full Validation” against all V4.0 criteria.
Grace Period for Technical Specifications: Existing projects benefit from a grace period until 01 January 2028. During this window, they may continue to distribute devices meeting their originally registered technical specifications, even if they do not meet the new V4.0 thermal efficiency thresholds (20% griddle / 25% wood / 30% charcoal). From 01 January 2028, all new devices must meet these stricter standards.
Immediate Calculation Shift: Unlike the technical specs, the shift in calculation methodology (from Efficiency Ratio to P-KPT) applies immediately upon transition for all vintage 2026+ credits to ensure accounting integrity.

C. Supplementary Information (Evidence Base)

Embodied Emissions: Synthesizes Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) literature to establish the conservative default deduction ensuring “cradle-to-gate” emissions are captured.
Leakage Rationale: Justifies the mandatory market leakage deduction as a necessary conservative buffer where project-specific “de minimis” claims cannot be rigorously verified.
Lock-In Risk: Confirms that improved biomass cookstoves generally present low lock-in risk, provided they are transitional technologies with lifespans of 10 years or less.

Feedback: We welcome feedback on all aspects of the proposed updates, specifically the shift to P-KPT based monitoring and the Baseline Cap thresholds. Please submit your comments via the feedback form by 05 Feb 2026.

Reduced Emissions from Cooking and Heating (TPDDTEC) Methodology (Version 5.0)

Consultation period: 22 Dec 2025 – 05 Feb 2026

Scope: Gold Standard invites stakeholders to provide feedback on Version 5.0 of the Methodology for Reduced Emissions from Cooking and Heating (TPDDTEC). This extensive update realigns the methodology with the Paris Agreement (PAA) requirements, introducing a rigorous 5-step baseline approach while narrowing its scope to focus exclusively on unmetered biomass and fossil fuel technologies.

Key Updates & Documents

A. Methodology V5.0 (Core Rules)

Scope Refinement: The methodology’s scope is now strictly limited to unmetered thermal energy technologies (e.g., improved biomass stoves, solar cookers). All metered technologies (electric, biogas, metered liquids) have been moved to the MECD methodology to ensure clearer accounting boundaries.
5-Step Baseline Approach: Introduces a mandatory stepwise procedure for setting baselines: (1) Selection, (2) Unadjusted Calculation, (3) Downward Adjustment, (4) Conservative BAU, and (5) Final Crediting Baseline. This ensures transparency and consistency across projects.
Ambition & Conservativeness: Integrates the “Downward Adjustment Factor” (DAF) to align with national Net-Zero goals. It also mandates strict per-capita Baseline Caps (PCAP) on fuel consumption (e.g., 1.25 tonnes/person/year for wood) and stricter uncertainty adjustments (90/10 rule).
Unified Calculation: Consolidates previous calculation methods into a single, robust approach based on the difference between Baseline Emissions and Activity Emissions (BE – AE), incorporating a mandatory Hawthorne Effect adjustment.

B. Transition Guidelines (V&V Requirements)

Structured Transition Pathways: Existing projects (all previous versions) can transition to V5.0 via two pathways:
Mid-Crediting Period (Mid-CP): Projects may undergo a targeted “Gap Validation” at their next verification. This focuses on applying new PAA integrity measures (e.g., DAF, Caps, Leakage) without re-validating the entire project design.
Crediting Period Renewal (CPR): Projects transitioning at renewal must undergo a “Full Validation” against all V5.0 criteria.
Grace Period for Technical Specifications: To prevent disruption, existing projects benefit from a grace period until 01 January 2028. During this window, they may continue to distribute devices that meet their originally registered technical specifications, even if they do not meet the new V5.0 thermal efficiency thresholds (20% griddle / 25% wood / 30% charcoal). From 01 January 2028, all new devices must meet these stricter standards.
Immediate Application: Critical PAA accounting rules—including the DAF, Baseline Caps, and the mandatory Hawthorne Effect adjustment—must be applied immediately upon transition for vintage 2026+ credits.

C. Supplementary Information (Evidence Base)

Lock-In Risk: Provides a detailed assessment of technology lifespans. It establishes “Safe Harbor” exemptions for short-lived technologies (<10 years) like many biomass stoves, while imposing a “High Burden of Proof” on fossil-fuel technologies (e.g., LPG) to demonstrate alignment with national transitional strategies.
Leakage & Embodied Emissions: Justifies the use of conservative defaults, including a market leakage deduction and a deduction for embodied emissions, based on peer-reviewed literature.

Feedback: We welcome feedback on all aspects of the proposed updates, particularly on the exclusion of metered devices, the Baseline Cap thresholds, and the mandatory Hawthorne Effect adjustment. Please submit your comments via the feedback form by 05 Feb 2026.

Comprehensive Lowered Emission Assessment and Reporting (CLEAR) Methodology for Cooking Energy Transitions

Consultation period: 22 Dec 2025 – 05 Feb 2026

Scope: Gold Standard invites stakeholders to provide feedback on the Comprehensive Lowered Emission Assessment and Reporting (CLEAR) Methodology, developed by the Clean Cooking and Climate Consortium (4C). This methodology aims to provide a unified, rigorous framework for quantifying emission reductions from cooking energy transitions, covering both metered and non-metered technologies.

Note on Scope and Paris Agreement Alignment (PAA)

The draft methodology currently available for consultation represents the technical framework developed by the 4C consortium. Gold Standard is specifically seeking stakeholder feedback on the non-PAA elements of this methodology, including the core calculation logic, monitoring procedures, and parameter determination methods.

Paris Agreement Alignment (PAA): This draft does not yet fully reflect the specific Gold Standard Paris Agreement Alignment (PAA) requirements.

Post-Consultation Update: Following this public consultation, Gold Standard will update the methodology to ensure full alignment with GS4GG PAA requirements.

Consistency: The PAA alignment provisions (such as the application of the Downward Adjustment Factor, specific additionality tests, and leakage safeguards) will be applied in a manner consistent with other GS4GG methodologies currently available for public consultation (e.g., TPDDTEC V5.0, MECD V2.0).

Feedback Focus: Stakeholders are asked to focus their feedback on the technical robustness of the CLEAR approach itself. It should be assumed that standard GS4GG PAA provisions will be overlaid on this framework in the final version.

Methodology overview: The CLEAR methodology proposes a consolidated approach for crediting cooking energy transitions:

Unified Framework: Covers both Continuously Tracked Energy Consumption (CTEC) projects (metered) and Non-CTEC projects (sampling-based) under a single standard.
Measurement Focus: Prioritizes direct measurement of fuel consumption (via Meters or Kitchen Performance Tests) over efficiency-based calculations to capture actual performance, rebound effects, and stove stacking.
Enhanced Parameters: Incorporates updated approaches for key parameters, including the use of MoFuSS for determining the Fraction of Non-Renewable Biomass (fNRB) and the exclusion of outdated tools (e.g., CDM Tool 30).
Uncertainty Management: Addresses uncertainty through a combination of conservative global defaults and rigorous statistical adjustments for measured data

Feedback:

We welcome feedback on the technical elements of the CLEAR methodology, particularly the back-calculation approaches for CTEC, the sampling requirements for Non-CTEC, and the default parameter values. Please submit your comments via the feedback form by 05 Feb 2026.

6 Other Updates

Core Carbon Principles (CCP) Labelling Requirements

Scope: Requirements and procedures for design-certified projects to seek Core Carbon Principles (CCP) labelling for Gold Standard Verified Emission Reductions (GSVERs).

Key Updates (Version 3.0) This update introduces critical changes regarding the eligibility of historical credits and new methodology approvals:

Extension of Retroactive Eligibility (2021 Vintage): The eligibility for CCP labelling has been extended to include historically issued GSVERs. Projects can now request labelling for eligible credits with vintages dating back to 2021 and onwards. This ensures that high-quality historical credits align with the integrity standards of the ICVCM.
New Carbon Removal Methodology: The update incorporates applicability conditions for the methodology “Carbon Sequestration Through Accelerated Carbonation of Concrete Aggregate V1.0”. This methodology is now eligible for CCP labelling, expanding the scope of approved carbon dioxide removal (CDR) activities.

Rule Update – SOC Loss Risk in Rice Cultivation

Scope: Requirements to account for Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) loss risk in projects shifting from continuously flooded rice cultivation to adjusted water management (e.g., AWD).

Overview This rule addresses the risk that drying rice fields (to reduce methane) could inadvertently release soil carbon. It mandates a conservative approach to ensure that emission reductions are not overestimated due to SOC losses.

Key Requirements

Mandatory Management Practices: Projects must implement and monitor scientifically established practices to conserve SOC, such as:
Incorporating crop residues (rice straw/stubble) back into fields.
Optimising Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD) to prevent over-drying (e.g., ensuring water depth does not fall below 5–15 cm).
Using green manures, organic amendments (e.g., biochar), and cover crops.
Deduction for Non-Compliance: If these management practices are reported as insufficient or missing:
A 100% deduction factor is applied to emission reductions for the affected fields.
This deduction can only be avoided if the project demonstrates (via direct measurement and sampling, not modelling) that SOC loss is insignificant (<5% of baseline stocks).

Compliance Timeline

General Compliance: Mandatory for all monitoring periods falling on or after 01 July 2026.
CCP Labelling: Projects seeking CCP labelling must be fully compliant immediately for the requested period (or by 01 July 2026, whichever is earlier). Non-compliance precludes CCP labelling even for pre-2026 periods.