Back to insights
Grey tile with BeZero pattern. BeZero guidelines for data disclosure

BeZero Carbon guidelines for data disclosure

  • BeZero Carbon
  • Markets and Policy
BeZero Carbon has put together this guideline document to help developers navigate data disclosure requirements, beyond the requirements set by standards bodies. This may allow interested parties to perform a fair assessment of their projects. We have created this document in response to the developer community requesting more guidance on how best to deliver on the market’s call for improved transparency.

Contents

Executive Summary

This document will shed some light on:

  1. The most frequently observed reporting gaps

  2. Why those reporting gaps can limit the market’s ability to fairly assess a project’s carbon efficacy, as previously highlighted in one of our articles explaining the concept of information risk.

  3. Some specific information which tends to be lacking but is deemed crucial when assessing different aspects of a project (i.e. additionality, over-crediting etc) 

It is important to highlight that:

  • These guidelines have been created based on a lookback analysis of the projects BeZero Carbon has rated, and are therefore not meant to be exhaustive

  • The recommendations are agnostic to specific methodology requirements and may therefore be in excess to the requirements needed to pass certification

  • Adherence with the recommended practices may not impact the BeZero Carbon Rating but should improve the market’s ability to form an informed view of the risks assessed

  • Acceptable forums for data disclosure are not limited to registries and can also be extended to the project/project developer’s website

This document will read as below:

  1. General guidelines for improved reporting and data disclosure

  2. Use of Non-Public Information in BeZero Carbon Ratings

  3. Table collating the most frequently observed reporting gaps, specifying:

    a. The risk factor impacted

    b. The suggested level of data disclosure with specific examples adhering to those recommendations.

    c. The reason why the information is important to producing a robust project assessment.

  4. Table collating practical guidelines with a focus on cookstove projects. Note that the sector-specific guidelines have been put together in response to the frequency of requests received from stakeholders operating in this sector.

‎

General guidelines for improved reporting and information disclosure.

A project should publicly disclose:

Project Design Documents, and these should include:

  • Additionality test

  • All referenced appendices

  • Links to the sources of referenced data

  • Assumptions underlying baseline estimations


Monitoring and Verification reports for all vintages. The project information should:


Spatial files (when relevant). Depending on project type these could include:

  • Project Area (and project accounting area where appropriate)

  • Reference Regions:

    • Reference Region of Deforestation (RRD)

    •  Reference Region of Location (RRL)

  • Leakage belt and leakage management areas where appropriate


Explanation as to why any key documentation or information is missing.
‎

Use of Non-Public Information (NPI) in BeZero Carbon Ratings

Our preference remains for all information to be publicly available (where possible) to limit information asymmetries in the market and promote transparency. However, we recognise that information may need to be private sometimes for legal, data protection, competitive, practical, or other reasons. As such, we will accept private information where necessary. Please note:

  • We can accept non-public information either privately, or under NDA.

  • If the information provided is material to our analysis, the rating report will reflect the analytical conclusion that was derived from that information (whether in combination with other sources or not). But we will not disclose the specifics or details of the private information.

  • We will seek agreement with the developer on: 

    • the extent to which information is used in platform analytics / graphics

    • the wording used to describe the use of the NPI

Table 1: Practical guidelines

Below are examples of data we frequently find to be missing, with an explanation of how this data can inform our assessment and our recommendations to reduce information risk


a. Risk Factor Impacted: General

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing impacting general risk, with an explanation of how this data can inform our assessment and our recommendations to reduce information risk.

*Information which is always required to be public for a project to be eligible for a rating

Table links:

b. Risk Factor Impacted: Additionality

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing impacting additionality risk, with an explanation of how this data can inform our assessment and our recommendations to reduce information risk.

*Information which is always required to be public for a project to be eligible for a rating

Table links:

c. Risk Factor Impacted: Over-Crediting

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing impacting over-crediting risk, with an explanation of how this data can inform our assessment and our recommendations to reduce information risk.

Table links:

d. Risk Factor Impacted: Leakage

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing impacting leakage risk, with an explanation of how this data can inform our assessment and our recommendations to reduce information risk.

Table links:

e. Risk Factor Impacted: Non-Permanence/Information Risk

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing impacting non-permanence / information risk, with an explanation of how this data can inform our assessment and our recommendations to reduce information risk.

Table links:

f. Risk Factor Impacted: Policy

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing impacting policy risk, with an explanation of how this data can inform our assessment and our recommendations to reduce information risk.

Table links:


Table 2: Practical guidelines with a cookstove focus

Below are examples of data we frequently find to be missing for projects within the cookstoves sub-sector, with an explanation of why we assess it and recommendations on best practices.

a. Risk Factor Impacted: Additionality

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing for projects within the cookstoves sub-sector impacting additionality risk, with an explanation of why we assess it and recommendations on best practices.

¹ The project was implemented prior to the positive list introduced by Gold Standard and therefore needed to prove additionality via a barrier or investment analysis. As of today, projects can prove automatic additionality if they achieve the positive list.

Table links:

b. Risk Factor Impacted: Over-Crediting

Table showing examples of data we frequently find to be missing for projects within the cookstoves sub-sector impacting over-crediting risk, with an explanation of why we assess it and recommendations on best practices.

Table links: