How rethinking the value of blue carbon could help to support local communities

More than a decade ago, coastal wetlands – mangroves, saltmarshes and seagrass – were rebranded as “blue carbon ecosystems”. This change reflects the large carbon sequestration potential of these nature-based climate solutions. Since then, there has been significant interest in the climate change mitigation potential of these ecosystems for producing credits and also among countries with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) goals.

In carbon markets, this focus on carbon sequestration has relegated other crucial ecosystem services to the status of “co-benefits” or nice-to-have side-effects of carbon projects. It’s important to remember that carbon sequestration is not the only benefit of these ecosystems for Indigenous people and local communities. These groups often rely on the resources coastal wetlands provide for food, fuel and income.

Successful high-quality blue carbon credit projects should focus on understanding the drivers of ecosystem loss or damage and working with community stakeholders to find solutions that reduce or halt degradation. This will help carbon projects to offer communities increased financial and nutritional security, as well as generating credits for governments and companies.

Reframing co-benefits as core benefits and acknowledging the integral role of communities in these carbon projects means looking beyond carbon to human-centric goals. This could increase support for global goals relating to investment, conservation and restoration of these ecosystems by 2030.

When we think about risk in the context of blue carbon, the focus is often on investor risk. But there is also a need to acknowledge the risks that communities connected to blue carbon ecosystems take when engaging in project development. Blue carbon projects must acknowledge the "informed" aspect of the human rights principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, ensuring this is implemented in diverse communities with diverse needs and levels of engagement with blue carbon ecosystems.

Helping communities to become genuinely informed about the implications and benefits of blue carbon projects is essential for fostering trust, inclusivity, and, ultimately, project permanence. Including core benefits in project development helps de-risk blue carbon initiatives for communities, as does agreeing on what constitutes a minimum fair deal for these groups.

Demand for blue carbon projects and credits grows as governments and companies try to meet climate commitments, but supplies of high-quality, verified carbon credits remain limited. Governments are inundated with blue carbon project proposals from direct buyers, project developers or technology companies offering monitoring, reporting and verification frameworks. But these often have conflicting visions, especially concerning community leadership and benefits.

Standardized criteria can be used to assess project quality, but they can also ensure that diverse socioeconomic considerations are integrated into project auditing processes. This will help to create blue carbon projects that generate high-quality carbon credits, but that also respect the rights and needs of local communities and recognize the wide diversity of these groups.

Initiatives like the High-Quality Blue Carbon Principles and Guidance and associated Practitioner’s Guide aim to provide robust quality and safeguarding frameworks for blue carbon projects. Although the principles focus on carbon credit initiatives, these resources also emphasize inclusivity and equitable benefit-sharing – two of the five principles are “Empowering people” and “Operating locally and contextually”.

There are a few standards that acknowledge local communities already. Verra's Climate, Community and Biodiversity Standards, for example, include stakeholder safeguards, while Plan Vivo standards include a mandatory 60% income allocation for communities.

Verra’s SD-VISta also considers project ecosystem services beyond carbon. It is developing a methodology for strengthening coastal resilience through restoration and protection of tidal wetlands. Organizations such as the Ocean Risk and Resilience Action Alliance (ORRAA), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and Conservation International (CI) are also pioneering efforts to quantify and market the resilience and insurance benefits provided by these ecosystem, while crediting systems are emerging to channel funding to specific biodiversity outcomes.

Further, project developers are increasingly using new technology to remotely monitor and model project areas in order to gather evidence they are meeting these standards. Reliance on these tools should not alienate local communities participating in a blue carbon project.

Investors often look for blue carbon projects with large geographical footprints that offer value for money, particularly given the costs incurred to ensure projects meet standards' requirements. This means that communities with smaller areas of blue carbon ecosystems, but where the non-carbon benefits of these ecosystems are still incredibly valuable, could be overlooked.

But the 117-hectare Mikoko Pamoja carbon crediting project in Kenya shows that careful crafting of smaller projects alongside communities can unlock new financial streams and make conservation efforts more sustainable.

In the Philippines, mangrove reforestation is challenged by a scarcity of large areas suitable for carbon crediting projects. To address this, Oceanus Conservation is currently merging mangrove restoration with food security initiatives in fishpond areas. Mangroves provide vital livelihoods, but the primary concern for fisherfolk, who often earn around $3 a day, is access to consistent food sources.

In Indonesia, recent research shows the potential economic value of mangrove conservation for fishery production can be as much as $22,861 per hectare annually. So, the conservation of healthy mangroves and the provision of food and other ecosystem services can go hand in hand.

Focusing on carbon alone means many projects won't be feasible and won't generate a profit. But using the carbon mechanism to fund long-term community projects could open up hundreds more viable sites, especially if return is calculated based on impact and not simply profits.

A recent action lab at Stanford University examined how governments have started to explore both blue food and blue carbon benefits across coastal ecosystems. This was supplemented by research led by the Stanford Center for Ocean Solutions, at the request of the Government of Indonesia.

The resulting findings highlighted opportunities for increasing community ownership, education and capacity building, gender recognition and inclusion, as well as transforming food systems and financial mechanisms across Indonesia’s blue food and blue carbon sectors.

Additionally, while high-quality carbon values are still important to many companies, others focus on mangrove investment for nature-positive outcomes, food security, coastline protection and other values. Many companies share such commitments and learnings through 1t.org, the Blue Carbon Action Partnership, and the associated Mangroves Working Group.

A rights-based approach to blue carbon project development integrates historical resource use, Indigenous rights, local perspectives and gender equity, while also recognising the full range of ecosystem services as core benefits. By embracing this approach, the blue carbon community can foster more equitable and sustainable conservation efforts.

Such a holistic perspective will ensure blue carbon ecosystems are valued, not just for their carbon sequestration potential, but for their broader contributions to environmental resilience and community well-being.

The authors would like to acknowledge the participants from the Blue Carbon Rights Workshop, hosted by the Blue Marine Foundation in June 2023, for exploring the themes highlighted in this blog.