Ecologists and climate scientists agree that “nature-based solutions” like the reforestation of degraded pasture lands and restoration of coastal wetlands can play a key role in combatting climate change. These projects take advantage of the natural carbon cycle—in particular, photosynthesis’ conversion of carbon dioxide into biomass—to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Investing in nature-based solutions also can increase community resilience to destructive climate impacts such as sea rise and storm surges in coastal areas, excessive heat, catastrophic wildfires, and the like. And nature-based investments can produce other valuable “ecosystem services” such as clean water, biodiversity, and multiple cultural and socio-economic benefits.

Despite all of these positives, there is a broad consensus that nature-based solutions are not playing as prominent a role as they should, given the climate benefits that they can generate and the many valuable ecosystem services that they provide.

This Stanford Law and Policy Lab report points to shortcomings in how nature-based solutions are measured, monitored, reported on, and verified (MMRV) as a fundamental weakness that is holding back the deployment of nature-based solutions. Measurement and verification deficiencies limit confidence in claims that investing in “climate-smart” agricultural or forestry practices, or prioritizing investments in restoring natural coastal barriers, will produce measurable and confirmable carbon emissions reductions or removals. This opens the door to criticism of governmental incentive programs; corporate “insetting” claims regarding low-carbon practices in supply chains; and carbon credit claims in voluntary carbon markets. This is unfortunate as nature-based solutions can and should play a major role in reducing GHG emissions and removing carbon from the atmosphere, while often also generating climate resilience and other ecosystem service co-benefits.

This report makes key recommendations to address MMRV deficiencies and attract more investment in nature-based solutions. For nature-based solutions that claim carbon reductions or removals, the report calls for a public/private collaborative that will: (1) identify scientifically-sound and consensus-based data greenhouse gas data collection and modeling protocols for specific practices; and (2) establish an open-source data sharing system that provides broad public access to credible and verifiable greenhouse gas data and analytics at the practice level. The report also recommends formation of a high-level panel of key policymakers, economists, and ecologists that will build on existing sources and systems to advance the quantification and monetization of ecosystem services that flow from nature-based projects.