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 count...