Terraspect’s Post

What is a community compensation distribution mechanism❓ Terraspect believes ‘community compensation’ is more accurate than ‘benefit sharing’ or ‘co-benefits’ as these terms imply that the local community is passive in a carbon project and is simply granted benefits as an act of generosity. Community compensation, on the other hand, suggests a rightful payment in return for active, critical contributions to a carbon project. A community compensation distribution mechanism is a way to pay local people for their conservation or restoration work that is context-specific and traceable. A typical distribution mechanism considers: 1️⃣ What to pay  2️⃣ How to pay it  3️⃣ How to audit it The design is determined through engagement and consultation with the community, grassroots organisations, local partners and the buyer or project investor. ⚖️ These principles balance the trade-offs between compensation flowing to the community versus imposing external requirements that reshape the internal structure. Payments can be monetary, non-monetary, in-kind of a hybrid: 💲 Monetary and non-monetary compensation is often distributed to the community, typically through specific vehicles such as community trust funds, ecotourism funds or group bank accounts. ❤️ In-kind compensation can be a positive thing for the community when it supports critical infrastructure which didn’t exist before. This development needs to benefit all community members, which can be hard to determine. Dig deeper into the discussion of what to pay in section 3 of our white paper - From co-benefits to core-benefits. 👇 https://lnkd.in/enn36Ekv #communitycompensation #carbonfinance 

  • No alternative text description for this image

At #carbontanzania we go further than this in framing the relationship between the forest communities and the flow of carbon finance. I agree strongly that phrases such as “banafit sharing” and “co-benefits” are inadequate, and potentially paternalistic, in describing the rationale behind the revenues that are received by communities in Carbon Tanzania’s model, we treat the communities who own and manage the critical forest resources as providers of a service to the global community which is paid for out of carbon revenues in this way genuine agency and ownership of the process is fostered, rather than repeating the shortcomings of charity and donor finded nature conservation.

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics