(fra kommisjonsforordningen)

(1) Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 establishes a voluntary Union certification framework for permanent carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage in products in order to support the achievement of the Union objectives under the Paris Agreement adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in particular the collective achievement of the climate neutrality objective at the latest by 2050 as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council. To that end, Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 lays down quality criteria for carbon removal and soil emission reduction activities with regard to quantification, additionality, storage, monitoring and liability, and sustainability. It is necessary to set out the certification methodologies under which operators of carbon farming activities taking place in the Union should be considered to comply with those quality criteria and the carbon removals and soil emission reductions generated should be eligible for certification under the Union framework. 

(2) An assessment carried out by the Commission of existing methodologies for the certification of carbon farming activities and the ensuing work conducted by the Expert Group on Carbon Removals has identified three types of activities for which the scientific knowledge and maturity allow for the establishment of certification methodologies for the purposes of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, namely activities in agriculture and agroforestry on mineral soils, rewetting and restoration of peatlands and of other organic soils, and afforestation. Those activities enhance adaptive capacity, strengthen resilience and reduce vulnerability to climate change in line with the objectives of Regulation (EU) 2021/1119. 

(3) Farming practices that sequester carbon or reduce soil emissions increase the resilience of agricultural production in the context of changing climatic and geopolitical conditions, by improving soil health and water retention and reducing dependency on inputs such as synthetic fertilisers and plant protection products. In order to optimise the positive impacts of carbon farming in agriculture and agroforestry, it should be possible for farmers to combine several practices within the same activity. 

(4) Similarly, the rewetting of peatlands and of organic soils can substantially curb greenhouse gas emissions, prevent further land degradation and maintain soil health. For this reason and to encourage in the short-term the transition of peatlands drained for agriculture to more sustainable land uses, it is appropriate that practices that only partially raise the water level in peatlands and organic soils, in addition to full rewetting, should be eligible for certification. 

(5) Afforestation is a key solution to address the declining carbon sink and to contribute to climate adaptation. In order to increase the forested area in the Union while enhancing forest resilience, an appropriate tree composition should be prioritised. However, the planting of a single species should be allowed to take account of land specificities and harsh growing conditions, such as in areas subject to desertification. 

(6) In order to ensure an appropriate combination of on-site measurements, remote sensing and modelling, as required by Article 4(7) of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, different quantification and monitoring approaches should be allowed. In order to ensure the robustness of those approaches, it is appropriate to provide clear rules on the selection and use of models, measurements, and emission factors. Considering the objectives of minimising the administrative and financial burden on operators and simplifying the certification process pursuant to Article 8(3), point (h), of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, it is necessary to develop a protocol for the validation of credible, accurate, transparently designed and suitable models and proximal sensing techniques to estimate the impact of the carbon farming practices covered by this Regulation in specific regions of the Union, while seeking consistency with approaches applicable to greenhouse gas inventories in the field of land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF). 

(7) In accordance with Article 4(9) of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, a standardised baseline is to be established by the certification methodologies. The Commission, through dedicated Horizon Europe research and innovation projects, including the Horizon Europe Mission “A Soil Deal for Europe”, has made significant progress in developing models and maps to estimate the average carbon fluxes in similar pedoclimatic circumstances in the Union. However, as the results of those projects are not yet available, in parallel to continuing work towards the establishment of a standardised baseline, it is appropriate to provide for the application of an activityspecific baseline representing the continuation of the practices that operators had in place before starting the carbon farming activity. To maintain high ambition, the activity-specific baseline should be subject to a downward adjustment over time reflecting plausible climate benefits that would be generated in the absence of the activity. This adjustment should apply only to emissions from agricultural soils, where technological innovation is likely to reduce the intensity of GHG emissions from food production in the future, but not in the case of peatland rewetting, agroforestry and afforestation where no climate benefit would be generated in the absence of the activity. 

(8) To account for uncertainties in the quantification of carbon removals and soil emission reductions, as required by Article 4(12) of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, an uncertainty deduction factor should apply. To align with standards adopted under the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), such factor should be at least 10%. 

(9) Indirect land use change (ILUC) can occur when land previously devoted to agricultural production is converted because of a carbon farming activity such as afforestation and peatland rewetting. In those cases, demand for agricultural products still needs to be satisfied, which may lead to the extension of agricultural land into areas with high carbon stocks such as forests, wetlands and peatlands, resulting in a reduced climate benefit of the carbon farming activities. In addition, the potential revenues generated through carbon farming practices might drive up land prices, leading to land speculation. Those negative impacts due to ILUC or land speculation would be triggered in the event that the revenues from certification for an operator are equal or higher compared to the revenues generated under the previous land use, including yields and land values. In this respect, the assessment of existing literature shows that carbon farming activities that are carried out in degraded, marginal or lowyield areas are not expected to be associated with significant ILUC emissions as there would not be any or only little re-/displacement of food and feed production. However, robust, EU-wide data on the revenues and opportunity costs of afforestation and peatland rewetting remain scarce. Therefore, currently it is not possible to quantify ILUC emissions or land speculation risks, pending experience with regard to the application of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 and the availability of information on prices for certified units, income foregone from lost yields, and land values. 

(10) To ensure that the certification has an incentive effect, and to demonstrate that revenues generated under certification are necessary to make the carbon farming activity viable, including where such revenues are cumulated with public funding, in line with Union State aid rules and with standards under the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism, it is appropriate to lay down rules for the performance of specific additionality tests referred to in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012. Operators should therefore demonstrate that the activity is not required by statutory provisions and did not start before the submission of the application to the certification scheme and that certification generates costs or is not the most viable investment scenario. As these rules for the performance of specific additionality tests would exclude from certification operators who started their activity between 2023 and 2027, it is appropriate to introduce a transitional derogation to the incentive effect requirement for such early movers to recognise their efforts. Likewise, operators who started the activity under a certification scheme that is later recognised under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2358 should be able to benefit from a derogation to the incentive effect requirement, in order to ensure sufficient time for the recognition process. 

(11) Carbon removed through activities relying on natural ecosystems such as carbon farming activities is exposed to the risk of being released into the atmosphere. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish harmonised and robust rules to assess the risk of reversing the carbon removals underlying certified units and encourage the application of practices that mitigate those risks and contribute to increased resilience. Based on that risk assessment, liability mechanisms should ensure that both unavoidable and avoidable events leading to carbon reversals do not affect the validity of certified units. Operators should be able to choose among different liability mechanisms in respect of market and competition rules. Activities such as rewetting and restoration of peatlands and of other organic soils and improved fertiliser use prevent emissions that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere; the soil emission reductions units generated from those activities are therefore irreversible, with the consequence that no liability mechanism is needed. However, for those activities, appropriate resilience practices should be put in place in areas prone to risks that could negatively affect the net climate benefit of those activities. 

(12) Pursuant to Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, carbon farming activities are to generate co-benefits for the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, including soil health and the avoidance of land degradation. To facilitate proof of compliance with this requirement, while ensuring a flexibility, operators should be allowed to choose from a list of qualitative approaches, that ensure compliance with and facilitate the application of Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council1and that enhance the use of biodiversityfriendly practices. In addition, operators should be able to demonstrate other sustainability co-benefits via action-based or result-based approaches, enhancing business opportunities through a potential market premium for the certified units. 

(13) Considering the necessity to take into account the best available scientific evidence for establishing the certification methodologies, in accordance with Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, it is also appropriate to provide for a periodic review of those certification methodologies in view of the technological and scientific progress and innovation, in particular improvements in monitoring of carbon removals and soil emission reductions and in the quantification of albedo effects resulting from current and future carbon farming activities. Developments in Union legislation need to be equally considered, among other things, to ensure synergies with certification approaches for nature credits in accordance with the Communication on the Roadmap towards Nature Credits and the development of a benchmarking system for on-farm sustainability announced in the Vision for Agriculture and Food. In order to reflect experience with the application of this Regulation and with the adoption of carbon farming practices in the Union, also with a view to include a common practice test and safeguards against land speculation, knowledge sharing events should be organised for collecting feedback and sharing best practices,