akar.earthARR Project Feasibility: A 10-Point Checklist
ARR feasibility checklist for Indonesia: land eligibility, tenure, additionality, growth, costs, communities, methodology fit and buyer route in ten checks.
An ARR (afforestation, reforestation and revegetation) project is feasible when the land is eligible, tenure and carbon rights are clear, the activity is additional, trees will grow enough to produce measurable removals, communities support it, and the full cost can be covered by credits and other income. The ten checks below find deal-breakers early, before money goes into nurseries or a project design document.
The 10-point checklist
1. Land eligibility
Was the land non-forest at the required reference date, and was it not cleared of native ecosystems to make way for the project? Verra’s rules generally look back ten years before the project start. Use Landsat and Sentinel-2 history and field evidence. See land eligibility and the 10-year rule.
2. Tenure and carbon rights
Who holds the land: private title, state forest under a PBPH licence, social forestry (perhutanan sosial), customary forest (hutan adat), or village land? Who owns the carbon? Indonesian rules, including Permenhut 6/2026, set out who can participate in forestry carbon trading. See carbon ownership in Indonesia.
3. Additionality
Would trees be planted anyway? Check for existing legal requirements to restore, government planting programmes, and whether timber or crop revenue alone would justify planting. Under VM0047’s area-based approach, a dynamic performance benchmark from control plots tests additionality at each verification.
4. Growth and removals potential
Rainfall, soils, elevation and degradation level set growth. Estimate removals per hectare per year by species mix with conservative growth curves. See ex-ante carbon estimation and try the ARR carbon estimator.
5. Species and land-use design
Native species, agroforestry, timber or a mix? Species affect carbon, livelihoods, biodiversity, fire risk and permanence. See species selection.
6. Community and FPIC
Do landholders and communities want this, on what terms, and with what benefit-sharing? Free, prior and informed consent is required by standards and is essential for permanence. See community engagement.
7. Risks to permanence
Fire (especially near peat), drought, pests, land conflict, competing land uses (oil palm, mining) and political change. These feed the non-permanence risk assessment and buffer contribution.
8. Methodology and standard fit
VM0047 under Verra, Gold Standard A/R requirements, or Plan Vivo for smallholder and community models. Consider CCP eligibility, co-benefit labels and Indonesian registration (SRUK) if you want domestic trading.
9. Costs and finance
Establishment, maintenance, monitoring, validation and verification, registry fees, community payments and overheads over the crediting period. See ARR project costs. Identify the financing route: prepayment, offtake, blended finance or equity.
10. Market route
Who buys, at what quality bar? Removals generally attract stronger interest than avoidance credits. Consider ratings, CCP labels and buyer due diligence early.
Scoring the result
| Outcome | Meaning | Next step |
|---|---|---|
| All green | No deal-breakers | Detailed design and PDD |
| Amber on 1–3 items | Fixable gaps (tenure documents, baseline data) | Resolve before investment |
| Red on eligibility, tenure or community | Stop or redesign | Change area or model |
Desk screen vs full study
Run the checklist twice. A desk screen uses satellite history, spatial overlays (forest estate, concessions, peat, protected areas), published growth data and a short call with the landholder. It answers “is there an obvious deal-breaker?” in weeks, not months.
A full feasibility study adds field visits, soil and site assessment, a sample of land-use interviews, tenure document review, community meetings in the local language, a draft species plan, and a financial model with sensitivity tests on carbon price, survival and growth. Only commission the full study for sites that pass the screen.
Common mistakes
- Starting nurseries before checking eligibility.
- Assuming state forest land can be used without the right licence.
- Using optimistic growth curves from plantation brochures.
- Leaving monitoring and verification costs out of the model.
- Treating community consent as a one-off meeting.
- Ignoring the domestic regulatory route until late.
What good evidence looks like
A feasibility report should include: land-cover history maps with imagery dates; tenure documents and a carbon-rights analysis; community consultation records; a species and planting plan; a removals model with sources and conservative assumptions; a cost and revenue model; a risk register; and a methodology applicability analysis. This becomes the backbone of your project design document.
Indonesia and SEA specifics
Degraded land in Indonesia is often contested, informally used or overlapping with concessions. Spatial data from different agencies may not agree. Fire and peat proximity are major risks in Sumatra and Kalimantan. Smallholder agroforestry landscapes in Java, Sulawesi and Nusa Tenggara offer strong livelihood models but need aggregation.
Our feasibility and eligibility service runs these checks. Start with the project eligibility quiz, or return to the ARR hub.
Frequently asked questions
What makes an ARR project feasible?
Eligible land with clear tenure, credible additionality, enough growth to produce meaningful removals, willing communities, a fitting methodology and standard, and costs that the expected credit revenue and other income can cover.
How long does an ARR feasibility study take?
A desk screen can take a few weeks. A full study with field visits, land-use history analysis, community consultation and a financial model usually takes several months, depending on area and access.
What is the minimum size for an ARR project?
There is no universal minimum, but fixed costs for validation, verification and monitoring mean small standalone projects often struggle. Grouped projects and aggregation help smaller areas reach viable scale.