akar.earthGHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard
GHG Protocol land sector and removals standard explained: land-use change, land management and removals accounting, and what it means for Indonesian suppliers.
The GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard sets how companies account for land-use change emissions, land management emissions and carbon removals in their corporate inventories, including across scope 3 supply chains. For Indonesian producers of palm oil, pulp, rubber, coffee and cocoa, it defines the data their corporate buyers need.
What the standard is
The GHG Protocol, convened by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, publishes the most widely used corporate accounting standards. Its Corporate Standard and Scope 3 Standard did not cover land in enough detail, so it developed land sector and removals guidance through drafts, public consultation and pilot testing with companies.
Check ghgprotocol.org for the current publication status, version and effective date. We describe the structure here and avoid quoting specific clause numbers.
What it covers
| Category | Examples | Indonesian relevance |
|---|---|---|
| Land-use change emissions | Clearing forest or peat for plantations | High in palm, pulp and some smallholder crops |
| Land management emissions | Fertiliser N2O, peat oxidation, rice methane | Peat drainage is a major source |
| Land-based removals | Tree growth on farms, restored areas, soil carbon gains | Agroforestry, riparian restoration |
| Product carbon storage | Long-lived wood products | Timber and plywood |
The standard distinguishes direct land-use change, where a company knows the specific land, from statistical approaches used when supply cannot be traced to plots. Traceable data usually gives a more accurate and often lower result for good producers.
Requirements for reporting removals
Removals face stricter tests than emissions because carbon can be released again. In outline, companies reporting removals must show:
- Ongoing storage monitoring, not one-off estimates.
- Traceability to the land or supply chain where removals occur.
- Primary data rather than generic factors.
- Uncertainty quantification.
- Reversal accounting, reporting emissions if stored carbon is lost.
Removals are reported separately from emissions. See removals vs avoidance.
Who uses it
- Food, consumer goods and forestry companies building scope 3 inventories.
- SBTi FLAG target setters, since SBTi FLAG relies on GHG Protocol accounting.
- Auditors and assurance providers.
- Suppliers and traders responding to customer data requests.
How it applies in Indonesia and Southeast Asia
Three issues dominate in Indonesia:
- Peat. Drained peat emits continuously. Accounting needs peat maps, drainage data and IPCC wetland emission factors. See IPCC AFOLU guidelines.
- Smallholder supply. Much palm, rubber, coffee and cocoa comes from smallholders. Without plot polygons, buyers fall back on statistical land-use change, which penalises good producers.
- Agroforestry removals. Shade trees and mixed systems store carbon that buyers may count as value-chain removals if monitored. See coffee agroforestry carbon and cocoa agroforestry carbon.
The same plot data supports EUDR due diligence, which the European Commission says applies from 30 December 2026 with a 31 December 2020 cut-off date. Our field data campaigns collect polygons, tree measurements and land-use history once for several uses.
A data checklist for suppliers
Corporate buyers reporting land emissions and removals will ask suppliers for data they can audit:
| Data item | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Plot polygons | Links production to specific land for direct land-use change |
| Land-cover history | Shows whether conversion occurred in the assessment period |
| Peat presence and drainage | Drives one of the largest emission sources in Indonesia |
| Fertiliser and fuel use | Land management emissions |
| Tree inventories | Evidence for on-farm removals |
| Monitoring plan | Shows removals storage will be tracked over time |
Collect these once, in a structured database, and they can serve GHG Protocol reporting, SBTi FLAG and EUDR together. Data gaps usually force buyers back to conservative default values, which make good producers look worse than they are. Our DMRV implementation service builds that pipeline.
Indonesian suppliers who invest in this data early can also offer customers verified value-chain removals, which may command better commercial terms than generic supply.
Common pitfalls
- Counting credits as removals. Purchased credits are not inventory removals.
- One-off tree estimates. Removals need continued monitoring.
- Ignoring land-use change. Recent conversion in the supply base can outweigh on-farm removals.
- Mixing up inventory and project accounting. Project methodologies such as VM0047 use baselines and additionality; inventories do not.
Relationship to ICVCM CCP status
The CCP label applies to credits, which sit outside the inventory. Companies that buy credits beyond inventory reporting should still use CCP-labelled credits for claims. See CCP label.
Next steps
Read carbon credits vs insetting, the scope 3 glossary entry, or return to the standards hub.
Frequently asked questions
What is the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard?
It is GHG Protocol guidance on how companies account for land-use change emissions, land management emissions and carbon removals in their corporate GHG inventories, including in scope 3.
Has the standard been finalised?
The guidance went through draft, public consultation and pilot testing. Check ghgprotocol.org for the current publication status and effective date before relying on any specific requirement.
Are carbon credits part of the GHG inventory?
No. Purchased carbon credits are reported separately from the inventory. Removals in a company's own operations or value chain can be reported in the inventory if they meet the standard's requirements.
Why does it matter to Indonesian suppliers?
Buyers need supplier data on land-use change, farm practices and on-farm removals to report under this standard. Suppliers who can provide plot-level data are easier to source from.