Verra Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (JNR) Framework

Updated 2026-11-02 · 3 min read · By the akar.earth specialist team

Verra's Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (JNR) framework explained: the three scenarios, how projects nest in jurisdictions, and what it means for Indonesia.

Verra’s Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (JNR) framework sets rules for crediting REDD+ across a whole jurisdiction and for fitting individual projects inside that jurisdiction’s accounting. It exists so that national or provincial programmes and site-level projects can coexist without counting the same avoided emissions twice.

The framework’s documents include a Program Guide, requirements for three scenarios and a JNR Non-Permanence Risk Tool. Verra lists these as version 4.1, issued 15 April 2021 and updated 19 August 2024. Check the Verra website for any later revision.

Why nesting matters

Early REDD+ was mostly project-based. Each project set its own baseline, often in isolation. When governments built national REDD+ programmes and reference levels, two problems appeared. Project baselines added up to more deforestation than the national reference level allowed. And the same reduction could be claimed by a project and by the government.

Nesting solves both. A jurisdiction sets one baseline, and projects take a share of it. Read nesting projects in jurisdictions for the practical side.

The three JNR scenarios

These summaries simplify the scenario documents. Confirm the exact definitions and requirements in the current version before designing a programme.

How JNR works step by step

1. Define the jurisdiction. A national or subnational government area, with a government body that has authority over the programme.
2. Set the jurisdictional baseline. Use historical deforestation and degradation data over a reference period, with consistent methods and maps.
3. Choose the scenario. Decide whether the jurisdiction, nested projects or both receive credits.
4. Allocate to projects. Where projects nest, distribute the jurisdictional baseline to project areas using rules such as risk maps.
5. Validate. An approved validation and verification body checks the programme against JNR requirements.
6. Monitor and verify. Measure actual emissions in the jurisdiction and in nested projects. Reconcile any differences between the sum of project results and the jurisdictional result.
7. Buffer. Apply the JNR Non-Permanence Risk Tool and deposit credits in the buffer.
8. Issue. Credits go to the jurisdiction, projects or both according to the scenario.

Link to VM0048

Verra’s consolidated REDD methodology, VM0048, applies a similar logic at project level even where no JNR programme exists. Verra provides activity data and risk maps for a jurisdiction and allocates a share of the jurisdictional baseline to each project. Read VM0048 jurisdictional allocation. This means every new Verra REDD+ project in Indonesia is effectively nested in a jurisdictional baseline, whether or not the government participates in JNR.

Indonesia and Southeast Asia

Indonesia has its own national REDD+ architecture: a forest reference emission level, the FOLU Net Sink 2030 target and domestic carbon trading under Perpres 110/2025. Forestry carbon trading procedures sit in Permenhut 6/2026, and exchange-traded units must be recorded in SRUK. Read FOLU Net Sink 2030.

That raises practical nesting questions for any international crediting route:

• How does a project baseline under VM0048 relate to the national reference level?
• Will the government authorise transfer, and with a corresponding adjustment?
• Can a province enter JNR or ART without national approval?

Our research did not find an Indonesian jurisdiction registered under JNR. Provincial programmes, such as those funded by results-based payments, have used other channels. The comparison of ART TREES vs VCS JNR and project vs jurisdictional REDD+ explains the options.

What projects should do while jurisdictions decide

Project developers cannot wait for jurisdictional programmes to mature. Build monitoring that is compatible with national forest data, document how your area relates to provincial and national baselines, and keep plot and land cover data in formats a jurisdiction could reuse. That keeps options open for nesting under Verra, ART or a national scheme.

Track announcements from the forestry ministry on how project and jurisdictional crediting will relate under national rules.

Pitfalls verifiers flag

• Baseline data inconsistent with the national reference level.
• Weak legal authority of the applying government body.
• Allocation rules that are not transparent or not applied consistently.
• Double claims where projects and jurisdiction both sell the same tonnes.
• Benefit-sharing arrangements that are vague or unfunded.

For more, see the REDD+ hub and the standards hub.