VM0007 REDD+ Methodology Framework and Its Retirement

Updated 2026-11-02 · 4 min read · By the akar.earth specialist team

VM0007 explained: how Verra's modular REDD+ Methodology Framework worked, why it was replaced by VM0048, and what Indonesian REDD+ projects must do now.

VM0007, the REDD+ Methodology Framework (REDD-MF), was Verra’s modular methodology for crediting avoided deforestation, avoided degradation and some wetland activities. Verra has replaced its project-level REDD methodologies, including the REDD parts of VM0007, with the consolidated VM0048 methodology, so new REDD+ projects cannot rely on VM0007.

VM0007 still matters. Many registered Indonesian REDD+ and peatland projects were validated under it, and their credits remain in circulation. Buyers, investors and due diligence teams need to understand how those credits were calculated and what transition to VM0048 means for future issuance.

How VM0007 worked

VM0007 was a framework, not a single formula. A project picked modules (published as VMD documents) and assembled them into one accounting system. The main module families were:

• Baseline modules for unplanned deforestation, planned deforestation and degradation. Unplanned deforestation baselines usually came from historical deforestation in a reference region, projected forward with a model.
• Leakage modules for activity shifting and market effects. Unplanned deforestation projects often used a leakage belt around the project.
• Carbon pool modules for above-ground and below-ground biomass, dead wood, litter, soil and wood products.
• Emission modules for fossil fuel use, biomass burning and peat emissions.
• Monitoring modules for tracking forest cover, carbon stocks and leakage.
• Wetland modules for restoration and conservation of wetlands, including peat.

The project developer chose the reference region, the deforestation model and the drivers. That flexibility let VM0007 fit many forest types. It also created the main weakness: two developers could build very different baselines for similar forests.

Why Verra retired it

Studies and media investigations argued that many project-level REDD+ baselines overstated the threat to forests, which inflated credits. Read the REDD+ baseline controversy for the detail. Verra’s response was VM0048. Under VM0048 the baseline is set for a whole jurisdiction using consistent activity data, then allocated to projects with a risk map. Developers no longer pick their own reference region or model. See VM0048 vs VM0007 for a side-by-side comparison and jurisdictional allocation for how allocation works.

The change also aligns with the JNR framework, which lets projects nest within jurisdictional programmes.

Step by step: what a VM0007 project does now

1. Check its status. Identify which VM0007 version and modules the project uses and when its baseline was last reassessed.
2. Read Verra’s transition rules. Verra publishes the conditions under which registered projects move to VM0048. Do not assume a date. Check the current methodology page and announcements.
3. Model the impact. Allocated baselines under VM0048 are often lower than legacy project baselines. Estimate future issuance under VM0048 before signing offtake or financing.
4. Prepare data. VM0048 still needs project-level monitoring of forest cover and carbon stocks, plus leakage. Strong plot data and remote sensing make the transition smoother.
5. Update legal documents. Offtake contracts written on VM0007 forecasts may need volume and pricing clauses revisited.

Indonesia and Southeast Asia

Indonesia accounts for 59.3% of Southeast Asian nature-based issuance under VCS and Gold Standard, much of it from REDD+. A large share of that volume came from VM0007 and similar project-level methods. Peat swamp forest projects in Central Kalimantan and elsewhere used VM0007 modules for both avoided deforestation and peat emissions. See peatland REDD+.

BeZero has rated 11 ex-post Indonesian projects with an average of ‘A’, above the ‘B’ most common for nature-based projects elsewhere. Ratings move price by about 40% per band. For legacy VM0007 credits, buyers now look hard at baseline evidence, leakage and permanence, and rating outcomes matter more than the methodology label.

Domestic rules add another layer. Perpres 110/2025 is the legal anchor for carbon trading, and Permenhut 6/2026 sets forestry carbon trading procedures. A legacy project must check how its units relate to SRUK and any authorisation requirements.

Pitfalls verifiers and buyers flag

• Reference region not comparable. Differences in access, slope, tenure or drivers between reference region and project area.
• Outdated deforestation drivers. Baselines built on drivers, such as a planned concession, that no longer apply.
• Leakage belt too small or poorly monitored.
• Peat emission factors applied without supporting water table or subsidence data.
• Assuming VM0007 forecasts continue. Revenue models must reflect transition to VM0048.

Reading a legacy VM0007 project file

When you review a VM0007 project, start with four documents: the registered project description, the latest monitoring report, the baseline reassessment (if any) and the non-permanence risk report. Compare the baseline deforestation rate with independent land cover data for the same period. Large gaps deserve an explanation.

Related reading

Start with the standards hub and the REDD+ hub. If you hold or are buying legacy credits, our due diligence service reviews baseline evidence and transition exposure.