evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

DRC's Mai-Ndombe Carbon Programme: A Seven-Year Wait, and a Programme Its Own Evaluators Doubt

Congo (the Democratic Republic of the) · Inongo · See the Congo (the Democratic Republic of the) profile

Top 89% 27/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

DRC's Mai-Ndombe forests earned a first-ever $19.48M FCPF Carbon Fund payment in June 2025 for 3.89M tonnes of satellite-verified reductions (2019-2020). Independent field research on the same programme found little evidence it cut deforestation, and low community consent.

DRC's Mai-Ndombe Carbon Programme: A Seven-Year Wait, and a Programme Its Own Evaluators Doubt

Details

Promoter
Observatoire Satellital des Forêts d'Afrique Centrale (OSFAC)
Period
ERPA signed 2018, effective 2022; first payment June 2025 for 2019-2020 results
Keywords
forestry, carbon markets, climate finance, remote sensing, REDD+, benefit-sharing

Description

The Mai-Ndombe Emission Reductions Programme, covering a Congo Basin province the size of England, became the first project worldwide selected into the World Bank's FCPF Carbon Fund portfolio, in December 2016, aiming to pay DRC for satellite-verified cuts in deforestation and degradation.

Monitoring runs through the Observatoire Satellital des Forêts d'Afrique Centrale (OSFAC), the region's satellite forest-monitoring observatory, feeding DRC's national MRV system alongside ground forest inventories.

The Emission Reductions Payment Agreement was signed in September 2018 but took until July 2022 to enter into force; DRC received its first-ever payment only in June 2025 - $19.48 million for 3.89 million tonnes of verified CO2 reductions in the 2019-2020 period, according to World Bank reporting.

Independent field research on the Mai-Ndombe programme, published by Rainforest Foundation UK and covered by Mongabay, found that many of its constituent REDD+ projects had not obtained free, prior and informed consent from local communities, delivered few of their promised benefits, and in some cases appeared to have had little effect on deforestation - or even coincided with continued forest loss. The programme illustrates a broader tension in results-based forest finance: a technically credible satellite-carbon accounting result can coexist with weak on-the-ground legitimacy.

Read the full analysis: https://www.rainforestfoundationuk.org/research-into-mai-ndombe-redd-programme-shows-how-forest-carbon-offsets-fail-to-reduce-deforestation-and-come-at-a-human-cost/

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful