evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

REM Mato Grosso — Results-Based Payments for Avoided Deforestation

Brazil · Cuiabá · See the Brazil profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 33% 53/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Since 2017, Germany and the UK have paid Mato Grosso, Brazil, for independently verified cuts in deforestation emissions via KfW. Phase 1 (2016–2023) delivered ~18 million tCO2e verified reductions against a 9 million target, reaching 12,400 smallholder families.

18 million tCO2e
Verified avoided emissions, Phase 1 (2016-2023)
9 million tCO2e
Target avoided emissions, Phase 1 (2016-2023)
R$247 million (~EUR 78 million)
Results-based payments disbursed (by mid-2023)
12,400
Smallholder families reached
~300,000 hectares
Forest conserved
REM Mato Grosso — Results-Based Payments for Avoided Deforestation

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
KfW Development Bank / Government of Mato Grosso (SEMA-MT), with GIZ technical support
Period
2016–2023 (Phase 1); programme ongoing
Keywords
forest carbon, REDD+, results-based climate finance, jurisdictional programme

Context

The REDD Early Movers (REM) programme in Mato Grosso, Brazil's largest agricultural frontier state, is a bilateral results-based payment mechanism in which Germany (via KfW and BMZ) and the United Kingdom pay the state government for independently verified reductions in deforestation-linked greenhouse-gas emissions, measured against a historical reference level. Mato Grosso's state environment secretariat (SEMA-MT) implements the programme with GIZ technical support, as part of the wider 'REM Brasil' initiative that also covers the state of Acre.

Objectives

Phase 1 (2016-2023) targeted avoided emissions of roughly 9 million tCO2e against the historical reference level.

Activities

SEMA-MT, with GIZ technical support, disbursed results-based payments largely by funding sustainable-production and monitoring initiatives for family farmers, rural producers and traditional communities.

Results

Independent verification found the state achieved about 18 million tCO2e in reduced deforestation-linked emissions in Phase 1, more than double the 9 million tCO2e target. The programme disbursed R$247 million (about EUR 78 million) in results-based payments by mid-2023, reaching 12,400 smallholder families and helping conserve close to 300,000 hectares of forest.

Conclusions

The World Rainforest Movement has criticised the REM approach as rewarding past reductions without necessarily changing the underlying economic drivers of deforestation, and notes that Mato Grosso's earlier (2004-2012) drop in illegal deforestation is not always fully recognised in later crediting baselines. REM's KfW-verified bilateral payments should be distinguished from the state's newer, separate voluntary carbon-market activity under the ART/TREES standard and LEAF Coalition, which faces its own scrutiny over baseline methodology and Indigenous consultation.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Very high (> €5M) — R$247 million (~EUR 78 million) disbursed in results-based payments by mid-2023
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Phase 1 ran 2016-2023; programme ongoing
Staffing & skills
SEMA-MT (Mato Grosso state environment secretariat) - implementer, GIZ - technical support, KfW Development Bank - verification and payment administration (funded by German BMZ), UK Government - co-funder

Conditions for success

  • Independent verification against a historical baseline reference level
  • Bilateral government funding commitment from Germany and the UK
  • Pre-existing REDD+ governance institutions (Forum Mato-Grossense de Mudancas Climaticas, Conselho Gestor de REDD+)

Common failure modes

  • World Rainforest Movement critique that REM rewards past reductions without changing underlying economic drivers of deforestation
  • Baseline methodology does not fully credit Mato Grosso's earlier 2004-2012 deforestation drop
  • Should not be conflated with newer voluntary carbon-market activity (ART/TREES, LEAF Coalition) facing separate scrutiny over baseline methodology and Indigenous consultation

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Replication kit

Reusable artefacts from this practice — as published by their sources.

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