Standard Documentation & methodologies management
The Riverse Standard Documentation is the set of documents that describes requirements and procedures for all projects and methodologies under the Riverse Standard.
Revising Riverse Standard Documentation
The Riverse Standard Rules undergoes regular revision to ensure it reflects up-to-date science and best practice in the voluntary carbon market. The complete diagram of these procedures can be found on the website here.
The revision of the Procedures Manual follows the same process.
Major revisions
Major revisions are tracked through the first number after the standard document name (e.g. Riverse Standard Rules V1). Major revisions include three phases: submission, review, and approval.
Submission Phase
Open feedback: All the latest versions of the Riverse Standard Rules and methodologies documentation are published on Riverse’s website. This allows any interested party to be able to comment on every document at any time—not only during dedicated public consultations.
All interested parties, irrespective of their background or involvement, are encouraged to continuously provide their feedback on the current Riverse Standard Documentation. They can do so by email at contact@riverse.io, or via this form.
To ensure the relevance and rigor of the Riverse Standard Documentation, the Climate team and the Secretariat actively monitor all references, and propose changes from referenced standards and tools (IPCC, ISO…).
Compilation of feedback: The Secretariat compiles feedback into a document called the 'Standard Revision Request'.
Review Phase
Formulation of Revision Proposal: After analyzing each feedback, the Secretariat drafts a 'Revision Proposal'. This proposal outlines the changes deemed necessary to the Riverse Standard Documentation based on the feedback received.
Submission to SAB and deliberation: the Revision Proposal is presented to the SAB for their critical evaluation. If the Revision Proposal is validated, the SAB decides whether the proposed revision is of a nature that demands public input.
Public Consultation: the Secretariat organizes a public consultation of the proposed revisions (see Public consultation section).
Approval phase
Integration of Public Feedback: the Secretariat integrates feedback from the public consultation into the existing 'Revision Proposal'. The outcome of this integration is a 'Final Standard Revision Proposition'.
SAB Review and Approval: The 'Final Standard Revision Proposition' is then presented to the SAB for their final approval. The SAB ensures that feedback from the public consultation phase has been genuinely and appropriately integrated.
Implementation: The Climate team implements the approved revisions into the Riverse Standard Documentation and any affiliated documents. All changes are documented in the Version History, and previous versions are archived.
After the revision procedure is completed, each contributor receives an update on how their remark has been treated.
Project compliance: Projects that are already validated must become compliant with revised rules upon their next verification. They do not need to undergo a new validation process. The VVB shall check for gaps and compliance during the verification audit. If projects are incompatible with revised rules, no new RCCs will be issued for that project, but their verified RCCs will remain valid on the Riverse registry.
Minor revisions
Minor revisions may be made by the Riverse Climate team when they are deemed necessary. All changes are documented in the Version History, and previous versions are archived. Minor revisions are tracked through the second number after the standard document name (e.g. Riverse Standard Rules V1.1). Revisions are considered minor if they:
Correct typographical or formatting errors that do not affect the meaning or application of the standard.
Update references to external documents, tools, or standards without changing the core methodology.
Adjust procedural steps or timelines to improve clarity or efficiency without altering the overall process.
Add or update examples or case studies to aid understanding, without introducing new requirements.
Simplify or streamline documentation language to improve accessibility, without affecting the technical content.
Formalize processes that are already implemented in practice.
Creating new Riverse Standard Documentation
The creation of new Riverse Standard Documentation follows the Review and Approval phases described in the standard revision procedure section, with the following differences:
Procedure and document development:
Internal process setting: All Riverse Standard Documentation is initially drafted internally by the Climate team.
Basis of standards: procedures are tailored to Riverse’s operations, but should draw inspiration and guidance from established standards such as ISO 9001 and ISO 31000, ensuring global compliance and recognition.
Instead of a Revision Proposal as described in the previous section, a creation proposal is submitted to the Standard Advisory Board for validation.
A public consultation is conducted for the creation of any new Riverse Standard Documentation.
All public consultations are accessible on the website under the Standard Documentation section here.
Creating a new methodology
The complete diagram of these procedures can be found on the website here.
Submission
Anyone may submit a request for a new methodology at any time. The requests are summarized by the Secretariat into a Methodology Creation Proposal (template here).
The Methodology Creation Proposal is reviewed first by the Riverse Climate team, and if approved then it is reviewed by the SAB for final approval.
The reviews consider factors such as:
Maturity of the technology
Number of existing projects
Scientific consensus of substantial carbon reduction potential
Feasibility of carbon reduction measurement
Degree of circularity
If the proposal is validated by the SAB, a Methodology Creation Mandate is granted to the Secretariat and the Riverse Climate team. This mandate assigns the designated teams to research, develop, and finalize the methodology. The current Methodology Creation Mandates are presented below.
If the proposal is rejected by the SAB, it then decides whether to earmark it for reworking or, based on the gravity of the concerns, abandon it altogether.
Development
The Secretariat gathers a technical working group composed of at least 3 members from the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and/or external experts. The technical working group collaborates with the Riverse Climate team to develop the methodology.
Members of the technical working group shall be selected based on
expertise related to e.g. the scientific foundations, sustainability issues, LCA/GHG quantification, policy, or operations of the methodology's subject.
representation from diverse stakeholders from e.g. researchers/academics, project developers, independent experts, or NGOs.
To research and develop the methodology, the Climate team will gather the working group and consult the TAC members on a regular basis. The first step of methodology development shall always be a literature review. Following steps depend on the needs of each methodology.
The minimum requirements for a Riverse methodology include the following:
Eligible technologies and activities
Scope/delineation of a project (e.g. how many sites can be included in one project?)
Minimum requirements for a monitoring plan
Justification of the baseline scenario (pre-defined or guidance for baseline scenario selection), and frequency of updating the baseline scenario
Glossary with definitions of technical terms
Review and acceptance
Once a first version of the methodology has been drafted, the Secretariat organizes a 30-day public consultation by publishing a Call for Consultation. The Secretariat and Climate team integrates feedback into a new Final Methodology Creation Proposition.
The Final Methodology Creation Proposal is then validated by the SAB, which ensures that the feedback from the TAC, experts, and the public consultation was integrated.
Revising a methodology
Methodologies are adaptable to ensure their relevance and robustness. To streamline updates and maintain transparency, the Climate team implements:
Major updates: substantive alterations are subject to a thorough vetting process and follow the Riverse Standard Documentation Major revision procedure, plus the technical working group requirements described the Creating a new methodology section. Major updates are tracked through the first number after the methodology name (e.g. BiCRS methodology V1).
Minor updates and clarifications: Minor modifications to the methodologies are regularly published and continuously open for public feedback on the Riverse website, ensuring constant engagement with stakeholders. Minor updates are tracked through the second number after the methodology name (e.g. BiCRS methodology V1.1).
Feedback integration: continuous feedbacks are integrated into the Standard revision procedure, promoting a feedback-driven refinement approach.
Examples of major updates include:
Eligible project updates: types, technologies, geographies
Eligibility criteria changes that could lead to discontinuing previously validated projects (same project compliance procedures apply as in the Riverse Standard Documentation revision)
Quantification methodology changes (for example: scope review, database…) resulting in at least a 20% average change in avoided/removed emissions with current method
Changes deemed as major by the SAB
At a minimum, methodologies shall be reviewed and undergo public consultation every 3 years.
Discontinuing a methodology
A methodology may be discontinued if:
shifts in scientific consensus indicate it no longer aligns with best practices
it fails to achieve measurable carbon reductions
it is no longer additional
it overestimates credits and cannot be revised to ensure conservativeness
projects under that methodology consistently fail to meet the Eligibility criteria outlined in the Riverse Standard Rules
Methodologies are evaluated against these criteria at least once every three years during the mandatory major revision process, though they can also be reviewed and discontinued at any time if necessary.
Projects already validated under a discontinued methodology may continue using it until their next verification. After that, they must transition to a new methodology or become ineligible for new RCCs. Previously issued RCCs remain valid and tradable.
Public consultations
Decision by the SAB: Public consultations are mandatory for all major revisions of the Riverse Standard Documents and methodologies. For other revisions, the Standard Advisory Board (SAB) decides, based on their judgment and complexity of the topic at hand, whether to launch a public consultation.
Publishing the Call for Consultation: the Secretariat initiates the public consultation with the publication of a Call for Consultation. This call is widely broadcasted through relevant channels to ensure maximum outreach, inviting Project Developers, carbon credit resellers / brokers / marketplaces, Net Zero engaged corporates, Validation and Verification bodies, greentech experts, climate and environmental scientists and the general public to provide their insights and feedback on the topic. The minimum duration of the consultation is 30 days.
For all new methodologies, the Secretariat should organize a webinar to explain the rationale of the methodology and an overview of its requirements.
Compilation of feedback: After the conclusion of the public consultation period, the Secretariat compiles all feedback, suggestions, and perspectives collected. This collective feedback is then structured and summarized into a document known as the 'Consultation Report’. The report serves as a comprehensive repository of public opinion, ensuring that every suggestion is captured. The consultation reports are made available on the website under Standard Documentation here.
Integration into Final Proposition: the Secretariat then integrates this feedback into the existing proposal. This revised document, now termed the Final Standard Revision Proposition, harmonizes both the initial proposal and the feedback from the public consultation.
Last updated