**How can we ensure that projects generating certified carbon credits also create tangible value for the territories that host them? In ecosystem restoration projects, long-term success depends not only on effective carbon sequestration, but also on the engagement of local communities and the creation of sustainable economic opportunities. This is precisely the purpose of benefit sharing. Today, this principle has become a structural condition for the credibility and durability of carbon projects. At Reforest’Action, it is embedded from the project design phase and supported by a rigorous evaluation framework to ensure that carbon finance genuinely contributes to local development.**

![Benefit-sharing-1.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Benefit_sharing_1_73dbcf5a19.jpg)

## Benefit sharing in certified carbon projects

### A principle of equity at the core of carbon finance

Within projects certified under international standards such as Verra (VCS) or Gold Standard, benefit sharing refers to the set of mechanisms designed to distribute the benefits generated by a project equitably among its stakeholders, particularly [local communities and Indigenous peoples](https://www.reforestaction.com/en/magazine/include-local-communities-to-develop-adapted-sustainable-project). At a time when the social integrity of projects has become central to the credibility of voluntary carbon markets, these mechanisms play a structuring role in both project design and governance. This approach acknowledges that the success of a carbon sequestration project depends on a broader ecosystem of actors and activities, and that benefits must be distributed fairly to ensure long-term sustainability.

### Carbon standards and national frameworks: towards stronger regulation of benefit sharing

While they do not impose a universal percentage of benefit sharing applicable to all projects, carbon standards have progressively strengthened the governance of benefit sharing by incorporating specific requirements into their methodological frameworks and social and environmental safeguard systems.

Under Verra’s VCS 5.0 standard, the benefit-sharing mechanism must be co-designed with land rights holders, local communities, and Indigenous peoples prior to project implementation, and subsequently implemented and monitored throughout the project lifecycle. These stakeholders are thereby recognized as full participants in the benefit sharing mechanism.

The standard also requires a high level of financial transparency. Project developers must disclose to participants, at the design stage, projected revenues and expected costs, and subsequently provide annual updates on operational costs and actual or projected revenues.

The mechanism itself must be formalized and contextualized: it must specify the nature of benefits (monetary, in-kind, or a combination), their distribution timeline, and be adapted to the local context, communicated through culturally appropriate means, and aligned with applicable national regulations. It must also remain accessible to stakeholders and include provisions to account for revenue variability, particularly in relation to carbon market fluctuations.

Finally, Verra introduces a critical distinction between activities necessary for project implementation and the benefits actually shared. Project operational costs, infrastructure required for implementation, worker salaries, and environmental risk mitigation measures cannot be considered part of benefit sharing. This clarification strengthens both the transparency and credibility of benefit-sharing mechanisms.

In parallel, several countries have recently introduced more prescriptive national frameworks on benefit sharing, explicitly defining value distribution mechanisms—and in some cases, the share of revenues allocated to local communities. This trend, particularly visible in East Africa and the Indian Ocean region, reflects a broader movement toward stronger regulation of benefit sharing within carbon markets.

### Benefit sharing as a condition for the success of restoration projects

In ecosystem restoration projects, benefit sharing is not merely a methodological requirement associated with carbon standards—it is also an operational condition for the success and long-term sustainability of initiatives on the ground.

These projects are embedded in complex territorial dynamics and rely on long-term commitments from local communities. Agroforestry projects, in particular, involve gradual changes in agricultural practices, the long-term integration of trees into production systems, and the collective management of new natural resources. Their success therefore depends directly on the engagement of local stakeholders and their ability to adopt and sustain these transformations over time. Active community participation thus becomes a key determinant of project viability, as it conditions both the adoption of introduced practices and their long-term continuity beyond the initial support phases.

In this context, benefit sharing plays a structuring role. By ensuring a fair distribution of the value generated by the project, it helps align economic incentives across stakeholders and strengthens local ownership. Capacity building for farmers, the inclusion of women in productive systems, and the structuring of collective initiatives at the territorial level all play a central role in sustaining implemented practices and amplifying environmental and socio-economic impacts.

However, benefit-sharing mechanisms often remain insufficiently structured. The report Beyond Beneficiaries – Fairer Carbon Market Frameworks by The Nature Conservancy highlights that some local communities bear costs that are not fully accounted for in project economic models, or receive only a marginal share of the value generated. Asymmetries in access to information, land rights, or negotiation capacity may also lead to situations of value capture to the detriment of local actors. These findings are driving a shift in benefit-sharing approaches toward more inclusive governance models and the recognition of communities as full partners rather than passive beneficiaries.

![Benefit-sharing-2.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Benefit_sharing_2_958345a3b4.jpg)

## Reforest’Action’s approach: structuring benefit sharing from project design

While international standards provide a framework for benefit sharing, its concrete implementation largely depends on project developers’ methodological choices. At Reforest’Action, this dimension is structured from the design phase to ensure sustainable local value creation.

### Direct contributions embedded in the project budget

Our evaluation of benefit sharing is grounded in a principle of transparency: clearly distinguishing the resources required for project implementation from those allocated to benefit sharing with local communities. This distinction avoids any confusion between investments necessary for generating carbon impact and mechanisms designed to redistribute value.

Accordingly, financial resources directly mobilized for project implementation (such as purchasing seedlings or operating nurseries), and contributing directly to carbon sequestration, are not considered part of benefit sharing.
Benefit sharing instead concerns co-benefits—contributions that directly improve living conditions and economic prospects for local communities—taking several complementary forms:

- Direct monetary contributions: communities participating in projects may receive direct financial compensation linked to their involvement, for instance for maintaining planted trees or transitioning agricultural practices over the long term. Monetary benefits are carefully structured: payments are targeted and regulated to avoid disrupting local economies or social dynamics. They may take the form of partial compensation for labor provided during project establishment, combined with an in-kind contribution from farmers. This approach recognizes participant engagement while preserving intrinsic motivation beyond financial incentives. 
- Direct non-monetary contributions: projects may also provide equipment, tools, and agricultural inputs to improve practices and productivity. 
- Community-level contributions: part of the project’s benefits is allocated to collective initiatives (often via village funds), such as building wells, improving local infrastructure, or supporting agricultural cooperatives. 

These contributions are embedded in the project’s initial budget and delivered from the early years of implementation. This reflects an expanded vision of benefit sharing: value creation for communities does not depend solely on future carbon revenues, but begins from the earliest project stages, supporting local economic dynamics, building trust, and ensuring sustained engagement.

### Value creation through agricultural value chains and practice transformation

In agroforestry projects in particular, value creation extends beyond financial redistribution mechanisms. The integration of trees into agricultural systems enables diversification of income sources—through fruit production, non-timber forest products, or other commodities—while also improving yields through ecosystem services and fostering the development of local value chains for processing and commercialization.

Such projects become drivers of territorial development and catalysts for sustainable agricultural activity even before generating their first carbon credits. In this model, most of the value generated is captured locally, with carbon revenues acting as a complementary stream.

### Carbon credit sharing: a complementary redistribution mechanism

Finally, benefit sharing includes a mechanism for distributing carbon credits generated by the project, whereby a portion is allocated to local communities. These revenues fall into a specific category: market-dependent benefits derived from the issuance, trading, and sale of carbon credits on voluntary markets. They constitute an additional income stream complementing other value-creation mechanisms.

The distribution of these revenues depends on the institutional and legal context in which the project operates. It may involve multiple stakeholders—land or carbon rights holders, communities, developers, investors, or public authorities—depending on national frameworks and governance structures. Increasingly, these mechanisms are regulated through legal or policy frameworks defining allocation rules and recognition of carbon rights.

By nature, the economic value of carbon credits remains variable. It depends not only on project performance and verified outcomes, but also on broader market dynamics, including price trends, demand levels, regulatory changes, and geopolitical context. In other words, these revenues are partly determined by factors external to the project itself.

At Reforest’Action, allocating a share of carbon credits to communities integrates these market dynamics into a territorial redistribution logic. The revenues generated can support village funds financing locally defined collective projects—such as infrastructure, agricultural initiatives, or community programs—thereby strengthening local development dynamics. This mechanism creates a durable alignment of interests: the greater the project’s measurable environmental impact and market value, the greater the resources redistributed to communities. However, it remains a complementary lever. By nature delayed and dependent on market conditions, these revenues arrive too late to support initial community engagement and practice adoption, and therefore cannot replace other value-creation mechanisms.

### Structuring benefit sharing over time: between immediate incentives and long-term alignment

Taken individually, each of these mechanisms addresses a specific dimension of benefit sharing. Their effectiveness, however, depends on how they are articulated over time. An approach relying solely on carbon revenues is not operationally viable. The time required to generate and monetize credits—often several years—does not meet the immediate economic needs of communities nor support early-stage engagement.

Benefit sharing therefore relies on a combination of complementary mechanisms: non-conditional short-term benefits, essential to generate interest, facilitate recruitment, and support transitions in practices (including in cases of temporary income loss), and performance- or impact-based benefits, which operate over the medium to long term to ensure sustained alignment of stakeholder interests.

![Benefit-sharing-3.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Benefit_sharing_3_570d913ceb.jpg)

**Benefit sharing is now a cornerstone of the integrity of carbon projects. By ensuring an equitable distribution of the value created, it strengthens both environmental credibility and social legitimacy. At Reforest’Action, this approach is grounded in a simple conviction: the success of ecosystem restoration projects depends on the prosperity of the territories that sustain them. By embedding benefit sharing at the heart of project design and rigorously evaluating its implementation, carbon finance can, beyond its contribution to climate mitigation, fully support sustainable development pathways at the local level.**



large_IMG_4822.jpg

medium_IMG_4822.jpg

small_IMG_4822.jpg

thumbnail_IMG_4822.jpg

IMG_4822.jpg

From Carbon to Local Value Creation: Our Approach to Benefit Sharing

**In West Africa, where agriculture is largely based on smallholder family farms highly dependent on climatic conditions and local resources, restoring degraded agricultural land cannot rely on isolated technical interventions. It requires a profound transformation of both farming practices and ecological balances. It is within this context that the Wawa project, developed by Reforest’Action and APAF in Togo, takes shape. Built on in-depth fieldwork, grounded in the observation of local agricultural practices and continuous dialogue with communities, the project leverages agroforestry as a driver of soil regeneration, production diversification, and increased farm resilience. By combining agronomic expertise with strong local anchoring, it proposes an approach in which ecosystem restoration is intrinsically linked to improving rural livelihoods.** 

![Wawa6.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Wawa6_3cd527c2bf.jpg)

## Agricultural systems under increasing pressure

In West Africa, agriculture is a cornerstone of territorial stability. It employs nearly 60% of the workforce and provides the vast majority of food consumption, with local production covering around 90% of caloric intake, according to the French Committee for International Solidarity. This dual economic and food security role places agricultural systems at the heart of rural stability.

However, this central role exists within structurally constrained systems. The agricultural landscape is dominated by small-scale family farms, often under five hectares. This fragmentation limits investment capacity, market access, and the ability to adapt to shocks, while also slowing the large-scale adoption of sustainable practices.

These structural constraints are compounded by the progressive degradation of natural resources. Soils subjected to intensive use cycles or extensive practices such as slash-and-burn agriculture quickly lose fertility. Limited storage and processing infrastructure further exacerbates post-harvest losses and reduces locally captured value. As a result, farmers operate in an environment marked by high economic and social vulnerability.

Climate change intensifies these pressures. Increased rainfall variability, more frequent droughts, and extreme weather events directly affect both subsistence and cash crops. Already under strain, agricultural systems must now contend with growing uncertainty.
In this context, the challenge goes beyond improving yields. It lies in rethinking agricultural systems to ensure their long-term viability, their capacity to absorb shocks, and their ability to maintain both productive and social functions. This transformation requires restoring soils, diversifying production, and reintroducing ecological mechanisms capable of sustaining fertility and resilience.

![Wawa4.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Wawa4_3ed5f01e71.jpg)

## An agroforestry project to address land degradation

### Moving beyond soil depletion dynamics

Slash-and-burn agriculture, historically widespread in Togo and within the Wawa project area, is a form of shifting subsistence farming based on alternating cultivation cycles. It involves clearing small forest plots by cutting vegetation and then burning the dried biomass to produce a layer of ash. This ash temporarily enriches the soil, enabling the cultivation of local food crops such as maize, yams, taro, squash, and okra.

Within systems characterized by low land pressure, this practice historically contributed to a certain agronomic balance, particularly when fallow periods allowed sufficient soil and vegetation regeneration. However, current dynamics—population growth, limited access to land, and intensified land use—are significantly reducing these fallow periods.

As a result, the rapid leaching of ash and nutrients, combined with weed invasion, leads to accelerated soil degradation. After two to three cropping cycles, yields decline sharply, forcing farmers to abandon cultivated plots. These lands are then left fallow under conditions that no longer ensure full regeneration before reuse.

![Wawa5.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Wawa5_71cad8708f.jpg)

In this context, developing soil fertility strategies based on biological processes—such as agroforestry—rather than fire or chemical inputs has become a key lever for land restoration. More broadly, it is essential to enable communities to access sufficient, healthy, and sustainable agricultural production.

In Togo, the Wawa project embodies this approach. Deployed across 594 hectares through our local partner APAF (Association for the Promotion of Fertilizer Trees), it builds on traditional African agricultural practices, reinterpreting and adapting them to current climatic conditions. The project involves 15 villages across the Wawa, Akébou, and Kloto prefectures, where access to food security and sustainable incomes remains closely tied to the restoration of degraded agricultural land.

### Activating biological soil fertility mechanisms

Agroforestry is one of the core pillars of the Wawa project. By integrating trees and crops within the same agricultural plots, it offers a viable alternative to conventional farming systems. It contributes to land restoration, biodiversity conservation, food production, and crop support, while enabling diversification of agricultural systems. In doing so, it strengthens resilience and adaptive capacity in the face of climate change.

The selection of species is critical, and it is precisely here that the project’s approach stands out. Since agricultural productivity depends on the soil’s ability to regenerate its fertility, the project design incorporates species capable of biologically fixing nitrogen—such as Fabaceae—as well as mobilizing and recycling essential nutrients like phosphorus and potassium, while producing significant biomass.

These “fertilizer trees,” as defined by Hugues Dupriez and Philippe De Leener in 1993, do not compete with the food or cash crops grown beneath their canopy. Their value lies in their ability to enrich topsoil layers, improve soil texture, and enhance soil structure.

These natural processes reduce reliance on synthetic nitrogen fertilizers while improving both the quality and quantity of agricultural production.

![Wawa3.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Wawa3_fba4c18c30.jpg)

### Designing systems adapted to local uses and territories

As part of a broader transition in agricultural practices, the project deploys several agroforestry models based on a diversity of species—fertilizer, fruit, and forest trees—tailored to local agricultural uses and ecological dynamics.

In subsistence crop systems (maize, yams, taro, okra), integrating trees helps restore natural resources, strengthen ecological balances, and enhance resilience to climate impacts. Species complementarity supports production diversification, improves nutritional quality, and stabilizes incomes, while reducing dependence on external inputs through natural soil fertilization.

In perennial cash crop systems (cocoa, coffee, cashew), agroforestry plays a key role in regulating growing conditions. Trees provide essential shade and humidity, protect soils from direct sun exposure, and mitigate the effects of drought. When properly managed, shade also contributes to pest regulation by limiting both fungal diseases associated with excessive humidity and insect proliferation linked to the absence of tree cover.

Additionally, the establishment of woodlots on communal or public land—representing around 10% of planted trees—addresses complementary needs. These areas provide timber and fuelwood resources while integrating fruit species for local consumption, supporting both sustainable resource management and community income generation.

![Wawa2.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Wawa2_363058ea36.jpg)

## Community engagement as a driver of lasting transformation

### Farmers’ ownership of practices

The Wawa project is built on strong community involvement at every stage of implementation. Farmers receive training in agroforestry practices and actively participate in integrating trees into their production systems, fostering rapid and lasting ownership of the proposed models.

Field observations conducted during Reforest’Action’s second audit mission in January 2025 highlight strong beneficiary engagement. Farmers report high satisfaction with the project and its early impacts, particularly in terms of improved soil fertility and crop performance. Some have gone further by independently replacing dead seedlings or extending agroforestry practices beyond initial project plots.

### Scaling practices across territories

This ownership translates into a gradual transformation of agricultural practices at the territorial level. In several villages, farmers report reduced reliance on slash-and-burn practices and growing interest in tree-based systems.

By combining capacity building, strong engagement, and observable changes in practices, the project creates the conditions for the long-term diffusion of agroforestry models. This dynamic is essential to securing impacts over time and enabling the scaling of more resilient agricultural systems.

![Wawa7.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Wawa7_de843f8add.jpg)

## A robust carbon performance framework 

### A methodology and tool validated by Bureau Veritas

Since 2023, Reforest’Action has developed a methodology and simulation tool for ex-ante carbon sequestration, providing estimates of a project’s carbon storage potential over 30 years. This approach enables optimization of project design to maximize climate impact.

The methodology and tool were validated by Bureau Veritas Certification in October 2023. They comply with the core standards of the voluntary carbon market, aligned with international frameworks and regulatory requirements, including Article 147 of France’s Climate and Resilience Law. Bureau Veritas is authorized to verify ex-ante carbon calculations, ensuring third-party credibility.

### Carbon projections aligned with ESG strategies

In August 2025, the Wawa project’s 30-year carbon sequestration projections were verified by Bureau Veritas through an audit assessing:

- **Quantification**: Carbon storage calculated using a verified tool aligned with ISO 14064-3:2019 and international standards 
- **Additionality**: Demonstration that sequestration would not occur without the project, through comparison with a baseline scenario 
- **Permanence**: Risk mitigation strategies and a 20% buffer applied 
- **Verifiability**: Full transparency of data 
- **Sustainability**: Multifunctional design maximizing environmental and socio-economic benefits 
- **Uniqueness**: Registration in an internal registry ensuring traceability 

The audit validated the project’s initial estimate of 92,243 tCO₂ sequestered over 30 years for the 2021–2022 planting season.

After five years, a field verification audit—also conducted by Bureau Veritas—will assess actual implementation, ecosystem health, and compliance with project conditions.

The Wawa project fully meets corporate requirements for transparency and ESG reporting (CSRD, SBTi, CDP) within a voluntary carbon contribution framework.

![Wawa1.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Wawa1_4ea6ef2397.jpg)

**Restoring agricultural land requires a fundamental transformation of production systems, grounded in the reactivation of ecological processes that sustain long-term productivity. In Togo, the Wawa project exemplifies this approach by leveraging agroforestry to move beyond soil depletion dynamics, restore fertility, and align agricultural practices with local realities.
Through this project, Reforest’Action demonstrates its ability to design and deploy integrated agroforestry systems based on a deep understanding of agronomic and social contexts, while anchoring implementation in strong territorial dynamics. The combination of scientific expertise, local engagement, and rigorous carbon performance frameworks provides a robust foundation for delivering credible and lasting impact.
At a time when the resilience of agricultural systems has become a strategic global challenge, projects like Wawa offer concrete, scalable solutions. They pave the way for models that reconcile ecosystem restoration, food security, and long-term value creation—while enabling companies to engage in measurable, transparent, and standards-aligned climate and nature strategies.**


medium_Wawa4.jpg

small_Wawa4.jpg

thumbnail_Wawa4.jpg

Wawa4.jpg

Restoring agricultural land in Togo: agroforestry as a foundation for sustainable transformation

**Across the landscapes of western Andalusia, forests unfold as a mosaic of clearings, grasslands and scattered trees, forming the distinctive silhouettes of the dehesas—Mediterranean agroforestry systems where human activity and ecological processes have long evolved in a delicate balance. Over recent decades, however, this equilibrium has begun to erode. Cork oak stands are ageing, natural regeneration is declining, while recurring droughts, pathogens and increasing browsing pressure from wildlife are accelerating the degradation of these forested landscapes. In this context, restoring a dehesa cannot be reduced to planting trees. The challenge lies in reactivating the biological processes that enable forest ecosystems to renew themselves and sustain their biodiversity. It is within this framework that the project led by Reforest’Action and our field partner Sylva Nova, at La Loma, in the heart of the Sierra de Hornachuelos Natural Park, takes shape. Spanning 176 hectares restored between 2023 and 2028, the ambition goes beyond re-establishing tree cover: it is about designing a restoration project in which biodiversity becomes the very foundation of ecological design, guiding every technical choice and field intervention.**

![LaLoma4.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/La_Loma4_1b726a776e.jpg)

## Dehesas: A Remarkable Yet Fragile Ecosystem 

### A High-Value Agroforestry System

La Loma is located within the Sierra de Hornachuelos Natural Park, a territory included in the Natura 2000 network and designated as a Special Protection Area for Birds (SPA). This status reflects the site’s ecological importance, as it hosts one of the most distinctive agroforestry landscapes in Western Europe.

The structure of dehesas is based on a semi-open system in which trees—primarily cork oaks and holm oaks—are interspersed with grazed natural grasslands. This configuration creates a mosaic of habitats highly conducive to biodiversity. The grasslands support a rich Mediterranean herbaceous flora composed of grasses, legumes and aromatic plants, providing the foundation for abundant pollinator communities and complex trophic networks.

Trees, in turn, play a structuring role within the ecosystem. They offer nesting sites, produce essential food resources and contribute to the microclimatic regulation of the landscape. The dehesas of the Sierra de Hornachuelos host a remarkable fauna, including species such as the southern shrike, several lark species and emblematic raptors such as the Spanish imperial eagle. Mammals are also well represented: genets, badgers, wild boar and deer inhabit these open environments, while high rabbit densities can occasionally attract the Iberian lynx, one of Europe’s most endangered felines.

This biological richness stems from an ecological balance shaped over centuries. Extensive agro-pastoral practices have helped maintain open landscapes and sustain habitat diversity. Yet this balance remains fragile.

### The Silent Decline of Mediterranean Cork Oak Woodlands

The dehesa landscapes are largely structured around the cork oak (Quercus suber), an emblematic species adapted to Mediterranean climatic conditions and the region’s poor soils. Trees on the La Loma site often reach 150 to 200 years of age, reflecting a forest heritage shaped by generations of human management.

Today, however, these cork oak woodlands are undergoing a gradual decline observed across the western Mediterranean basin. Recurrent droughts weaken the trees and intensify the dieback phenomenon known as seca. At the same time, xylophagous insects colonise trunks and lay their eggs in the bark, progressively weakening older individuals.

Meanwhile, natural regeneration is no longer sufficient to ensure stand renewal. High densities of deer and wild boar lead to massive acorn consumption and browsing of young shoots, preventing seedlings from surviving their most critical early years.

The consequence is gradual yet decisive: tree density declines and the ecological integrity of dehesas deteriorates. Restoring these landscapes therefore requires acting both on forest stands and on the ecological processes that govern their renewal.

![LaLoma2.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/La_Loma2_4f2b209475.jpg)

## The Design of the La Loma Project: Ecological Engineering in Service of Living Systems

### Ecological Interactions at the Core of Restoration

In ecosystems such as the dehesa, forests are not merely assemblages of trees but networks of interactions linking vegetation, fauna, soil microorganisms and human activities. Restoring the forest therefore means reactivating the ecological relationships that underpin ecosystem resilience.

At La Loma, biodiversity is conceived as the driving force of restoration: interactions among species play a decisive role in regenerating forest stands. Seed-dispersing birds actively contribute to natural regeneration, while pollinators support plant reproduction. Soil microorganisms enhance nutrient uptake by roots, and insectivorous bats help regulate insect populations. Restoration thus aims not to replace natural processes, but to support their expression by mobilising biodiversity as a lever for ecological regeneration.

### Genetic Selection and Cork Oak Regeneration

Within this framework, the La Loma project relies on a design combining three complementary regeneration strategies: sowing germinated acorns, planting nursery-grown young oaks, and promoting natural regeneration through seed dispersal by wildlife. The objective is to activate multiple renewal dynamics simultaneously, thereby enhancing both the resilience and genetic diversity of the stand.

A meticulous process of seed selection is first carried out. Acorns are collected from trees identified on-site as seed trees, selected for their ecological qualities: resistance to pests and pathogens, drought tolerance, cork quality and longevity. Part of these acorns is then raised in nurseries for one year to produce robust saplings for planting, while the remainder is used for direct sowing after germination.

In winter 2026, more than 3,200 germinated acorns were sown across the site at an average density of approximately 64 plants per hectare. In parallel, one-year-old nursery-grown saplings are planted to secure stand establishment. These are often installed near the stumps of dead trees, where existing root systems create favourable conditions for growth and enhance soil biological structure.

Restoration does not rely solely on these direct interventions. The project also harnesses natural seed dispersal processes. A feeding station installed on-site attracts Eurasian jays, whose behaviour of caching acorns in the soil promotes subsequent germination. This process of zoochory could generate up to 125 young trees per hectare, thereby contributing to natural regeneration.

### Managing Ecological Pressures

To better understand these ecological dynamics, camera traps have been installed across the site. They allow for monitoring wildlife activity and documenting the role of different species in regeneration processes.

Managing ecological pressures is another essential component of the project. Fencing has been installed to limit damage caused by wildlife, which represents one of the main barriers to natural regeneration.

In this Mediterranean landscape, characterised by hot and dry summers, fire prevention is also integrated into the project design. Firebreaks created through vegetation clearing have been established around restored areas to reduce the risk of fire spread.

### Restoring Ecosystem Functions

Restoring soil biological functioning is another key pillar of the project. Mycorrhizal fungi are introduced during planting to promote symbiotic relationships between roots and microorganisms. These associations improve nutrient uptake and increase plant resistance to environmental stress.

Vegetation diversification is also encouraged through the introduction of complementary species, such as wild pear, which enriches food resources for wildlife. The installation of bat boxes further supports insectivorous species that contribute to natural pest regulation.

### Preserving a Socio-Ecological System: The Cork Value Chain

The restoration of cork oak woodlands at La Loma also takes into account the long-term perspective of traditional uses associated with cork oak. The tree’s bark provides the raw material for cork, a renewable resource that has structured the rural economies of Mediterranean regions for centuries. Harvested periodically without felling the tree, typically on a nine-year cycle, cork extraction relies on careful forest management aimed at preserving tree vitality and stand sustainability.

By fostering cork oak regeneration and enhancing biodiversity, the La Loma project contributes to maintaining the ecological conditions necessary for the long-term viability of this local value chain. Biodiversity restoration and the sustainability of human activities thus appear deeply interconnected, reflecting the inherently socio-ecological nature of these Mediterranean landscapes.

Together, these actions reflect an approach in which biodiversity constitutes both the ultimate objective and the driving force of restoration.

![LaLoma1.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/La_Loma1_cfca28363a.jpg)

## Measuring Impact: The Global Biodiversity Standard

### The Need for Rigorous Biodiversity Assessment

The ecological design of the La Loma project is part of a broader ambition: to demonstrate, in a rigorous and measurable way, the real impact of restoration projects on biodiversity. As reforestation initiatives expand globally, the scientific evaluation of outcomes becomes increasingly critical. Tree planting may be the most visible indicator, but it fails to capture the complexity of ecological processes involved. Restoration requires the re-creation of functional habitats, the return of native species and the re-establishment of biological dynamics that ensure ecosystem resilience.

In this context, robust assessment tools are essential to ensure the credibility and effectiveness of restoration strategies. This is precisely the purpose of [The Global Biodiversity Standard](https://www.reforestaction.com/en/magazine/the-global-biodiversity-standard-reforestaction) (TGBS), the only international standard dedicated to evaluating the biodiversity impact of projects. Developed over several years with the contribution of an international network of botanists, ecologists and conservation experts, this certification provides a rigorous scientific framework for assessing the ecological quality of restoration projects. Officially launched at COP16 of the Convention on Biological Diversity, it is based on the in-depth analysis of habitats, species communities and site-specific ecological dynamics.

### Reforest’Action’s Role and the Audit of the La Loma Project

Reforest’Action contributes to the Global Biodiversity Standard by providing environmental analysis tools based on remote sensing, enabling a more refined understanding of ecological dynamics and the monitoring of restoration trajectories over time. The organisation also leads the [European Hub](https://www.reforestaction.com/en/magazine/reforestaction-european-hub-tgbs) of the standard, dedicated to deploying the certification across projects on the continent.

Within this framework, the La Loma project is currently undergoing an audit with a view to certifying its management plan under the Global Biodiversity Standard. By submitting the project to independent assessment by Preferred by Nature, Reforest’Action adopts a transparent scientific approach aimed at ensuring that restoration strategies effectively enhance local biodiversity and restore the ecological dynamics of dehesa landscapes. The La Loma project is set to become the first European project to achieve Global Biodiversity Standard certification.

### A Strategic Framework for Corporate Engagement

Beyond scientific evaluation, the Global Biodiversity Standard also represents a strategic tool for companies investing in restoration initiatives. By independently validating the biodiversity impact of forestry and agroforestry projects, it enables organisations to credibly demonstrate their contribution to ecosystem preservation and restoration.

In a context of growing expectations around transparency and environmental accountability, TGBS-certified projects provide a robust framework for structuring biodiversity commitments and strengthening the credibility of corporate sustainability strategies. They also offer strong complementarity with climate initiatives, particularly those aligned with international carbon standards. Healthy, functional ecosystems contribute both to climate change mitigation and to the adaptation of territories and societies to its impacts. The TGBS certification therefore enables companies to anchor their actions within a more integrated approach to climate and biodiversity, recognising the role of restoration projects in the long-term regeneration of ecosystems.

![LaLoma-Header.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/La_Loma_Header_7bce60fda0.jpg)

**The project in La Loma illustrates a profound shift in forest restoration practices. In a context marked by biodiversity loss and climate change, tree planting alone can no longer be considered sufficient. Restoration now requires a deep understanding of ecosystem functioning and the biological dynamics that underpin it. In this project, every intervention—from seed selection and mycorrhizal inoculation to seed dispersal by birds and protection against browsing pressure—is designed to support the natural processes that enable forests to regenerate. By placing biodiversity at the heart of project design, Reforest’Action demonstrates a demanding and scientifically grounded approach to restoring degraded forests. The objective is not merely to rebuild tree cover, but to restore ecosystems capable of sustaining themselves, evolving over time and supporting life in all its forms. In the Mediterranean landscapes of the Sierra de Hornachuelos, this ambition translates into the gradual reconstruction of a living system, in which the forest regains its capacity for renewal and biodiversity once again becomes the organising principle of the landscape.**

large_LaLoma-Header.jpg

medium_LaLoma-Header.jpg

small_LaLoma-Header.jpg

thumbnail_LaLoma-Header.jpg

LaLoma-Header.jpg

Spain: in La Loma, biodiversity is the cornerstone of restoration

In recent years, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has established itself as the leading framework for corporate climate strategies. More than 10,400 companies across over 100 countries and 50 sectors have already committed to this approach, which is aligned with the latest findings of the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) and the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.

The [SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard](https://sciencebasedtargets.org/net-zero) (CNZS) enables organizations to define a carbon emissions reduction pathway across their entire value chain (Scopes 1, 2 and often 3) by setting near-term and long-term targets, allowing them to reach net zero by 2050.

**While the SBTi places strong emphasis on emissions reductions, it has never limited corporate climate action to this single lever. From the outset, it has also recognized the importance of mobilizing finance for climate mitigation beyond companies’ value chains. Even with ambitious reductions, the transition to global net zero will require a large-scale deployment of emission avoidance and carbon removal solutions, including Nature-based Solutions (NbS), as highlighted by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).**

![SBTi guideline_EN.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/SB_Ti_guideline_EN_4c59468d44.jpg)

## BVCM: Climate contribution at the core of SBTi recommendations

One of the most frequently misunderstood aspects of the SBTi framework concerns the role and implementation of climate contribution mechanisms beyond companies’ value chains. Yet since the publication of the Corporate Net-Zero Standard in 2021, the initiative has actively encouraged companies to take such action through the [Beyond Value Chain Mitigation (BVCM) framework.](https://sciencebasedtargets.org/beyond-value-chain-mitigation)

### The BVCM framework promoted by the SBTi

BVCM refers to a company financing climate mitigation activities outside its value chain, while simultaneously implementing its validated emissions reduction pathway. This includes supporting projects that avoid emissions as well as projects that remove carbon from the atmosphere. Within this approach, Nature-based Solutions are highlighted by the SBTi as essential tools for climate change mitigation.

### A virtuous complement to emissions reduction targets

This mechanism is commonly referred to as carbon contribution. Its objective is straightforward: accelerate global climate action by channeling greater private finance toward high-impact – and often underfunded – climate solutions, while enabling companies to contribute to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The SBTi also emphasizes that this approach brings strategic benefits for companies. Over time, it helps accelerate the global transition to net zero, defined as reducing 90 to 95% of a company’s emissions by 2050, combined with the full neutralization of residual emissions, notably through carbon removal projects.
Strategic climate finance can also help companies mitigate climate-related risks while strengthening their long-term financial resilience and value creation.

### A voluntary yet evolving framework

At this stage, the BVCM framework remains voluntary and is not subject to formal validation by the SBTi. However, the initiative encourages companies to structure their approach by:

- defining a clear beyond-value-chain commitment framework (objectives, timeline and scope)
- supporting projects that meet key environmental integrity criteria (additionality, permanence, and avoidance of double counting)
- prioritizing third-party verified projects based on standardized methodologies
- establishing measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) systems
- communicating transparently on supported projects and achieved impacts

The SBTi also encourages ambitious levels of engagement—for example, by supporting mitigation activities delivering emission reductions or removals equivalent to at least 50% of a company’s unabated emissions.

## OER: Toward greater corporate climate responsibility

The revision of the Corporate Net-Zero Standard, with a draft published in November 2025, suggests that beyond-value-chain climate contributions are likely to play an increasingly significant role. In this updated version of the standard, the SBTi introduces a more structured framework: Ongoing Emissions Responsibility (OER).

### From voluntary contribution to climate responsibility

While BVCM encouraged voluntary contributions, the proposed OER framework introduces a more structured approach. Companies are invited to take explicit responsibility for the emissions they continue to generate during their transition to net zero. This mechanism creates a clearer link between companies’ historical and ongoing emissions and their contribution to addressing the global climate crisis. The objective is to embed carbon contribution more firmly within corporate climate and financial strategies.

### Quantified targets and recognition mechanisms

Although the draft standard is currently being reviewed by the SBTi, it introduces several key developments:
 
- **recognition of corporate engagement** through two levels (“recognized” and “leadership”) designed to promote reputational incentives
 
- **quantified contribution targets,** expressed either in tCO₂e (Mitigation Impact Contributions) or financial contributions per tCO₂e (Climate Finance Contributions), enabling clearer comparison of commitments
 
- strong encouragement to **integrate climate contribution into corporate climate strategies,** notably through the implementation of an internal carbon price, and the possibility that the framework could become mandatory for certain companies by 2035
 
- a preference for **measurable and verified climate impacts,** often through certified carbon credits, although other projects may be accepted if they demonstrate credible and verifiable climate benefits

However, one fundamental principle remains unchanged as companies approach 2050: in order to achieve net zero, they must fully neutralize 100% of their residual emissions. 

The direction proposed in the Draft Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0 sends a strong signal to companies: contributing beyond their value chain is no longer merely a complementary action, but rather a strategic climate solution to be deployed alongside emissions reduction efforts.

Whether through the BVCM framework – already in place – or the currently under review Ongoing Emissions Responsibility (OER) framework, these mechanisms share a common objective: accelerating climate action today rather than waiting until the net-zero target year to mobilize the necessary solutions.

**In this context, financing carbon projects is increasingly emerging as a meaningful pathway to support a company’s SBTi trajectory, alongside the strict emissions reduction pathways implemented within its value chain.**

## Nature-based Solutions to support SBTi climate contribution strategies

[Nature-based Solutions](https://www.reforestaction.com/en/magazine/what-are-nature-based-solutions) (NbS) are particularly well suited to building high-integrity climate contribution strategies. In addition to enabling carbon storage – with forests representing the largest terrestrial carbon sink – they deliver essential co-benefits for biodiversity, soil health, water systems and local communities. Investing in NbS therefore allows companies to align climate strategy with broader ESG objectives, moving beyond a purely carbon-centric approach.

### Anticipating near-term SBTi targets

To date, more than 10,000 companies have committed to the SBTi with near-term targets covering a 5- to 10-year timeframe, many of which converge around 2030. In this context, climate contribution represents an actionable lever that companies can activate today to maximize their climate impact under the BVCM framework while continuing to implement emissions reduction pathways.

At the same time, new quality standards and integrity frameworks are emerging in the voluntary carbon market, contributing to a more robust ecosystem for climate projects. Despite these improvements, the supply of high-integrity projects remains limited, largely due to chronic underfunding. As a result, it is becoming strategically important for companies to secure their climate contribution commitments early.

**With this in mind, Reforest’Action develops Nature-based Solutions, particularly through forest ecosystem projects, to support companies in achieving their 2030 climate objectives.**

### A portfolio of solutions tailored to corporate needs

With over 15 years of experience in Nature-based Solutions, Reforest’Action offers a range of solutions designed to help companies secure climate contributions beyond their value chains. Through a diversified set of projects - including forest restoration, agroforestry and tropical forest conservation initiatives - certified or verified by recognized third parties and spanning different geographies and pricing levels, companies can build carbon project portfolios aligned with their operational constraints and climate objectives.

The **carbon units** generated by our projects are available for immediate mobilization and can therefore be integrated into short-term SBTi strategies:

- **REDD+ carbone credits:** Carbon credits certified under recognized standards (VCS, CCB) generated by projects that protect tropical forests threatened by deforestation or forest degradation. These projects contribute to biodiversity conservation while supporting sustainable economic opportunities for local communities.
-
- **Label bas-carbone credits:** Forestry projects developed by Reforest’Action and certified under France’s Label Bas-Carbone, contributing to the (re)forestation of French forests. The Label Bas-Carbone currently represents the only official certification framework for quantifying nature-based carbon removal in France, supporting the French National Low-Carbon Strategy (SNBC).

- **Carbon units from verified projects:** (Agro)forestry projects developed by Reforest’Action with 30-year carbon sequestration projections validated by Bureau Veritas, combined with an independent field audit after five years, ensuring transparency and environmental integrity.


As the SBTi evolves from voluntary climate contribution toward a more structured approach to corporate climate responsibility, beyond-value-chain contributions are becoming increasingly central to corporate climate strategies.
For companies, acting beyond the value chain does not mean acting in isolation from their core business. On the contrary, high-integrity climate action can be anchored locally, closely connected to territories, ecosystems and corporate stakeholders.

In this context, Nature-based Solutions offer a concrete opportunity to support companies in achieving their near-term SBTi targets while generating positive environmental and social impacts where they matter most.

**Discover how Reforest’Action’s solutions can support your climate strategy.**


_Note: Activities and investments related to BVCM and OER frameworks are not accounted for within Scope 1, 2 or 3 emissions and do not contribute to value-chain emissions reduction targets. They therefore cannot replace corporate decarbonization efforts._



large_Header article SBTi.jpg

medium_Header article SBTi.jpg

small_Header article SBTi.jpg

thumbnail_Header article SBTi.jpg

Header article SBTi.jpg

Carbon contribution under the SBTi: The growing role of  Nature-based Solutions

**Today, water deficit is no longer an occasional hazard but a structural transformation of the hydrological cycle. In many agricultural regions, atmospheric demand now exceeds the capacity of ecosystems to retain and redistribute available moisture. This shift challenges a productive model historically built on climatic stability and the relative availability of water resources. How can the continuity of agricultural production be maintained when water becomes a structural limiting factor? Rethinking agricultural models therefore requires revisiting the biophysical mechanisms that govern water infiltration, storage, and availability across soils, crops, and territories, and repositioning the capacity of ecosystems to regulate water at the core of agronomic and territorial decision-making.**
 
## Water Deficit: A Systemic Transformation of the Agricultural Water Cycle

### The Intensification of Climatic Constraints

The sixth assessment report of the IPCC highlights the increasing frequency and intensity of agricultural droughts as a combined consequence of global warming and changes in atmospheric circulation. Rising temperatures increase potential evapotranspiration—that is, the amount of water that could be transferred from soil and plants to the atmosphere if water were available without limitation. This indicator reflects climatic water demand: the warmer, drier, and windier the air, the greater this demand becomes. Consequently, even when precipitation remains constant, an increase in potential evapotranspiration intensifies crop water stress, as the atmosphere demands more water than the soil–plant system can supply.

Water stress therefore arises from a structural imbalance between the actual supply of water—dependent on rainfall and the soil’s capacity to store it—and a rapidly increasing atmospheric demand. This tension alters cropping calendars, weakens sensitive phenological stages such as flowering or grain filling, and increases the variability of yields from one year to the next. In this context, productive stability becomes a central concern: a system’s capacity to absorb successive water shocks now determines economic viability as much as the yield levels achieved in favorable years.
 
### Blue Water and Green Water: A Strategic Framework

The work of Malin Falkenmark beginning in the mid-1990s, followed by research conducted with Johan Rockström in the early 2000s, profoundly reshaped hydrological analysis by distinguishing between blue water stored in rivers and aquifers and green water retained in soils and directly used by plants.

Rainfed agriculture—that is, production systems relying exclusively on natural precipitation rather than artificial irrigation—accounts for the majority of cultivated land worldwide. It depends directly on the moisture stored in soils following rainfall infiltration, in other words on green water. The hydrological performance of rainfed agriculture therefore depends on the soil’s ability to absorb precipitation, slow runoff, build a usable reserve within its active horizons, and release this water in line with the physiological needs of crops.

Water deficit thus reflects a failure of ecosystem regulation as much as a volumetric shortage. Such a perspective shifts attention toward the structural and biological quality of soils, as well as the spatial organization of agricultural landscapes, which determine how water circulates and how long it remains within territories.
 
### From Water Deficit to Water Bankruptcy

When these natural regulatory mechanisms deteriorate over time, a structural imbalance can emerge between needs and ecological capacity. At the scale of territories and value chains, such an imbalance corresponds to what the United Nations University report Global Water Bankruptcy describes as water bankruptcy: a tipping point at which water demand permanently exceeds the capacity of ecosystems to supply it, jeopardizing agricultural production, supply security, and the economic stability of entire sectors.
 
## Toward Water Sobriety: Restoring the Hydrological Capacity of Soils

### Vegetative Cover and Infiltration Dynamics

In agricultural systems, soils left bare between crops exhibit structural vulnerability to intense rainfall. The kinetic impact of raindrops breaks down surface aggregates; disaggregated silts and clays migrate toward the surface and clog soil pores—that is, the interstitial spaces through which water infiltrates and circulates—forming a surface crust that reduces infiltration capacity. Excess water then runs off across the surface, carrying away fine particles and nutrients while the replenishment of the soil’s plant-available water reserve remains limited.

Introducing cover crops fundamentally alters this sequence. Vegetative cover absorbs the impact of raindrops, root systems structure the soil at depth, and associated biological activity—earthworms, microorganisms, and root exudates—fosters the formation of stable aggregates. This biological architecture increases macroporosity, improves hydraulic continuity, and facilitates percolation toward active soil horizons.

Several meta-analyses conducted in temperate and Mediterranean agricultural systems—notably Basche & DeLonge (2017) and Blanco-Canqui et al. (2015)—demonstrate significant improvements in infiltration rates and reductions in runoff in most of the contexts studied, although results depend on climate, soil texture, and crop rotations. The magnitude of benefits therefore varies according to local conditions, requiring a contextualized agronomic approach. When coherently integrated into cropping systems, permanent soil cover increases the share of precipitation effectively stored in the soil and available for subsequent crops, transforming rainfall events into hydrological capital rather than transient flows.
 
### Soil Organic Matter and Water Retention

Soil organic carbon content is a key determinant of the structural architecture of agricultural soils. By promoting the formation and stabilization of aggregates, it directly influences the distribution and continuity of soil pores, and therefore the way water circulates and is stored within the soil profile. Studies such as Rawls et al. (2003) and Minasny & McBratney (2018) highlight a positive relationship between soil organic carbon and water-holding capacity, while emphasizing the context-dependent nature of this effect. Its magnitude depends strongly on soil texture and mineralogy: the impact is generally more pronounced in sandy or loamy soils, where biological structuring compensates for limited intrinsic storage capacity, than in clay-rich soils already characterized by high microporosity.

Increasing soil organic carbon stocks can therefore enhance the plant-available water reserve while improving structural cohesion and reducing vulnerability to erosion. Biological activity stimulated by this enrichment contributes to the formation of macropores and to improved hydraulic continuity within the soil profile. This more functional soil structure strengthens the soil’s capacity to buffer short- to medium-term water deficits, whose frequency is increasing in many temperate regions. In this sense, restoring soil carbon stocks emerges as both a hydrological and climatic lever, stabilizing production while contributing to emission mitigation.
 
### Conservation Agriculture and Hydraulic Continuity

Systems combining reduced soil disturbance, permanent soil cover, and diversified crop rotations profoundly reshape the pore architecture of surface horizons. No-till practices limit the mechanical disruption of aggregates, vegetative cover protects the soil surface and contributes carbon inputs, while diversified rotations encourage differentiated root structuring.
Analyses of conservation agriculture systems, including Pittelkow et al. (2015) and Blanco-Canqui & Ruis (2018), show significant improvements in infiltration and structural stability when these practices are implemented together. By contrast, the effects are more variable—and sometimes limited—when no-till is adopted without cover crops or crop diversification, highlighting the systemic nature of the approach.

Improved hydraulic continuity—that is, effective connectivity between soil pores—allows infiltrated water to percolate into deeper horizons rather than flowing across the surface, thereby reducing runoff losses. This structured pore network regulates hydrological flows by absorbing intense rainfall, facilitating water storage within the soil profile, and gradually releasing moisture during dry periods.

Hydrological performance therefore depends on the overall coherence of the cropping system: it results from the integration of multiple practices implemented together rather than from the isolated adoption of a single technique.
 
## Trees and Landscapes: Reconfiguring Agricultural Hydrology

### Agroforestry and Microclimatic Regulation

Agroforestry reintroduces vertical complexity into simplified agricultural systems—that is, fields dominated by a single vegetation layer, typically consisting of uniform annual crops. Introducing trees creates multiple vegetation strata that alter energy and water exchanges between soil, vegetation, and the atmosphere.

Trees intercept and redistribute solar radiation (radiative fluxes), reducing the energy reaching the soil surface and the crops beneath. This modulation of radiation lowers surface temperatures and limits excessive heating of the crop canopy. It is accompanied by reduced wind speed within the field, which in turn decreases water losses associated with atmospheric turbulence.

These microclimatic modifications attenuate instantaneous evaporative demand—that is, the amount of water the atmosphere can extract at a given moment from soils and plants when air conditions are hot and dry. During heat waves, this reduction in atmospheric demand can limit the intensity of water stress experienced by associated crops.

At the same time, the depth and diversity of tree root systems contribute to structuring the soil at depth and improving its porosity. Agroforestry design—tree density, row orientation, and species selection—determines the balance between competition and complementarity for water and light. Careful ecological design makes it possible to optimize these interactions between trees and crops in order to maximize the hydrological resilience of the ecosystem.
 
### Vertical Hydraulic Redistribution

Deep tree root systems, capable of exploring several meters of soil depending on species and pedological conditions, access water reserves beyond the reach of annual crops. This deep anchoring modifies the vertical distribution of water flows within the soil profile.

Ecohydrological research, from the pioneering observations of Richards & Caldwell (1987) to more recent syntheses by Neumann & Cardon (2012), documents processes of hydraulic redistribution—sometimes referred to as hydraulic lift—through which water absorbed at depth during the day may be released into upper soil layers when these layers become drier than deeper horizons. This moisture gradient allows water to move upward through the root system, particularly at night when reduced transpiration favors the reversal of hydraulic flows. In this way, the root network connects different soil layers and can, depending on moisture contrasts, help maintain residual moisture in surface horizons, benefiting fine roots of the tree itself and, in some contexts, associated crops and soil biological activity.

The magnitude of this process depends on rooting depth and density, soil physical properties, and the availability of water in deeper horizons. It therefore varies according to tree species, agroforestry design, and climatic conditions. By redistributing water vertically, trees actively contribute to regulating the local water cycle and to stabilizing the functioning of the soil–plant–atmosphere system.
 
### Functional Landscapes and Territorial Water Retention

The simplification of agricultural landscapes—the removal of hedgerows, clearing of woodlots, drainage of wetlands, and enlargement of fields—has profoundly altered water circulation at the territorial scale. By removing physical and biological obstacles that once slowed flows, these transformations have accelerated surface runoff and reduced water residence time within watersheds. An increasing share of rainfall therefore rapidly reaches drainage outlets, limiting diffuse infiltration and the gradual recharge of soils and aquifers.

Restoring ecological infrastructures such as hedgerows, grass strips, and wetlands acts simultaneously on several hydrological mechanisms. Vegetated hedgerows and embankments increase landscape roughness, slow runoff, and promote infiltration upstream. Grass strips intercept surface flows, reduce erosion, and enhance local percolation. Wetlands, whether natural or restored, function as hydrological buffers by temporarily storing water during rainfall events and releasing it gradually, thereby smoothing hydrological extremes.

Analyses by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre highlight the role of Nature-based Solutions in strengthening the hydrological resilience of agricultural territories, notably by increasing water retention time and moderating peak flows. These mechanisms do not replace technical infrastructures, but they alter their operating conditions by reducing flow variability.
Managing water deficit therefore extends beyond the scale of individual fields to that of the watershed. Regulating water flows requires coordination among farmers, public authorities, and economic actors. A territory’s ability to retain, infiltrate, and redistribute water thus becomes a collective asset upon which the hydrological stability of farms and value chains depends.
 
## Agronomic and Economic Adaptation to Water Risk: Transforming Production Systems

### Reconfiguring Cropping Choices in a Constrained Climate

By modifying the biophysical conditions in which crops develop, restoring the ecological functions of soils and landscapes constitutes a necessary condition for hydrological resilience. Yet the intensification of water deficits also requires a transformation of the very structure of agricultural production.

The choice of species and varieties becomes a strategic parameter. Differences in physiological responses to water stress—rooting depth, stomatal regulation capacity, phenological plasticity—directly influence a crop’s ability to maintain productive potential under constraint. Adapting crop rotations to regional climate projections therefore amounts to a structural repositioning of agricultural systems in relation to their future environmental conditions.

Crop diversification constitutes a second lever. Highly specialized systems concentrate exposure to water risks on a limited number of productions. By contrast, more diversified rotations distribute risks, reduce dependence on water-intensive crops, and enable more precise adjustment of cropping calendars to critical climatic periods identified through data.
Transforming production systems therefore requires reconsidering the coherence between regional climate conditions, crop physiology, and the organization of crop rotations.
 
### Embedding the Transition within Value Chains

These agronomic transformations unfold within value chains whose structure strongly influences decisions at the farm level. Introducing new crops, modifying rotations, or reducing dependence on certain productions requires not only technical adjustments but also commercial and contractual adaptations.

The durability of these transitions depends on the capacity of economic actors to integrate water constraints into their sourcing criteria and long-term commitments. When market outlets are secure and risks are shared, producers gain greater room to adapt their systems. Conversely, rigid economic frameworks tend to maintain production models that are increasingly misaligned with emerging climatic realities.

Water risk is therefore not merely an environmental variable; it affects supply continuity, volume stability, and cost predictability. As episodes of tension become more frequent, the ability of value chains to anticipate these dynamics becomes a determining factor in their economic resilience.

**Water deficit highlights a now-central interdependence between climate, ecosystems, and agricultural models. A territory’s capacity to produce under constraint depends first and foremost on the functionality of its soils and landscapes: infiltration, storage, and redistribution of water form the physical foundation of productive stability. Yet ecological restoration alone is insufficient without parallel changes in cropping choices and economic frameworks. Aligning production systems with regional climate trajectories and structuring value chains accordingly becomes a condition for long-term viability. Technical infrastructures—irrigation systems, storage facilities, and monitoring tools—can complement these dynamics. Their effectiveness, however, remains closely tied to the hydrological quality of the ecosystems in which they operate. Rethinking agricultural models in the face of water deficit therefore implies a change of scale: from field to watershed, from annual yield to multi-year stability, from water management to the transformation of production systems. The future of agriculture will depend on this articulation between restoring living systems and reorganizing value chains within an increasingly uncertain hydrological regime.**


large_iStock-1352512170.jpg

medium_iStock-1352512170.jpg

small_iStock-1352512170.jpg

thumbnail_iStock-1352512170.jpg

iStock-1352512170.jpg

Rethinking Agricultural Models in the Face of Water Deficits

**The leather sector occupies a distinctive position within textile and fashion value chains. Often regarded as a by-product of the meat and dairy industries, bovine hides in fact embody a significant share of the environmental impacts associated with livestock production. Behind every processed hide lie systemic challenges: greenhouse gas emissions, imported deforestation linked to animal feed, growing pressure on water resources, soil degradation, and biodiversity loss. According to the FAO, livestock accounts for approximately 14.5% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, the majority of which are attributable to cattle. In this context, leather sustainability cannot be limited to improvements in industrial processing: it requires a profound transformation of agricultural practices. It is precisely at this upstream level that regenerative agriculture offers structuring levers to reshape the sector’s sourcing models.**

## Leather Supply Chains: Understanding the Underlying Agricultural Challenges

### Cattle Farming: A Sector Struggling to Align with Sustainability Pathways

Converging analyses from the FAO, the IPCC and INRAE highlight that cattle farming remains one of the most complex agricultural sectors to align with climate trajectories, due to its significant share of enteric methane emissions and its structural link to deforestation dynamics driven by animal feed production.

Dominant intensive systems rely heavily on external inputs, including mineral fertilizers, agrochemicals and imported feed concentrates. In many European regions, landscape simplification and the progressive disappearance of traditional agroforestry systems—such as the historic bocage landscapes of Normandy—have weakened the ecological resilience of farms.

This situation is all the more critical as farmers are on the frontline of climate change impacts. Recurrent droughts, extreme weather events and declining pasture productivity are undermining farm economic stability. At the same time, the agroecological transitions expected of the sector require significant technical and human investment: rethinking grazing management, diversifying cropping systems, restoring soil fertility and reducing input dependency. These transformations carry short-term risks, particularly in terms of yields and financial stability, which many farmers cannot shoulder alone.

The absence of sufficiently strong financial incentives therefore constitutes a major barrier to engagement in the transition. Without structured support, sustainability is too often perceived as an additional constraint rather than a resilience strategy.

### Animal Feed and Deforestation: A Strategic Blind Spot

Among the key drivers of leather’s environmental footprint, animal feed occupies a central role. A significant share of the plant proteins consumed by European cattle is imported, particularly soy grown in South America. This dependency directly contributes to deforestation and the conversion of natural ecosystems, notably in the Amazon.

The European Union itself acknowledges its responsibility in imported deforestation, estimated at nearly 10% of the global total associated with international trade. In this context, strengthening feed self-sufficiency at farm level emerges as a major strategic lever. Producing a greater share of livestock feed locally—through diversified and resilient cropping systems—not only reduces farms’ carbon footprint but also helps break the structural link between cattle farming and deforestation.

## Agricultural Levers for Transformation: Towards Regenerative Leather

To address these challenges, Reforest’Action builds its approach on three complementary pillars of regenerative agriculture applied to cattle farming: regenerative soil and crop management, silvopastoral systems, and rotational grazing.

### Restoring Soils to Reinvent Agricultural Performance

Regenerative soil and crop management forms the foundation of the transition. It relies on a coherent set of practices designed to restore soil biological functions: reduced mechanical tillage, the use of cover crops, extended and diversified crop rotations, the development of polycultures, and the progressive reduction of mineral fertilizer use.

These practices fundamentally transform agroecosystem functioning. By increasing soil organic matter, they enhance carbon storage while reducing emissions linked to mineral fertilizers and field operations. Better-structured soils improve water infiltration, limit runoff and erosion, and strengthen resilience to drought.

Global meta-analyses based on field data indicate that introducing cover crops can increase soil carbon stocks by approximately 0.3 to 1 tonne of CO₂e per hectare per year, depending on pedoclimatic conditions and management practices. In livestock systems—where soils already represent a major carbon sink—such gains are decisive in improving leather’s overall carbon footprint.

### Silvopastoral Systems: Reconnecting Trees and Livestock

Silvopastoral systems occupy a central role in Reforest’Action’s approach. By reintroducing trees, hedgerows and wooded alignments into pasturelands, these systems reconnect with historically rooted agricultural models while adapting them to contemporary challenges.

Trees play a multifunctional role. Scientific research on agroforestry consistently shows that integrating trees into agricultural systems significantly increases carbon stocks, both in above-ground biomass and in soils, compared to treeless systems. Although the magnitude of sequestration varies according to climate, planting density and management practices, its contribution is sufficiently well documented to be integrated into farm-level carbon accounting.

Trees also play a decisive role in soil protection. When topsoil erodes, fundamental soil functions deteriorate: rooting depth declines, water retention capacity weakens, and nutrients become less accessible to crops. The FAO notes that in cases of severe erosion, the degradation of soil ecological functions can result in substantial yield losses, reaching up to 50% in the most extreme situations. By slowing runoff, stabilizing surface horizons and strengthening soil structure through root systems, agroforestry systems offer a strategic lever to preserve long-term land productivity.

From a hydrological perspective, reduced runoff and improved infiltration help protect the quality of surface and groundwater. Trees also provide essential microclimatic regulation: agroforestry trees can reduce wind speed over distances several times their height, helping stabilize production conditions in the face of climate variability.

In certain contexts, trees can also contribute directly to livestock feeding. Some fodder tree species produce leaves and young shoots that can be consumed by ruminants, particularly during summer periods when pasture productivity declines. This complementary resource—often rich in minerals and sometimes in protein—can strengthen farm feed autonomy. However, not all tree species are suitable for this purpose, and the potential for fodder valorization depends on species selection, management practices and the specific needs of the livestock involved.

For animals, the presence of trees provides essential shade during heatwaves, improves thermal comfort and contributes to overall herd welfare. At farm scale, silvopastoral systems also create opportunities for economic diversification through the valorization of tree-based products such as timber, fruit or biomass.

### Rotational Grazing: A Key to Ecological Pasture Productivity

Rotational grazing constitutes the third pillar of the transition. By dividing pastureland into multiple paddocks and regularly moving livestock, this practice prevents overgrazing and allows vegetation sufficient time to regenerate.

Its benefits are both agronomic and environmental. Soils experience less compaction, root systems develop more extensively, and organic matter gradually accumulates. Denser vegetative cover protects soils from climatic stress and supports biodiversity.

From an economic and environmental standpoint, rotational grazing improves the efficiency of forage resource use. By reducing reliance on fertilizers and purchased feed, it lowers production costs while mitigating deforestation risks associated with imported feed. It also enhances animal health and productivity by reducing parasite pressure and providing more favorable grazing conditions.

## Measuring to Transform: A Transition Grounded in Robust Indicators

The credibility of regenerative leather supply chains depends on the ability to accurately measure environmental and socio-economic impacts. The framework developed by Reforest’Action relies on a structured methodology ranging from baseline assessment to trajectory verification, including medium-term projections and ongoing monitoring.

Indicators cover all key dimensions of sustainability. They include enteric methane emissions, emissions linked to manure management, mineral nitrogen use, emissions per unit of output, as well as carbon storage in soils and biomass. These climate-related metrics are complemented by biodiversity indicators, water quality metrics, economic performance measures and feed autonomy indicators.

Alignment with the French Low Carbon Label (Label Bas Carbone) ensures institutional and methodological recognition of the results achieved. The certification of emission reductions and carbon sequestration—materialized through carbon units—constitutes a key economic lever to secure the transition phase and encourage long-term adoption of regenerative practices by farmers.

However, transformation cannot stop at the farm gate. Valorizing leather derived from regenerative practices also requires coordination with slaughterhouses to ensure identification, segregation and traceability of hides at the point of processing. This intermediary link is decisive: without logistical organization across the value chain, environmental benefits generated upstream risk remaining invisible and unrecognized in the market.

## Reforest’Action: Architect of Regenerative Leather Supply Chains

With over fifteen years of experience designing and implementing ecosystem regeneration projects worldwide, Reforest’Action has established itself as a structuring actor in the agricultural transition, mobilizing hundreds of economic partners around the sustainable securing of raw materials.

Through its regenerative agriculture programs, Reforest’Action develops support frameworks combining agroforestry expertise, supply chain structuring and robust carbon accounting methodologies. Its approach is based on long-term farmer engagement, integrating initial diagnostics, transition planning and ongoing environmental and economic performance monitoring.

By aligning environmental performance, economic viability and carbon traceability, Reforest’Action positions itself as a true architect of regenerative supply chains, capable of meeting the growing expectations of brands and territories alike.



**The sustainability of leather supply chains is not determined solely in processing facilities, but in the agricultural landscapes where raw materials are produced. Pastures, crop rotations, hedgerows and livestock feeding systems ultimately shape the sector’s climate footprint, its dependence on imported deforestation, and the resilience of rural territories. Combining feed autonomy, soil restoration, silvopastoral systems, rotational grazing and rigorous impact measurement makes it possible to transform the leather sector at its roots. At a time when the European Regulation on Deforestation-Free Products (EUDR) is redefining traceability and compliance requirements for raw materials, organizing regenerative leather supply chains has become a strategic imperative as much as an environmental one. By structuring regenerative supply chains, Reforest’Action is paving the way for leather that is compatible with planetary boundaries, while strengthening the long-term resilience of farmers and territories.**


large_Filiere-cuir.jpg

medium_Filiere-cuir.jpg

small_Filiere-cuir.jpg

thumbnail_Filiere-cuir.jpg

Filiere-cuir.jpg

Leather Supply Chains: What Agricultural Levers Can Strengthen Sustainability?

**In February 2026, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) approved the _[Business and Biodiversity Assessment]_(https://www.ipbes.net/business-impact), the first global report specifically dedicated to the interactions between business activities and biodiversity. The result of three years of collective work by more than 79 experts from 35 countries, this publication responds to an explicit request from IPBES Member States to ground business–nature relations in a robust scientific framework, in support of political, financial and economic decision-makers. The challenge it addresses is unequivocal: the continuity of economic models relies on ecological functions whose degradation directly undermines value creation itself. At a time when international regulatory frameworks increasingly require companies to account for biodiversity-related risks and impacts — notably under the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework — this assessment provides a precise analytical framework to inform corporate strategies in the context of the intertwined climate and biodiversity crises.**
 
## Biodiversity and the Economy: A Functional Interdependence

Biodiversity encompasses the diversity of species, ecosystems and biological interactions through which nature generates essential functions such as soil fertility, pollination, water regulation and carbon sequestration. These functions constitute a set of ecosystem services without which economic activity could not be sustained.

The IPBES analysis highlights the scale of value-chain dependencies — both direct and indirect — on these services provided by biodiversity. In the mapping presented by the report, the primary sector and agri-food systems appear on the front line, but exposure extends far beyond them. The pharmaceutical industry depends on genetic diversity; construction and infrastructure are embedded in territories whose ecological stability conditions long-term viability; and the financial sector holds portfolios whose value ultimately rests on ecologically vulnerable supply chains.

Biodiversity thus operates as a functional matrix underpinning economic activity. As ecosystems degrade, the functions they provide become increasingly unstable, more costly to replace, and in some cases irreplaceable. Economic trade-offs that long overlooked this dimension are now confronted with clear biophysical limits.
 
## Economic Pressures and the Transformation of Natural Systems

The Business and Biodiversity Assessment builds on earlier IPBES work, notably the 2019 Global Assessment, which identified five direct drivers of biodiversity loss resulting from human activities: changes in land and sea use, overexploitation of natural resources, climate change, pollution and the introduction of invasive alien species.

This new publication deepens the analysis of how economic activities contribute to these pressures. Globalised value chains, the intensification of agricultural systems, urban expansion, mining activities, deforestation and the standardisation of production systems — centred on a limited number of species, varieties and technical practices — are collectively reshaping natural environments.

The challenge, however, lies not only in the accumulation of localised impacts. The report describes cumulative dynamics in which habitat fragmentation, biological homogenisation and the structural impoverishment of ecosystems — marked by the loss of functional diversity and regulatory capacities — reduce their ability to adapt. This erosion of ecological resilience increases the vulnerability of territories and, by extension, of the economic activities established within or dependent upon them.

Moreover, long and complex supply chains dilute the perceived link between strategic decision-making and concrete ecological impacts. In 2023 alone, approximately USD 7.3 trillion was channelled towards activities with direct negative impacts on nature, including USD 4.9 trillion from private finance and USD 2.4 trillion in public subsidies supporting biodiversity-harmful activities. By contrast, only USD 220 billion was directed towards conservation and restoration efforts — barely 3% of harmful financial flows. Under current conditions, capital allocation continues to reinforce trajectories that are ecologically unsustainable.
 
## Reframing Risk in Corporate Strategy

One of the report’s major conceptual contributions lies in repositioning biodiversity among the major structural risks facing contemporary economies, alongside climate change and geopolitical tensions. Within this framework, biodiversity-related risks fall into three broad categories:
- **Physical risks**, reflecting the direct consequences of ecological degradation, such as water scarcity, unstable agricultural yields and heightened exposure to climate-related hazards amplified by the loss of regulating ecosystems.
- **Transition risks**, arising from rapid shifts in regulatory, financial and market frameworks, including transparency requirements, reporting standards and the growing integration of biodiversity considerations into risk analysis by investors and supervisors.
- **Systemic risks**, referring to cascading effects that can simultaneously affect multiple sectors. A regional ecological disruption may trigger supply shortages, influence commodity prices, weaken asset portfolios and lead to rapid financial adjustments.

Taken together, these risk dimensions underscore the need for companies to treat biodiversity not as a peripheral concern, but as a structural parameter of strategic decision-making and long-term performance management.
 
## From Impact Management to the Transformation of Economic Architectures

The assessment notes the growing number of voluntary corporate commitments, while also highlighting their limited impact in relation to the scale of observed trends. Strategies focused solely on marginal reductions in environmental footprints fail to alter the structural drivers of pressure on biodiversity.

The core issue identified by IPBES lies in the architecture of economic models themselves. The report points to the need to align economic incentives, public policies and financial flows with the objectives of the Global Biodiversity Framework, notably the restoration of degraded ecosystems and the substantial reduction of direct pressures by 2030.

Such transformation entails revisiting activity portfolios, strengthening supply-chain traceability, progressively internalising ecological costs and redirecting investment towards activities compatible with ecosystem regeneration. The report also emphasises cooperation with Indigenous Peoples and local communities, who hold critical knowledge and steward biodiversity-rich territories. Territorial governance emerges as a decisive lever in this transition.
 
## Finance and Governance: A Strategic Inflection Point

Financial actors occupy a structurally influential position in the IPBES analysis. Capital flows shape the trajectory of economic sectors and can either accelerate or hinder transformative change.

Integrating biodiversity into capital allocation, risk management and performance assessment represents a major inflection point. Boards of directors are called upon to embed these issues within governance mechanisms, set measurable objectives and ensure coherence between public commitments, investment strategies and operational practices.

Biodiversity thus emerges as a transversal strategic variable, intrinsically linked to competitiveness, resilience and long-term reputation.
 

**The IPBES _Business and Biodiversity Assessment_ establishes a demanding analytical framework: economic viability depends on the stability and regenerative capacity of living systems, and can only be pursued within ecological limits. Through this report, companies gain access to a diagnosis grounded in the best available scientific knowledge, a structured risk mapping, and a set of methodological frameworks and tools to integrate biodiversity as a core parameter of strategic decision-making. The ability to mobilise these levers will become a key determinant of long-term corporate resilience.**


large_Header-IPBES.jpg

medium_Header-IPBES.jpg

small_Header-IPBES.jpg

thumbnail_Header-IPBES.jpg

Header-IPBES.jpg

Biodiversity: is the corporate sector at the heart of the solution?

**As climate change accelerates, companies whose business depends on natural raw materials face an increasingly complex equation: securing their supplies while meeting rising regulatory, climate-related, and societal expectations. In this context, insetting is emerging as a major strategic lever—at the intersection of economic performance, operational resilience, and environmental impact.**

**Reforest’Action develops insetting projects designed to durably strengthen the resilience of agricultural and water supplies, at the very heart of corporate sourcing strategies and reporting frameworks, notably the [EUDR](https://www.reforestaction.com/en/magazine/european-law-deforestation) and [SBTi FLAG](https://www.reforestaction.com/en/magazine/sbti-flag-steering-transformation-agricultural-value-chains). More than a mechanism for environmental contribution, insetting is an integrated approach, designed to act directly within value chains—where the most material risks and opportunities are concentrated.**

## Supporting the transition to regenerative models

Today, more than a third of the Earth’s land surface is devoted to agriculture and livestock farming. Yet soil degradation, biodiversity loss, increasing water scarcity, and the growing frequency of extreme weather events are profoundly weakening global agricultural sectors. Strengthening the resilience of these value chains has become a strategic imperative.

Reforest’Action supports companies in transitioning their agricultural supply chains towards regenerative models. The impact is threefold: securing long-term sourcing, regenerating agroecosystems, and supporting the communities that depend on them. This approach rests on a strong conviction: the economic sustainability of supply chains is inseparable from the health of the ecosystems from which they originate.

At the core of this approach, agroforestry stands out as a multifunctional solution. Carbon sequestration, crop protection, improved soil fertility, natural pest regulation, enhanced water resilience, and additional income streams for farmers—its benefits are many. Implementation, however, requires in-depth expertise, both silvicultural and agronomic, including species selection, planting design, and adaptation to local farming practices. Combined with other levers of regenerative agriculture, agroforestry becomes a high-impact model, capable of transforming value chains over the long term.

Agroforestry experts since 2010, we deliver projects in Europe and tropical regions, across more than fifteen agricultural commodities, grounded in the operational realities of businesses.

## Structured programmes—from strategy to the field

To address the wide range of corporate challenges, we offer three complementary programmes.

The **Regenerative Agriculture Programme** develops end-to-end projects within companies’ value chains. It includes a pre-project study phase—diagnosis, design, and impact projections—followed by operational implementation and monitoring that combines field surveys with remote sensing tools. These projects are deployed in France, across Europe, and in tropical regions, with a clear objective: strengthening the resilience of agricultural supplies in the face of climate, economic, and environmental risks.

The **Monitoring and Support Programme** responds to growing needs around compliance, reporting, and impact valuation. It measures the tangible outcomes of insetting initiatives and integrates results into key reference frameworks such as SBTi FLAG, SBTN, the EUDR, and the CSRD. This approach is based on long-term analysis of forest and agricultural dynamics, impact measurement combining field and satellite data, and training local teams in data collection.

Lastly, the **Water Replenishment Programme** aims to strengthen water resilience for sites and production regions. At watershed scale, Reforest’Action identifies and implements forestry projects that durably improve water availability. These projects draw on recognised scientific models and are tracked through a combination of satellite indicators and field measurements.

## Measuring, steering, and showcasing impact

The long-term viability of regenerative models depends on the ability to measure impacts reliably and transparently. We are convinced that only a hybrid approach—combining the irreplaceable accuracy of field monitoring with the spatial and temporal coverage of remote sensing—can meet today’s requirements from companies and investors.

To that end, we have invested in developing our own impact measurement tools and in deploying a digital MRV (Measuring, Reporting and Verification) platform. It enables data visualisation, anticipation of regulatory requirements, and easier integration of results into corporate reporting and communications. This steering capability is a key factor in securing investments, demonstrating the credibility of actions undertaken, and strengthening stakeholder trust.

## Insetting in action: our flagship programmes

This vision is now embodied in a portfolio of strategic insetting programmes, illustrating our ability to deploy high-impact regenerative solutions—operationally secure and aligned with companies’ and investors’ performance and reporting requirements.

### Transforming a cotton supply chain in India

To address the increasing vulnerability of the cotton sector to climate and social risks, Kiabi chose to act directly within its value chain. Since 2023, the company has been deploying, with Reforest’Action, a regenerative agriculture project in the state of Odisha, India, integrated into its organic cotton sourcing.

The project is based on the introduction of agroforestry systems and agroecological practices on cotton plots cultivated by a partner producers’ cooperative. By combining trees, crops, and sustainable soil management levers, the initiative aims to strengthen farm resilience, improve soil fertility, and diversify agricultural incomes.

Deployed across 520 hectares and benefiting 1,250 producers, the project combines agronomic performance, secured raw material volumes, and measured environmental impacts. It contributes directly to Kiabi’s climate trajectory objectives by addressing land-use emissions and carbon sequestration within the value chain.

![Illu-2.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Illu_2_c94875f859.jpg)

### Strengthening a natural rubber supply chain in Brazil

In the Brazilian Amazon, Reforest’Action supports an international company engaged in sourcing natural rubber from traditional forest-based systems. In a context of increasing deforestation and progressive land degradation—particularly linked to cattle ranching—the project aims to deploy a rubber production model that is both sustainable and economically attractive for rubber tappers, offering a more compelling alternative to cattle ranching and thereby contributing to the preservation of the surrounding Amazon forest.

The initiative is based on the restoration of degraded land and supports the development of productive agroforestry stands, using the Assisted Natural Regeneration method. This approach combines plot protection, targeted interventions, and enrichment planting with locally adapted productive species offering strong economic potential.

Deployed across several priority areas in the state of Acre, the project is implemented with the direct involvement of rubber-tapper families, placed at the heart of the approach. A payment for ecosystem services mechanism secures their engagement and helps offset transition costs and the opportunity cost of not converting land.

Impact monitoring combines field observations and satellite analysis, with the objective of consolidating a replicable model that reconciles supply chain security with local economic resilience.

![Illu-rubber.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Illu_rubber_89ff885d11.jpg)

### Adapting an aromatic supply chain to water scarcity in Morocco

In northern Morocco, in the Khémisset region, Reforest’Action supports Maison Francis Kurkdjian and its essential oils supplier in transforming their flower-to-fragrance production chain. In a context of growing water stress, the project’s central challenge is to ensure the long-term viability of crops that are particularly sensitive to water availability.

The intervention begins with an in-depth diagnostic of the farm, agricultural practices, and the value chain linked to essential oil distillation. Technical itineraries, energy needs, the use of residual biomass, and the hydrological functioning of the local ecosystem are analysed to identify the most relevant adaptation levers.

Based on this assessment, the project explores regenerative agriculture solutions suited to local constraints, notably the selection of water-efficient plant species and the integration of agroforestry designs compatible with resource scarcity. By planting 2,900 linear meters of protective hedges, which will take place over six years, the objective is to strengthen production resilience while durably securing upstream supply.

![Illu-5.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Illu_5_9479be08ba.jpg)

### Strengthening the resilience of a vineyard in France

In Champagne, Reforest’Action supports Maison Ruinart in rolling out a vitiforestry project at the heart of an exceptional vineyard facing significant climate, regulatory, and landscape constraints. Vitiforestry combines tree planting with viticulture to strengthen vine resilience while enhancing biodiversity.

Designed in close consultation with the vineyard’s technical teams, the project integrates operational realities, appellation requirements, and mechanisation constraints. Since 2021, it has been deployed progressively and experimentally, enabling planting designs to be refined according to each plot’s specificities. More than 20,000 trees have already been planted through diversified agroforestry systems.

Beyond the pilot site in Taissy, the approach is intended to expand across the Champagne region, through partnerships with other winegrowers, helping to structure a replicable model in support of vineyard resilience.

![Taissy-2.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Taissy_2_65724ba3d4.jpg)

### Supporting the transition of arable crop supply chains in France and Poland

Cargill is a leading global food, ingredients, agricultural solutions, and industrial products company to nourish the world in a safe, responsible, and sustainable way and believe change starts where the food system begins – at the farm. 

That’s why Cargill is working with farmers at every level of production, empowering them with the support and resources they need to adopt regenerative agriculture practices to produce the food the world needs sustainably while helping them improve their resilience through the Cargill RegenConnect® program. The program is grounded in conservation agriculture principles: reduced tillage, permanent soil cover, and adapted crop rotations. These practices help improve soil health and reduce the footprint of numerous agricultural commodities.

Building on this foundation, Reforest’Action supports Cargill in integrating agroforestry within arable farming systems (wheat, rapeseed, sunflower, barley, etc.) to strengthen the agronomic and environmental resilience of farms. Bringing trees back into fields helps restore functional biodiversity, improve on-farm water dynamics, limit exposure to climate stress (droughts, flooding, etc.), and enhance carbon storage within production systems.

Following two pilot years in France and Poland—combining field deployment with monitoring of carbon, water, and biodiversity impacts—the project is now entering a scaling phase. The aim is to extend this approach to downstream actors in Cargill’s value chain, fully aligned with an insetting logic. This program illustrates the ability of regenerative agriculture to reconcile economic performance, supply security, and measurable long-term environmental impacts.

![Illu-1.jpg](https://backoffice.reforestaction.com/uploads/Illu_1_ee678a17a9.jpg)

**As climate and water risks intensify, living-based supply chains are being called to transform in depth. Insetting is now emerging as a structuring response to these challenges, enabling companies to act directly where their commodities—and therefore their resilience levers—are concentrated.**

**Through its insetting and regenerative agriculture projects, Reforest’Action demonstrates that it is possible to reconcile value chain security, economic performance, and measurable environmental impacts. By relying on nature-based solutions designed to fit each supply chain and territory, insetting becomes a strategic steering tool in support of business model sustainability.**

**Beyond the projects themselves, a new way of envisioning the relationship between companies and ecosystems is taking shape: the possibility of moving from a logic of extractivism to a logic of regeneration. At a time when value chain resilience increasingly determines corporate competitiveness and credibility, investing in regenerative models is becoming a defining choice for the future.**

**Are you a company looking to evolve practices linked to the production of your raw materials? Our experts are here to discuss and support you in your thinking. [Get in touch.](https://www.reforestaction.com/en/contact)**



large_Header-AR.jpg

medium_Header-AR.jpg

small_Header-AR.jpg

thumbnail_Header-AR.jpg

Header-AR.jpg

Value Chain Resilience: Our Reference Programs in Regenerative Agriculture

**The issue of reducing pesticide use has now emerged as a central challenge for agricultural systems worldwide. It crystallizes deep tensions between environmental imperatives, public health requirements, and the economic constraints faced by farms. Behind what may appear to be a technical debate lies a broader question concerning the very foundations of the agricultural production model and its ability to remain competitive in a context marked by increasing regulatory pressure, market liberalization, and the intensification of climate-related risks.
In many countries, discussions surrounding the regulation of plant protection products emphasize a legitimate concern: preserving producers’ competitiveness in a competitive environment characterized by disparities in standards and production costs. Yet this perspective raises a strategic long-term question: can economic performance sustainably rely on maintaining—or even reinforcing—a structural dependence on chemical inputs?**
 
## Reducing Pesticides: An Agronomic, Societal and Economic Imperative

The reduction of pesticide use is not driven solely by societal expectations or regulatory developments. It also reflects profound agronomic dynamics. The emergence of pest resistance, the simplification of crop rotations, and the erosion of functional biodiversity are progressively weakening productivist agricultural systems. This fragilization, compounded by the degradation of natural agroecosystem mechanisms, often leads to an even greater reliance on treatments in a cumulative logic that increases production costs without guaranteeing long-term yield security.

Moreover, dependence on chemical inputs—whose prices are often correlated with those of hydrocarbons—exposes farms to international price volatility and regulatory shifts, thereby increasing economic uncertainty. In this context, reducing pesticide use can be understood as a medium- to long-term risk mitigation strategy, aimed at restoring biological balances whose deterioration ultimately generates significant economic costs.
 
## Alternatives Based on Systemic Transformation

Alternatives to pesticides do exist, but they require systemic transformation rather than simple technical substitution. Lengthening and diversifying crop rotations disrupt pest life cycles and reduce parasitic pressure. The integration of cover crops improves soil structure, enhances water retention capacity, and stimulates biological activity, thereby strengthening crop resilience to stress.

The development of agroecological infrastructures—such as hedgerows and grass strips—encourages the presence of beneficial organisms and reactivates natural regulation mechanisms. These levers are complemented by biocontrol solutions and varietal selection adapted to local soil and climate conditions, enabling a reduction in chemical dependency while maintaining production levels compatible with market expectations.

These approaches are part of the broader framework of regenerative agriculture, whose objective is to restore the ecological functions of soils and agricultural ecosystems in order to enhance their productive resilience. Experience shows that, although this transition requires technical support and an adjustment period, it can ultimately lead to stabilized performance and a gradual decrease in input-related costs.
 
## Organizing the Financing of the Transition

The economic sustainability of this transformation remains a decisive condition for its success. Modifying farming practices entails investment, learning, and temporary risk-taking. It would be economically fragile to place the entire burden of this effort on farmers alone, particularly when the benefits generated—improved water quality, carbon sequestration, biodiversity preservation—extend far beyond the sphere of agricultural production.

A managed reduction in pesticide use therefore requires broader mobilization across value chains. Agri-food companies and retailers hold a structuring lever to support these shifts by integrating environmental criteria into their sourcing strategies and establishing long-term contractual relationships with producers.

Insetting approaches constitute an operational tool in this regard. By financing, within their own value chains, transition projects toward regenerative agriculture, companies help share the cost of transforming practices while securing their supply chains. This mechanism enables economic performance and environmental objectives to be aligned, embedding the transition within a logic of cooperation and shared value creation.
 
**Reconciling pesticide reduction with economic sustainability is therefore not a binary trade-off. It requires embedding agricultural performance within a long-term perspective grounded in the resilience of production systems and in a more balanced distribution of transition costs across value chains. Competitiveness cannot sustainably rely on chemical intensification alone; rather, it will depend on the capacity of agricultural and agri-food stakeholders to invest in more robust systems capable of maintaining productivity while meeting the environmental requirements that increasingly shape markets and public policy.**



large_Header-Pesticides.jpg

medium_Header-Pesticides.jpg

small_Header-Pesticides.jpg

thumbnail_Header-Pesticides.jpg

Header-Pesticides.jpg

Can the reduction of pesticides be reconciled with economic sustainability?

**Water is no longer merely a resource under stress. The Global Water Bankruptcy report published by the United Nations University – Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH) shows that, in a growing number of watersheds worldwide, hydrological systems are entering a phase of structural degradation. This “water bankruptcy” is redefining the conditions of ecological, territorial and economic stability. Reforest’Action analyses its underlying drivers and implications for businesses, and explores the levers for action that can help strengthen the water resilience of territories.**

## Water as a Condition of Life and a Driver of Systemic Stability

The availability of freshwater underpins all living systems. It determines ecosystem productivity, biodiversity maintenance, soil fertility, and the functioning of biogeochemical cycles, as well as food security, industrial production, energy generation, and the stability of human societies. When water becomes scarce or its quality deteriorates, it is not isolated uses that are affected, but the very organisation of territories — from the location of economic activities and the arbitration between competing uses to the ecological balances that sustain them.

For several decades, these tensions have been described under the generic label of a “water crisis.” Yet this expression suggests a temporary disruption, one that can be resolved through technical adjustments, infrastructure investments, or improved resource allocation. The Global Water Bankruptcy report introduces a major analytical shift: in many watersheds, the issue is no longer a cyclical or conjunctural crisis, but a structural degradation of hydrological systems.

The concept of water bankruptcy captures this shift. It refers to a situation in which water uses and pressures durably exceed the natural capacity of ecosystems to produce, store, filter and regulate the resource. In other words, the natural capital embodied in water systems is being depleted. This perspective calls for a reassessment of analytical and decision-making frameworks, particularly for companies whose operations depend on increasingly fragile territorial equilibria.

## From Crisis to Water Bankruptcy: A Shift in Analytical Framework

Water governance has historically been structured around a flow-based rationale. Public policies and industrial strategies have sought to secure available volumes, smooth seasonal variability, and offset temporary deficits through hydraulic infrastructure such as dams, reservoirs, transfer canals and diversion structures. While this framework remains relevant as long as natural systems retain their regulatory capacity, it becomes inadequate once withdrawals durably exceed renewable inputs.

As diagnosed by UNU-INWEH, water bankruptcy describes the moment when societies begin drawing down stocks accumulated over decades or even centuries: deep groundwater aquifers, soil moisture reserves, wetlands and glaciers. At the same time, the mechanisms that enable water to infiltrate, be stored and purified are degraded through soil sealing, deforestation, erosion and diffuse pollution. Water bankruptcy thus characterises a post-crisis condition in which water use exceeds long-term renewal capacity, causing irreversible or near-irreversible damage to the ecosystems that generate, store and regulate the resource.

In this regard, the economic analogy used in the UN report is particularly illuminating. A hydrological system functions much like a balance sheet. Precipitation and natural recharge constitute income; aquifers, soils and ecosystems form the assets; human withdrawals represent expenditures. Bankruptcy occurs when maintaining current uses requires degrading the assets themselves. At that point, the issue is no longer a quantitative imbalance, but a structural alteration of hydrological systems.

## Irreversibility as a Breaking Point

Water bankruptcy therefore marks a regime shift in which certain alterations of hydrological systems become partially irreversible. In many aquifers, prolonged pumping reduces pressure to such an extent that geological formations compact. This subsidence decreases the porosity of underground layers and, with it, their capacity to store water. Even if precipitation increases later, aquifers do not necessarily recover their initial storage capacity.

Comparable mechanisms operate in soils. The loss of organic matter, compaction resulting from intensive land use, or salinisation reduce infiltration and retention capacity. Water runs off more rapidly, intensifying erosion and flooding while diminishing groundwater recharge. The disappearance of wetlands eliminates key spaces of regulation and filtration that are essential to water quality and habitat preservation.

In such contexts, a return to previous conditions becomes uncertain, if not impossible, within economic and investment timeframes. Water management consequently shifts from a logic of optimisation to one of loss limitation and targeted restoration of ecological functions.

## A Dynamic Already Observable at the Global Scale

The Global Water Bankruptcy report documents the rapid expansion of such situations. Nearly 75% of the world’s population now lives in countries exposed to high water vulnerability. Approximately four billion people experience severe water scarcity at least one month per year. More than half of the world’s major lakes have seen declining levels since the 1990s, and around 70% of major aquifers show long-term depletion trends.

The United Nations distinguishes between climatic drought and anthropogenic drought. In the latter case, scarcity results primarily from land-use, production and consumption choices. Precipitation levels may remain close to historical averages, yet recovery fails to occur because storage and regulatory capacities have been degraded. Scarcity thus becomes chronic.

## From Water Vulnerability to Economic Risk

For businesses, water bankruptcy fundamentally alters the nature of risk. Water ceases to be a peripheral environmental parameter and becomes a structural constraint on operations. This constraint first manifests operationally. Withdrawal restrictions, increased flow variability, or deteriorating water quality directly affect production capacity, variable costs and supply chain reliability.

Beyond these direct effects, territorial dimensions come into play. In water-stressed basins, competition between agricultural, industrial and domestic uses becomes increasingly contentious. Decisions regarding the siting, expansion or continuation of industrial activities are progressively shaped by local water availability and by the social legitimacy of water use, in light of community needs and ecosystem requirements.

Water thus joins climate and biodiversity as a determinant of long-term value creation. According to CDP’s Global Water Report 2024, one in five companies already reports water-related risks within its supply chain that could have a significant financial impact.

## Reference Frameworks Structuring Corporate Action

In response to these challenges, a growing body of methodological and regulatory frameworks has emerged. Corporate Water Stewardship, promoted notably by the World Resources Institute (WRI), encourages companies to move beyond purely internal water management and adopt a basin-level, collaborative approach involving other water users and public authorities.

The Science Based Targets for Nature (SBTN) apply science-based target-setting to freshwater. They propose a sequenced methodology that includes assessing dependencies and impacts, geographically prioritising at-risk basins, and defining actions consistent with local ecological limits, integrating both quantity and quality dimensions.

CDP Water structures the disclosure of information relating to corporate water risks, opportunities, governance and performance. It has become a central assessment tool for investors by making previously fragmented data comparable.

The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) further strengthen transparency requirements by imposing a “double materiality” analysis. Companies must assess both their impacts on water resources and ecosystems, and the financial risks arising from their degradation. Water is thus recognised as a cross-cutting issue at the intersection of ecological impacts and economic dependencies.
Taken together, these frameworks converge toward a common requirement: aligning corporate water strategy with the biophysical realities of the territories on which business activities depend.

## Water Resilience: Restoring the Hydrological Functions of Landscapes

Reforest’Action’s Water Resilience programme is designed for companies whose operations or value chains are exposed to significant water risks. It aims to strengthen watershed resilience through nature-based projects.

### The Watershed as the Appropriate Scale

A watershed is the territory within which rainfall and runoff converge toward a common outlet. It constitutes the physical unit within which hydrological flows, uses and impacts are structured. Any action on water — whether withdrawals, discharges or ecosystem restoration — necessarily takes place within this geography.

Acting at basin scale makes it possible to connect industrial uses with upstream and downstream dynamics, identify the most effective levers, and coordinate actors sharing the same resource. By contrast, a strictly volumetric approach disconnected from ecosystem functioning tends to displace pressures rather than resolve them.

### An Approach Grounded in Hydrological Processes

Our approach is based on a comprehensive hydrological diagnosis integrating soil characteristics, land cover and land use data, topography, precipitation regimes and water uses. Forestry and agroforestry projects are then designed to act on key water cycle mechanisms — notably infiltration, groundwater recharge, pollutant filtration and flow regulation — and implemented by our teams in close collaboration with local stakeholders.

Impacts are assessed and monitored using recognised methodologies such as the Volumetric Water Benefit Accounting (VWBA) framework developed by WRI, alongside monitoring systems combining field data and remote sensing. Results are consolidated within a Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) platform compatible with leading reporting standards.
Through this programme, Reforest’Action seeks to restore the hydrological functions of landscapes — improving natural water filtration, regulating flows, reducing flood risks and enhancing groundwater recharge — as a necessary condition for long-term water stability.

**Water bankruptcy signals a regime shift. It reveals the limits of volume-centred management and calls for a systemic approach grounded in the restoration of ecological functions and territorial governance. For businesses, the challenge is no longer merely to secure immediate access to water, but to contribute to the resilience of watersheds upon which their activities depend. In a context of growing constraints, the ability to integrate water as a strategic, ecological and territorial factor becomes a major determinant of long-term performance, while contributing to the preservation of hydrological equilibria essential to all life.**

large_iStock-2172917273.jpg

medium_iStock-2172917273.jpg

small_iStock-2172917273.jpg

thumbnail_iStock-2172917273.jpg

iStock-2172917273.jpg

Rethinking corporate strategy in the age of water bankruptcy

Actualités et décryptages