The role of carbon in building a conservation economy

A recent Reuters report brought a particularly relevant perspective to the global climate finance debate: how can economic mechanisms make nature conservation financially viable for the people who own and manage these areas?

The story, presented during London Climate Action Week, focuses on Lori Melton, a landowner in Arkansas, United States, who inherited a forest from her father and chose to preserve it rather than sell it.

According to Reuters, Lori regularly receives offers to purchase her property, with some reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars and even exceeding US$1 million. Selling the property could have provided an important financial alternative for her family. Instead, she chose to keep the forest standing.

To support that decision, Lori pursued an alternative to conventional land use options by enrolling the property in a carbon credit program developed by NativState, led by Stuart Allen. The program created an additional source of revenue, providing her with greater financial security while allowing her to retain the property and continue its conservation.

The story raises a fundamental question:

How much is a standing forest worth?

The answer is environmental, but it is also economic.

Conservation is also an economic decision

A forest has significant environmental value long before any carbon credit is issued.

It stores carbon, supports biodiversity, protects water resources, maintains ecosystems and provides a wide range of environmental services.

For landowners, however, conservation also has an economic dimension.

Forest areas may have alternative uses capable of generating direct revenue. When conservation represents a cost to the landowner while its environmental benefits are shared by society, an economic imbalance emerges.

This is where climate finance can play a strategic role.

Carbon can help transform part of the environmental value of a forest into an economic incentive for conservation.

That is one of the most relevant messages emerging from the Reuters story. Climate finance does not necessarily need to focus exclusively on removing new carbon from the atmosphere. It can also help create the economic conditions for existing natural ecosystems to remain protected.

The case of Lori illustrates this in practical terms.

Carbon was not simply used to account for another tonne of CO₂.

It became part of an economic mechanism that helped a landowner keep her existing forest standing.

Carbon can finance the forest that already exists

This perspective is particularly relevant when considering projects focused on the conservation of forest carbon stocks.

A native forest already contains significant amounts of carbon stored in its biomass.

That carbon does not need to be newly removed from the atmosphere for its conservation to have climate relevance.

The logic is different from projects specifically designed for carbon removal.

In a removal project, the climate benefit is associated with taking additional CO₂ from the atmosphere and storing it.

In a conservation project, the objective is to keep an existing carbon stock protected, reducing the risk that its loss will result in emissions.

Conserving carbon is not the same as removing carbon.

This distinction does not reduce the importance of conservation. It highlights that forests can contribute to climate mitigation through different mechanisms.

The relevant questions become how much carbon is stored, what risks threaten that stock and which mechanisms can contribute to maintaining it over time.

Brazil already recognizes the economic value of conservation

In Brazil, this concept is supported by the country’s environmental legislation.

The Brazilian Forest Code recognizes the conservation and maintenance of carbon stocks among the environmental services associated with natural areas. It also provides mechanisms for payments and incentives related to the conservation of Permanent Preservation Areas, Legal Reserves and other environmentally relevant areas.

This is significant because conservation is not treated solely as an environmental obligation.

It can also be recognized as an environmental service capable of generating economic value.

Law No. 15,042/2024, which established Brazil’s Emissions Trading System, further advanced this framework by recognizing the restoration, maintenance and conservation of Permanent Preservation Areas, Legal Reserves and areas of restricted use as activities eligible for carbon credit generation, subject to applicable legal requirements.

The legislation also recognizes private projects involving the conservation of forest carbon stocks and establishes rules concerning ownership of credits generated on private properties.

There is therefore an important convergence between environmental legislation, climate finance and carbon markets. Conservation can create value.

Turning conservation into a climate asset

This is where methodologies specifically designed for forest carbon stock conservation become relevant.

LCS003, developed by the Lux Carbon Standard, was designed for conservation projects involving native Brazilian forests on private properties.

The methodology establishes requirements for demonstrating additionality, defining a baseline, quantifying carbon stocks and monitoring them throughout the crediting period.

It also establishes Monitoring, Reporting and Verification requirements and provides for independent third party auditing before credits are issued.

In practical terms, this framework creates a connection between forest conservation and climate finance.

The carbon stock already held within the forest becomes part of a structured, measurable and verifiable climate project, creating the potential for revenue associated with maintaining conservation.

The objective is not to characterize the project as having removed carbon that it did not remove.

It is to establish an economic mechanism capable of supporting the protection of an existing carbon stock through a structured framework for conservation.

From conservation cost to conservation asset

This is where Lori Melton’s story, as reported by Reuters, becomes particularly relevant to Brazil. The challenge of conservation is not simply convincing people that forests matter, in many cases, they already understand that.

The challenge is creating the economic conditions that allow conservation decisions to remain viable when other land use alternatives are available.

The Reuters report illustrates how climate finance can provide landowners and natural asset custodians with greater financial flexibility to choose conservation rather than conversion.

This logic is particularly relevant in countries such as Brazil.

If millions of hectares of native vegetation are located on privately owned land, conservation at scale will also depend on mechanisms capable of generating economic value for those who keep these areas protected.

Carbon markets can be one of those mechanisms.

A unique opportunity for Brazil

Brazil has conditions that few countries can match, it has some of the world’s largest areas of tropical forest, extensive native vegetation on private properties, legislation that recognizes environmental services and a developing carbon market. The opportunity lies in connecting these elements.

Conservation needs to create value for those who conserve.

Climate finance needs to reach the territories where conservation actually takes place.

And markets need mechanisms capable of converting part of the environmental value of forests into resources that support their long term protection.

The 369 EcoCredits perspective

At 369 EcoCredits, we believe carbon markets can play a role far beyond emissions compensation.

They can contribute to building an economy of conservation, where keeping forests standing becomes an economically viable activity.

Our work focuses on connecting environmental projects with the market, structuring and commercializing climate assets from forest conservation and renewable energy initiatives.

For conservation projects, this perspective is particularly important, where the objective is not simply to turn carbon into credits.

It is to connect landowners conserving their natural assets with companies and investors willing to direct capital toward climate initiatives capable of generating long term environmental benefits.

Lori Melton’s story shows that this discussion is already taking place beyond Brazil.

A landowner received purchase offers that could exceed US$1 million for her forest, yet found in climate finance an alternative that contributed to keeping the property protected, and Brazil has an even greater opportunity.

We have the forests, the landowners, the legal framework and a market capable of connecting capital with conservation.

The next step is to make that connection increasingly effective, because ultimately, the question is not only how much a tonne of carbon is worth. The more important question is how much a standing forest is worth.

And if we want millions of hectares to remain conserved, the answer must also make economic sense.