This document details a conceptual Framework for the Certification of Carbon Sequestration (FCCS). It is based on a system designed to support negative emissions. It provides the minimum requirements for the development of carbon sequestration standards and certificates of carbon sequestration. It allows the certification of standards so that they in turn produce certification of removed carbon that authenticates durability and verifiability. The framework (i) identifies an organizational structure for the certification system, (ii) clarifies the responsibility of participating entities, (iii) provides certificate designs and usages, (iv) details the requirements to develop measurement protocols, (v) provides mechanisms to support a long-term industry, and (vi) outlines a vision towards durable storage.

We analyze current approaches to carbon accounting for removed carbon sold on carbon markets, focusing on carbon crediting under the framing of a remaining carbon budget, the issue of durability, and approaches to accounting methodologies. We explore the topic of mixing carbon with other problems in developing carbon accounting methodologies and highlight the open policy questions. We conclude with a suggested framework for accounting for carbon removal accounting that simplifies climate action and enables a world with negative carbon emissions.

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) is essential to meet the Paris Agreement’s commitment to stay below a 1.5 degrees Celsius average temperature increase. To provide critical foundational support to the development, deployment, and scaling of CDR, certification of carbon removal is needed. The international community is developing rules for the functioning of carbon markets. To support that process, we explored open questions on four key themes in the development of standards and certification of carbon removal through an international multi-stakeholder consultation process hosted by the Global Carbon Removal Partnership, Arizona State University, and Conservation International. Categories of stakeholders included standard developing organizations, non-governmental organizations, governments, and academics. Discussions covered 1. the treatment of emission reduction, avoidance,and removal in certification, 2. the role of additionality in carbon removal, 3. the choice of certification instrument for carbon removal, and 4. the treatment of durability in certification. They revealed fundamental differences in viewpoints on how certification should work. We highlight areas of further exploration, concluding that providing transparency on assumptions made at the certification level will be crucial to progress and, eventually, the acceptance and success of carbon removal as a climate solution.

Agricultural and dairy work is among the most dangerous work in the US. In addition to the dangers of work, undocumented migrant workers may face additional stress as a result of the increase in antiimmigration enforcement and criminalization of undocumented status. The purpose of the study was to better understand how migrant dairy workers were impacted by the increase in restrictive immigration policies and immigration enforcement, as well as how they coped with any issues they faced. Interviews were conducted with fourteen migrant dairy workers following the passage of several anti-immigration bills across the US. Findings revealed four major categories; three were related to negative impacts of immigration policies and enforcement:

1. Fear.
2. Stress and anxiety.
3. Perceptions of discrimination.

An additional major category emerged that demonstrated the hope and resilience of participants in the face of an increasingly difficult socio-political environment. Implications for social service practice, policy, and research are discussed.

The purpose of this paper was to examine the impact of perceived discrimination among Latino immigrants in the context of recent immigration policies and immigration enforcement strategies. Data for this study were drawn from a pilot study (n=213) of adult Latino immigrants living in Arizona during the summer of 2014. The results of multivariate OLS linear regressions indicated greater perceived discrimination was significantly related to reporting:

1. Avoidance of immigration officials.
2. Family has suffered.
3. Friends have suffered.

In addition, greater perceived discrimination was significantly related to lower confidence in a better future for the individual, their families, their children, and the children of today.