The NSW Government welcomes the Australian Government Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee (the committee) decision to publicly exhibit the draft Improved Native Forest Management (INFM) method. 

Submit feedback on the method

The draft INFM method, explanatory statement and supporting documents are available on the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water website for comment from 2 January to 30 January 2026, in line with the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (Cth).

Have your say on the proposed Improved Native Forest Management in Multiple-use Public Native Forests (INFM) method.

Next steps

The key remaining steps are:

  • preparation of the final INFM method and related documents considering public comment and technical input
  • final assessment against statutory Offset Integrity Standards by the committee
  • final consideration by the Australian Government Minister for Climate Change and Energy.

This process is overseen by the committee and is subject to change based on the committee's advice.

Background

On 12 July 2024, the NSW Government submitted an expression of interest to the Australian Government for the INFM method under the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (Cth).

On 30 October 2024, the Australian Government announced that the INFM expression of interest had been prioritised for method development. The INFM method was one of only 4 methods selected for prioritisation from 39 expressions of interest. 

The proposed INFM method will, if approved, provide for Australian Carbon Credit Units (carbon credits) to be generated by projects that involve stopping or deferring native forest harvesting on public land that is designated for commercial forestry use.  

The NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (the department) contracted the Australian National University to help prepare the INFM method. The proposed INFM method was subject to extensive technical and public consultation before being submitted for consideration to an independent statutory committee, committee. 

The department released the draft INFM method for public exhibition and held many briefings and workshops with technical experts and key stakeholders as part of the method development process. 
The consultation process allowed the department to understand stakeholder views and revise the draft INFM method before submitting it to the committee.

The department sent the draft INFM method and related documents to the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water.

A final decision on whether to make the INFM method will be made by the Australian Minister for Climate Change and Energy under the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (Cth). The INFM method will be approved only if it meets the statutory Offsets Integrity Standards. If the INFM Method is approved, state and Commonwealth governments can choose whether they wish to use the INFM method. 

The method explained

The INFM method outlines the proposed rules by which carbon credits will be calculated for projects which involve the stopping of native forest harvesting or a significant reduction in the level of harvesting. 

The proposed INFM method will apply only to projects involving stopping or deferring harvesting in public native forests (state forests). Under the proposed INFM method, carbon credits would not be able to be generated in state forests where harvesting has stopped for other policy reasons. This would be the case, for example, in Victoria and Western Australia. 

Activities that will generate carbon credits

The activities that will be eligible under the proposed INFM method are limited to:

  • stopping timber harvesting
  • deferring timber harvesting in publicly owned native forests that are designated for commercial forestry use.

How stopping or deferring timber harvesting generates carbon benefits

Stopping or deferring harvesting in native forests abates greenhouse gases by: 

  • avoiding the emissions associated with harvesting (releasing the carbon stored in forests into the atmosphere)
  • increasing the amount of carbon stored in the forests by allowing them to grow older.

In calculating the abatement generated by activities eligible for carbon credits, the INFM method will account for the carbon that is stored in wood products when forests are harvested, the regeneration of forests after they are harvested, the potential for ‘leakage’ into other products and natural disturbances like bushfires.

Find out more about the method

How is the baseline harvest level calculated?

The Improved Native Forest Management (INFM) method requires setting a ‘baseline harvest level’ to represent business-as-usual harvesting if the project did not proceed. This involves:

  • Stage 1: estimating logs produced (m³) using the latest modified sustainable yield, which is the unmodified sustainable yield adjusted by a factor based on historical log production data.
  • Stage 2: converting this volume into harvest area (hectares) using the prior period FullCAM forest estate model.

The sustainable yield must be a conservative estimate of long-term wood production under pre-project management strategies and include all commercial log types (excluding residues). Adjustment factors depend on the correlation between sustainable yield and log production over a 10-year baseline period, excluding wildfire-affected years.

Proponents must also calculate the area cleared to facilitate harvesting, based on prior period data and the baseline harvest level. All calculations are independently verified by a qualified assessor engaged by the Regulator.

Does stopping timber harvesting generate better climate outcomes than continuing harvesting and regrowing forests?

Yes. In Australian native forests, the level of carbon sequestration is higher if forests are allowed to grow old compared to cutting and harvesting them on a 40 to 80-year cycle.

Does the INFM method provide for carbon credits from forest management activities such as fire management, weed control, ecological thinning and low impact harvesting?

No. The proposed INFM method does not provide carbon credits for these types of activities. This is because they are subject to high additionality risks (i.e. it is extremely difficult to design rules and processes to confine eligibility to instances where the conduct of the project activities is contingent on the provision of carbon credits) and/or there is significant uncertainty about whether the activities will reduce net emissions into the atmosphere.

Will the INFM method meet the highest standards of scientific integrity?

Yes. The proposed INFM method can be approved only after consultation, technical assessments, consideration by an independent statutory committee and if it meets the legislated Offsets Integrity Standards (see below).

Who decides whether to submit a project that involves stopping or deferring timber harvesting?

The making of the proposed INFM method will not, in and of itself, regulate or constrain forest operations on public land. It is up to each state government to decide whether it wishes to submit a project to generate carbon credits by stopping or deferring timber harvesting in its state forests.

How could the carbon credit income from INFM projects be used?

Each state government can decide how to use the income from carbon credits. For example, income can be applied to encourage regional development, to ensure effective forest management, and to support Aboriginal employment and businesses.

What do the statutory Offsets Integrity Standards require?

The statutory offsets integrity standards are legislated under the CFI Act. They require carbon methods to ensure credited abatement is additional, measurable, verifiable and eligible, that the methods are supported by ‘clear and convincing evidence’, that appropriate deductions are applied to account for emissions that are a direct result of the project activities, and that estimates, projections and assumptions in the methods are conservative.

Conservatism in this context requires that the methods err on the side of under-crediting rather than over-crediting the abatement generated by eligible projects.

Further information can be found by referring to:

  • section 133 of the CFI Act
  • the Commonwealth DCCEEW Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee webpage.

How will the INFM method address the risk of leakage into other state forests?

The proposed INFM method requires that a discount be applied to the number of carbon credits generated by a project if the volume of wood removed from other State Forests exceeds a prescribed baseline harvest level. In other words, the number of carbon credits is reduced if the project’s proposed reduction in harvesting is offset by an increase in harvesting elsewhere in the state forest estate.

Other state forests are those in the same state that are not included within the boundary of the project.

How will the INFM method address the risk of leakage into private native forests?

The proposed INFM method requires that a deduction be applied to the number of carbon credits generated by a project if the volume of wood removed from private native forests in the same state in which the project is located exceeds a prescribed baseline harvest level. In other words, the number of carbon credits is reduced if the project’s proposed reduction in harvesting is offset by an increase in harvesting of private native forests in the same jurisdiction.

Will the INFM method lead to increased timber imports?

Timber imports are not expected to increase because of the INFM method.

Despite timber production from Australian native forests declining by approximately 70% over the last 15 to 20 years, timber imports have not significantly increased. Instead, substitutes have primarily come from domestic and foreign softwood and hardwood plantations.

How will the INFM method address the risk of timber products being substituted with more carbon-intensive alternatives?

The INFM method requires a 5% deduction be applied when calculating net abatement. This accounts for the risk of leakage into native forests in other jurisdictions, and into emissions-intensive products like concrete and steel.

How will a Great Koala National Park (GKNP) decision potentially generate ACCUs?

The INFM method proposal design outline indicates that no ACCUs could be generated if a decision has already been made to stop timber harvesting in a jurisdiction, except where the decision is subject to a project being registered under the ACCU Scheme and earning carbon credits.

A decision has not yet been made on the proposed GKNP boundaries or on the implications for the level of harvesting in the North East Regional Forest Agreement (NE RFA) area.

The GKNP decision is expected to consider a range of factors including carbon sequestration.

If the establishment of the GKNP also involves a decision to reduce the level of harvesting in the NE RFA area (that is, to prevent the displacement of harvesting effort into other parts of the region), then that reduction of harvesting level may generate ACCUs.

Where can I find more information about carbon credits and abatement methods?

More information about carbon credits and abatement methods can be found on the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water website.

More information