When supporting climate impact through the provision of finance or technology, it’s important to consider the accountability required for financing public goods. The transparency and traceability provided by the GoodCollective platform is only possible in partnership with a local partner that operates with direct access to target recipients, has the technical infrastructure to work with us and designs their work in an ethical manner and with respect to cultural context.

The list is not exhaustive but builds on our experience choosing environmental service partners for this pilot. Make sure to tailor it to your organization’s needs and existing capabilities. Feel free to reach out to [email protected] if you want to discuss this or any pilot work in more detail.

Partner considerations

How and Where They Work

• [ ] Can your partners contribute with networks or skills you do not already possess? Which ones?
• [ ] Does your potential partner work in-country?
• [ ] Does your potential partner have a local cultural context?
• [ ] Does your partner have direct access to prospective target recipients of direct payments?
• [ ] Does your partner work in the field you want to foster/reward? (e.g. ecosystem, climate and/or environmental services

Their Business Model

• [ ] How are they funded?
  • [ ] Do they have a primary funding source / mechanism outside of your collaboration?
• [ ] If your partner utilizes a tokenomics model,
  • [ ] Do you need to integrate the tokenomics model into your project to make the project work?
  • [ ] If so, will your partner’s tokenomics model impact the economic assumptions or delivery of the project?
• [ ] Does their business model, organizational and product roadmap align with the work you intend to do with them?

Their Methodology & Impact Measurement Capabilities

• [ ] Does your potential partner have a peer-reviewed methodology for measurement, reporting and verification of their climate outcomes or comply with an existing, verified and reputable methodology (e.g. Puro.Earth, Gold Standard)?
• [ ] Are the partner measurements, reporting vehicles and verification process all digitally-native?
  • [ ] Are the results of each step written to a public blockchain and auditable to their source?
• [ ] Is their methodology publicly accessible, with a means for public comment?
• [ ] Does their dMRV technology include an identifier for individual stakeholders within their ecosystem taking measurements and verifying claims (e.g. local stewards, VVBs)?
  • [ ] Does their dMRV technology capture a wallet address for each of these individual stakeholders?

Organization Competency

• [ ] Is your potential partner literate in financial literacy or Web3?