DRAM vs DPP: PERPRES 110/2025's Dual Documentation Pathway for Carbon Units
DRAM vs DPP: PERPRES 110/2025's Dual Documentation Pathway for Carbon Units
PERPRES 110/2025 Comparative Analysis Series - Article 4 of 5
This series analyzes the comprehensive transformation from PERPRES 98/2021 to PERPRES 110/2025:
- From Carbon Rights to Carbon Allocation - The Paradigm Shift
- Emissions Trading Infrastructure - From Batas Atas to Quota System
- International Carbon Markets - Otorisasi and Corresponding Adjustment
- Dual Certification Pathway - DRAM vs DPP Documentation
- Registry Evolution - From Single SRN PPI to Dual Registry System
Articles 1(40) and 1(41) of PERPRES 110/2025 introduce two parallel documentation systems completely absent from PERPRES 98/2021: "Dokumen Rancangan Aksi Mitigasi Perubahan Iklim" (DRAM - Climate Change Mitigation Action Design Document) for domestic certification and "Dokumen Perencanaan Proyek" (DPP - Project Planning Document) for international standards. Article 1(40) defines DRAM as "dokumen yang menjelaskan desain proyek, memenuhi persyaratan yang ditetapkan oleh Pemerintah, menguraikan rincian pengurangan dan/atau penyerapan Emisi GRK dalam rangka memperoleh Unit Karbon SPE GRK" (document explaining project design, meeting Government-established requirements, detailing GHG emission reduction and/or absorption to obtain GHG Emission Reduction Certificate Carbon Units). Article 1(41) defines DPP as "dokumen yang menjelaskan desain proyek, memenuhi persyaratan yang ditetapkan oleh standar internasional, menguraikan rincian pengurangan dan/atau penyerapan Emisi GRK dalam rangka memperoleh Unit Karbon non-SPE GRK" (document explaining project design, meeting international standard requirements, detailing GHG emission reduction/absorption to obtain non-Certificate Carbon Units). This bifurcation creates distinct pathways with different standards, procedures, and resulting carbon unit types (see Matrix 1.1 below).
1.0 Documentation Framework Comparison
1.1 From Undefined to Dual-Pathway System
PERPRES 98/2021 contained no definitions or requirements for carbon project documentation. While it defined Unit Karbon (Pasal 1(15)) and mentioned MRV requirements (Pasal 1(21)), it never specified what documents projects must prepare to generate carbon units. This regulatory silence left project developers uncertain about documentation requirements, likely relying on inherited CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) templates or voluntary market standards without clear domestic legal foundation.
PERPRES 110/2025 fills this gap by establishing two formal pathways. The DRAM pathway leads to "SPE GRK" (Sertifikat Pengurangan Emisi GRK - GHG Emission Reduction Certificates) defined in Article 1(37) as domestic certificates verified through MRV and registered in SRUK. The DPP pathway leads to "non-SPE GRK" carbon units certified under international standards like VCS (Verified Carbon Standard), Gold Standard, or potentially Article 6.4 Paris Agreement mechanisms. This dual structure acknowledges that Indonesia's carbon market will interact with both domestic compliance needs and international voluntary/compliance markets.
Matrix 1.1: Documentation Pathway Comparison
| Element | PERPRES 98/2021 | DRAM (PERPRES 110/2025 - Pasal 1(40)) | DPP (PERPRES 110/2025 - Pasal 1(41)) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Document Definition | Absent | Dokumen Rancangan Aksi Mitigasi | Dokumen Perencanaan Proyek |
| Standard Source | None specified | Persyaratan Pemerintah (Government requirements) | Standar internasional (International standards) |
| Resulting Unit Type | Generic Unit Karbon | Unit Karbon SPE GRK | Unit Karbon non-SPE GRK |
| Certificate Form | Sertifikat atau persetujuan teknis | SPE GRK (Certificate) | International registry units |
| Verification Route | Generic MRV | Domestic MRV to SPE GRK | International verification bodies |
| Registry | SRN PPI only | SRUK | SRUK + international registries |
| Primary Market | Unclear | Domestic compliance/voluntary | International voluntary/compliance |
1.2 SPE GRK vs Non-SPE GRK Units
The documentation pathway directly determines the resulting unit type. Article 1(37) defines SPE GRK as "bukti pengurangan emisi oleh usaha dan/atau kegiatan yang telah melalui MRV, serta tercatat dalam SRUK dalam bentuk nomor dan/atau kode registri" (proof of emissions reduction by business and/or activities that have undergone MRV, and are recorded in SRUK in the form of registry number and/or code). This definition specifies three requirements: MRV completion, SRUK registration, and unique registry identification.
Non-SPE GRK units, while not explicitly defined in Article 1, are implied as Unit Karbon certified through international standards (referenced in the expanded Article 1(18) Unit Karbon definition). These follow international certification body procedures—validation, monitoring, verification, issuance—and may register in international registries (Verra, Gold Standard Registry) in addition to or instead of SRUK. The critical distinction: SPE GRK units undergo government-controlled verification and must register in the government registry; non-SPE GRK units follow private or international procedures.
Matrix 1.2: Unit Type Characteristics
| Characteristic | PERPRES 98/2021 Unit Karbon | SPE GRK (PERPRES 110/2025) | Non-SPE GRK (PERPRES 110/2025) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Generation Document | Not specified | DRAM | DPP |
| Verification Standard | Generic MRV | Government MRV procedures | International standard procedures |
| Verification Body | Not specified | Presumably government-accredited | International certification bodies |
| Registry Requirement | SRN PPI mandatory | SRUK mandatory | SRUK or international (TBD) |
| Numbering | Registry number | Nomor dan/atau kode registri | International serial numbers |
| Domestic Recognition | Automatic | Automatic (government-issued) | Requires government acceptance |
| International Recognition | Unclear | Requires international approval | Automatic under standard |
2.0 DRAM Pathway Characteristics
2.1 Government Standard Requirements
The DRAM pathway's defining feature is compliance with "persyaratan yang ditetapkan oleh Pemerintah" (requirements established by Government). PERPRES 110/2025 does not specify these requirements, leaving them to implementing regulations. Drawing from international practice and Indonesia's existing frameworks, DRAM requirements likely will include: (1) project description and objectives, (2) baseline methodology demonstrating additionality, (3) monitoring plan with parameters and frequency, (4) estimated emission reductions/removals, (5) safeguards for environmental and social impacts, (6) stakeholder consultation documentation, and (7) sustainable development contribution assessment.
The government-set standards provide flexibility to tailor requirements to Indonesian conditions. Unlike international standards designed for global application, DRAM requirements can address Indonesia-specific issues: peat emissions factors, tropical forest methodologies, renewable energy grid factors, waste management practices. This customization potential represents both opportunity (contextual relevance) and risk (potential for lower rigor than international standards).
Matrix 2.1: DRAM Likely Requirements
| Requirement Area | International Standard (DPP) Baseline | Expected DRAM Adaptation | Regulatory Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Additionality | CDM/VCS additionality tests | May simplify for certain sectors | Reduces transaction costs |
| Baseline | Conservative reference scenarios | May use Indonesia-specific baselines | Better reflects national circumstances |
| Monitoring | Continuous with high frequency | May allow less frequent monitoring | Reduces ongoing costs |
| Safeguards | International safeguard standards | Must meet Indonesian EIA requirements | Aligns with domestic law |
| Validation | Third-party international | Government or accredited domestic | Builds local capacity |
| Permanence | Long-term liability (forestry) | May address through national mechanisms | Risk pooling possible |
| Leakage | Project boundary analysis | May account at jurisdictional level | Recognizes nested approaches |
3.0 DPP Pathway Characteristics
3.1 International Standard Compliance
The DPP pathway requires compliance with "standar internasional" (international standards) without specifying which standards qualify. Likely candidates include: (1) Verified Carbon Standard (VCS/Verra), (2) Gold Standard, (3) Climate Action Reserve (CAR), (4) American Carbon Registry (ACR), (5) Article 6.4 Mechanism methodologies once operational, and (6) sector-specific standards like Plan Vivo for community forestry. The regulation's openness allows market evolution as new standards emerge.
International standard compliance offers credibility advantages for accessing global carbon markets. Foreign buyers often require internationally certified credits for corporate voluntary commitments or compliance obligations (e.g., CORSIA). DPP-generated non-SPE GRK units would satisfy these requirements without buyers needing to assess unfamiliar domestic standards. However, international certification typically costs more due to international verifier fees, longer procedures, and more stringent requirements.
Matrix 3.1: International Standards Characteristics
| Standard | Primary Use | Indonesia Relevance | DPP Application |
|---|---|---|---|
| VCS (Verra) | Voluntary market | Many Indonesian REDD+ projects | Forestry, renewable energy, agriculture |
| Gold Standard | High-integrity voluntary | Limited Indonesian projects | Renewable energy, household devices |
| Article 6.4 | Paris Agreement compliance | New mechanism (2024+) | All sectors once operational |
| CAR | California compliance + voluntary | Limited Indonesian use | Tropical forest protocols |
| Plan Vivo | Community carbon | Smallholder agroforestry | Community forest management |
| ACR | Voluntary market | Minimal Indonesian projects | Methodology development opportunity |
| CDM (Legacy) | Kyoto Protocol | Many transitioning projects | Transitioning to Article 6.4 |
4.0 Strategic Pathway Selection
4.1 Factors Influencing Pathway Choice
Project developers face strategic decisions in selecting DRAM versus DPP pathways. The choice depends on multiple factors: target market (domestic vs international), cost tolerance (DRAM likely cheaper), time urgency (DRAM may be faster), buyer requirements (international buyers may demand DPP), project size (large projects can absorb DPP costs), and risk appetite (DRAM requirements uncertain pending implementing regulations).
The dual pathway structure suggests a stratified market may emerge. Large, well-financed projects targeting international buyers (e.g., REDD+ jurisdictional programs, utility-scale renewable energy) likely choose DPP for international credibility. Smaller domestic projects targeting Indonesian compliance markets (e.g., industrial energy efficiency, waste-to-energy) may prefer DRAM for lower costs and faster timelines. Importantly, nothing in PERPRES 110/2025 prohibits pursuing both pathways simultaneously—projects could seek SPE GRK and non-SPE GRK certification in parallel, maximizing market access.
Matrix 4.1: Pathway Selection Decision Framework
| Decision Factor | DRAM Pathway Advantage | DPP Pathway Advantage | Neutral/Both Possible |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost | Lower verification fees | Higher but internationally recognized | - |
| Speed | Likely faster (domestic only) | Slower (international procedures) | - |
| Buyer Base | Domestic market | International market | Can dual-certify |
| Credibility | Government-backed | International reputation | Both have merit |
| Regulatory Certainty | Uncertain (awaiting regulations) | Established standards | DPP clearer currently |
| Methodology Availability | TBD by government | Extensive international library | - |
| Language | Bahasa Indonesia likely | English required | Translation costs vary |
Continue Reading: PERPRES 110/2025 Comparative Analysis Series
This series analyzes the comprehensive transformation from PERPRES 98/2021 to PERPRES 110/2025:
- Article 1: From Carbon Rights to Carbon Allocation - The Paradigm Shift
- Article 2: Emissions Trading Infrastructure - From Batas Atas to Quota System
- Article 3: International Carbon Markets - Otorisasi and Corresponding Adjustment
- Article 4 (this article): Dual Certification Pathway - DRAM vs DPP Documentation
- Article 5: Registry Evolution - From Single SRN PPI to Dual Registry System
PERPRES 110/2025 Comparative Analysis Series - Article 4 of 5
This series analyzes the comprehensive transformation from PERPRES 98/2021 to PERPRES 110/2025:
- From Carbon Rights to Carbon Allocation - The Paradigm Shift
- Emissions Trading Infrastructure - From Batas Atas to Quota System
- International Carbon Markets - Otorisasi and Corresponding Adjustment
- Dual Certification Pathway - DRAM vs DPP Documentation
- Registry Evolution - From Single SRN PPI to Dual Registry System
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This analysis compares carbon project documentation frameworks in PERPRES 98/2021 and PERPRES 110/2025 for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice or carbon project development guidance. The introduction of DRAM and DPP pathways affects project documentation, verification procedures, and market access. Specific implementation requires consideration of: (1) forthcoming government regulations defining DRAM requirements and procedures, (2) recognition criteria for international standards qualifying for DPP pathway, (3) SRUK registration procedures for both SPE GRK and non-SPE GRK units, (4) verification body accreditation for DRAM projects, (5) cost structures for each pathway, (6) timeline expectations pending implementing regulations, and (7) dual certification feasibility and procedures. Carbon project developers should consult qualified environmental law and carbon market counsel specializing in Indonesian certification pathways for guidance on appropriate pathway selection for their specific project types and market targets.