A comprehensive governance structure for a G4T certification system, specifically designed to ensure compliance with international deforestation regulations (like the EUDR, UKDR, and potential US measures) by leveraging Leaflet and GIS technology.

G4T Deforestation-Free Compliance Governance Framework: Leveraging Geospatial Technology for Assurance

Document Version: 1.0 Date:October 26, 2023 Author : G4T International Standards Board Status : For Implementation founded by Alfred Gitau Mwaura.

Table of Contents

Page 4: 1.0 Executive Summary Page 5: 2.0 Introduction & Background 2.1 The Challenge of Deforestation-Free Compliance 2.2 The Role of the G4T Certification System 2.3 The Critical Importance of Geospatial Data (GIS) Page 7: 3.0 Governing Principles 3.1 Core Principles of the G4T Deforestation-Free Framework 3.2 Alignment with EUDR Article 2 & 9, and Other Regulations Page 9: 4.0 Governance Structure: Roles & Responsibilities 4.1 G4T International Standards Board (ISB) 4.2 G4T Geospatial Verification Unit (GVU) 4.3 Accredited Certification Bodies (CBs) 4.4 National G4T Implementation Committees (NGIC) 4.5 The Certified Operator (Company/Producer) 4.6 External Stakeholder Advisory Group Page 15: 5.0 The Geospatial Data & Technology Stack 5.1 Core Technology: Leaflet.js and Supporting Architecture 5.2 The G4T Geospatial Portal: User Interface Description 5.3 GIS Data Requirements: Layers and Sources 5.4 Data Standards: Format, Precision, and Metadata 5.5 Secure Data Storage, Management, and Access Control Page 22: 6.0 The Due Diligence Process: A GIS-Integrated Workflow 6.1 Step 1: Operator Registration & Farm/Plot Mapping 6.2 Step 2: Automated GIS Risk Categorization 6.3 Step 3: Field Verification & Ground-Truthing 6.4 Step 4: Ongoing Monitoring & Change Detection Alerts 6.5 Step 5: Generating the Due Diligence Report for Authorities Page 28: 7.0 Audit, Verification & Compliance Mechanisms 7.1 The Role of Accredited Auditors in Geospatial Verification 7.2 Desk-Based GIS Analysis (Remote Audit) 7.3 On-Site Geospatial Auditing Procedures 7.4 Handling Non-Conformities and Triggering Alerts 7.5 Whistleblower & Complaint Mechanism via GIS Portal Page 31: 8.0 Capacity Building & Stakeholder Engagement 8.1 Training Programs for Auditors, Operators, and Governments 8.2 Engagement with Smallholders and Cooperatives Page 32: 9.0 Review, Appeals, and Continuous Improvement 9.1 Annual Framework Review Cycle 9.2 Appeals Process Page 33: 10.0 Conclusion & Next Steps

Detailed Page-by-Page Content Overview

Page 4: 1.0 Executive Summary This document outlines the mandatory governance framework for the Good For Trade(G4T) certification system to verify and ensure compliance with deforestation-free regulations, notably the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR). This framework is built upon a robust, transparent, and technologically advanced foundation utilizing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and the Leaflet open-source library to provide irrefutable geospatial evidence of compliance. It defines the roles, responsibilities, technical standards, and processes required to create a credible and auditable chain of custody from plot to port.

Page 5: 2.0 Introduction & Background

Page 7: 3.0 Governing Principles

· 2.1 The Challenge: International regulations require proof that commodities were not produced on land deforested after December 31, 2020 (EUDR cutoff date). The challenge is proving a negative across complex, multi-tiered supply chains, often in remote regions.
· 2.2 The G4T Role: G4T provides a verified certification that serves as a key component of an operator’s due diligence system, reducing the burden of proof for individual companies and providing a standardized, trusted approach for authorities.
· 2.3 The GIS Imperative: Satellite imagery and polygon mapping are the only scalable, objective methods to provide conclusive evidence of a plot’s history and current forest cover. GIS is not an option but a necessity for compliance.

· 3.1 Core Principles: The framework is based on Non-Discrimination (accessible to smallholders), Transparency (of method, not confidential data), Robustness (scientifically sound methods), Verifiability (all claims can be audited), and Data Protection (GDPR compliance).
· 3.2 Regulatory Alignment: Explicitly maps G4T requirements to specific articles of the EUDR, demonstrating how the framework fulfils the legal obligations for geolocation, risk assessment, and due diligence.

Page 9: 4.0 Governance Structure: Roles & Responsibilities

· 4.1 G4T ISB: Independent body responsible for maintaining and updating this framework, approving technology standards, and accrediting Certification Bodies.
· 4.2 G4T Geospatial Verification Unit (GVU): The central, tech-focused unit. Its critical duties include:
· Maintaining the central G4T Geospatial Portal.
· Procuring and processing base satellite imagery (e.g., Sentinel-2, Landsat).
· Developing and running automated change detection algorithms.
· Defining and updating the “Risk Layer” (e.g., maps of protected areas, indigenous territories, known deforestation hotspots).
· Providing technical support to CBs and operators.
· 4.3 Accredited Certification Bodies (CBs): Conduct audits. Must employ auditors trained and qualified in geospatial analysis. They are responsible for verifying the data submitted by operators through the portal.
· 4.4 National G4T Implementation Committees (NGIC): Country-level multi-stakeholder groups that adapt the global framework to national contexts (e.g., defining national forest definitions, integrating national forest cover maps).
· 4.5 The Certified Operator: Responsible for accurately mapping all plots of land under their control (or their suppliers’) using the G4T portal, providing access to auditors, and responding to alerts.
· 4.6 External Stakeholder Advisory Group: Provides external oversight and feedback, includes NGOs, academia, and community representatives.

Page 15: 5.0 The Geospatial Data & Technology Stack

· 5.1 Technology Stack: The system is built on Leaflet.js (open-source for the front-end map rendering) but is supported by a powerful back-end including PostgreSQL/PostGIS (database), Geoserver (serving map layers), and Python/R for data analysis. This ensures scalability and avoids vendor lock-in.
· 5.2 The G4T Geospatial Portal: A secure, web-based platform. Description of its interface: a map view with layer controls, a panel for uploading shapefiles/KMLs, a dashboard for alerts, and a report-generation module.
· 5.3 GIS Data Requirements:
· Mandatory Layers: Satellite Imagery (annual composites), Operator Plot Boundaries, G4T Forest Definition Layer, Protected Areas, Global Forest Watch Tree Cover Loss Data.
· Optional Risk Layers: Peatlands, Indigenous Territories, Fire Hotspots.
· 5.4 Data Standards: Plot polygons must be collected with a minimum precision of 10m (using GPS/GNSS devices). All data must be in WGS84 coordinate system. Strict metadata requirements (who collected, when, with what device).
· 5.5 Secure Data Storage: Data is stored on encrypted, secure cloud servers. Access is role-based (e.g., an operator sees only their plots; an auditor sees their clients’ plots; the GVU sees all data for analysis). Full compliance with GDPR; individual farmer data is not made public without consent.

Page 22: 6.0 The Due Diligence Process: A GIS-Integrated Workflow

· 6.1 Step 1: Plot Mapping: Operator uses the portal to draw or upload precise polygon(s) of their farm(s). The system timestamps and records this submission.
· 6.2 Step 2: Automated Risk Categorization: The GVU’s system automatically cross-references the submitted polygon against deforestation layers (e.g., analyzes GLAD alerts within the polygon since 12/2020) and risk layers. It generates a preliminary risk classification (Low/High).
· 6.3 Step 3: Field Verification: For all plots and especially high-risk preliminary classifications, an auditor must physically visit the plot to ground-truth the map data and verify the absence of deforestation. This includes taking geotagged photos.
· 6.4 Step 4: Ongoing Monitoring: The GVU system runs automated analysis (e.g., every 16 days with new Sentinel imagery) on all certified plots. Any detected vegetation loss triggers an immediate alert to the operator and their CB for investigation.
· 6.5 Step 5: Report Generation: The portal allows the operator or CB to automatically generate a standardized audit report containing maps, time-series imagery, and compliance statements that can be submitted to EU authorities as part of their due diligence package.

Page 28: 7.0 Audit, Verification & Compliance Mechanisms

· 7.1 Auditor Role: Auditors are not just checklist tickers; they are geospatial data verifiers. They must confirm the polygon’s accuracy on the ground.
· 7.2 Desk-Based Analysis: Auditors use the portal’s tools to analyze historical satellite imagery (e.g., via Google Earth Engine integration) to visually confirm no deforestation occurred on the plot after the cutoff date.
· 7.3 On-Site Audit: Procedures for using handheld GNSS devices to validate the submitted polygon’s boundaries. Procedures for interviewing workers and neighbors about land-use history.
· 7.4 Non-Conformities: Defining Major vs. Minor CARs related to geospatial data. A Major CAR would be a found instance of deforestation post-cutoff, leading to certificate suspension.
· 7.5 Whistleblower Mechanism: A feature on the public-facing website allowing anyone to report concerns about a certified plot. The GVU would then task high-resolution satellite imagery to investigate the claim.

Page 31: 8.0 Capacity Building & Stakeholder Engagement

· 8.1 Training: Developing a certified training course on “Geospatial Auditing for Deforestation Compliance” for auditors. Creating simpler training modules for operators on how to map their plots.
· 8.2 Smallholder Engagement: Critical. Proposing a model where Cooperatives or Exporter companies act as the “Operator,” aggregating the mapped plots of hundreds of smallholders into a single system for management and certification. Providing low-tech solutions (e.g., SMS alerts, simplified apps) for data collection.

Page 32: 9.0 Review, Appeals, and Continuous Improvement

· 9.1 Annual Review: The framework must be updated annually to incorporate new satellite data sources, improved algorithms, and changes to referenced regulations.
· 9.2 Appeals Process: A clear process for an operator to appeal a suspension decision, which may involve a third-party geospatial expert review.

Page 33: 10.0 Conclusion & Next Steps This framework establishes G4T as a leader in credible,technology-driven sustainability certification. Next steps include:

  1. Fundraising for the development of the Geospatial Portal.
  2. Forming the International Standards Board and Geospatial Verification Unit.
  3. Initiating pilot programs in key commodity sectors (e.g., coffee in Kenya, cocoa in Ghana).
  4. Seeking formal recognition from the European Commission as a voluntary certification scheme contributing to lowering risk classification.