The present invention relates to net sink credit system comprising carbon offset estimation unit, carbon sequestration estimation unit, carbon footprint estimation unit, geospatial module, inclusive wealth estimation module and blockchain module and method for assessing net sink credits on planet earth such as home gardens, agricultural lands, communities, government properties, institutions, plantations, waterbodies, air, forests, forest lands and all kinds of carbon removal, offset and sink with various embodiments. The present invention also relates to net sink credit system comprising carbon offset estimation unit, carbon sequestration estimation unit and carbon footprint estimation unit, and a method for determining net sink credits on planet earth such as home gardens, agricultural lands, communities, government properties, institutions, plantations, waterbodies, air, forests, forest lands and all kinds of carbon removal, offset and sink with various embodiments.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Climate change is one of the most thought-provoking terms in the international discourse and the strategies to mitigate climate change have been discussed in every nook and corner of the society. In which climate equity and burden sharing are most contested issues at the international climate change negotiations. However, national and international endeavours are going on to limit global warming at 1.5°C and global warming occurs because emissions exceed the capacity of sinks to absorb Greenhouse Gases (GHGs). So, the ultimate aim of the international community is to reduce emissions and reach the net zero emissions target through various sinks and removals such as ecosystem services and new technologies like Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) across the world. At present, the share of global carbon credits is distributed equally among nations although the terrestrial sinks such as forests and grasslands are national property and oceanic and atmospheric sinks (beyond national boundary) belong to humankind as they are common global property. Here, 'net' emissions of each nation are based on its gross emission contribution and the share of sinks to each nation. Therefore, the unequal distribution of carbon sinks and recognition of carbon credits adds on to climate inequity (SunitaNarain et al. 2021. Climate Change: Science and Politics. Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi incorporated in its entirety). The biosphere

that specific biosphere also belongs to the nation and its citizens and they are the owners of that carbon credit.
The present emission reduction strategies in the carbon market are allowance based transactions and project based transactions. In the allowance-based transactions, the buyer purchases emission allowances created and allocated (or auctioned) by regulators under cap-and-trade regimes, such as Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) under the Kyoto Protocol or regional or local emissions trade. Such schemes combine environmental performance (defined by the actual level of caps set) and flexibility, through trading, in order for mandated participants to meet compliance requirements at the lowest possible cost. The following drawbacks are associated with allocation based transactions: Problems with allocation based transactions:
1. The allocation based transactions contribute much less than the expected reductions in the carbon emissions reduction commitment by developed countries, for example the overall reduction commitment by developed countries (Annex 1) under the Kyoto Protocol was to achieve reductions 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, yet emissions among these countries have actually increased 8.4 percent above 1990 levels and global temperatures are projected to increase by 1.8 to 4.0 degrees Centigrade by the end of the 21stcentury.
2. The emission trade neglect climate equity because it's a trade between emitters and non-emitters and their carbon sinks are not taken into consideration.
3. International climate change negotiations are not currently taking into consideration the carbon credit contributions owned by people and national governments.
4. Time and location of emissions are not taking into consideration in the transactions. The current carbon market does not take into account the time and location of carbon emissions.
5. Emission transactions occur between two or more emitters and no additionalities take place.
On the other hand in the project-based transactions, the buyer purchases emission credits from a project that can verifiably demonstrate GHG emission reductions compared with what would have happened otherwise. The most notable examples of such activities are under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the Joint implementation (JI) mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol (Karan Capoor and Philippe Ambrosi. 2007. State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2007. The World Bank, Washington, D.C.). The following drawbacks are associated with project based transactions:

in developed countries.
2. Also, these transactions impose top to bottom level emission reduction strategies (major decisions come from international agencies and national governments rather than individuals and local solutions) and neglect the bottom to top approach in the creation and maintenance of carbon credits.
3. Procedural risks in the creation of carbon offset such as host country approval, project registration, verifying the emission reductions and having them certified, shortage of skilled professionals to do the work etc.
4. Project financing risks due to the varied interests and motives of investors leading to actual displacement of local people.
5. It does not encourage a reduction in total greenhouse gas emissions, as the developed countries offset their emissions to developing and Least Developed Countries (LDCs), making them carbon neutral, which can impact the development of the developing countries and LDCs.
6. Post project period monitoring and sustaining of carbon offsets are absent in this model so the long-term impact of carbon sequestration through these projects will be fluctuating.
7. There is an apparent gap in the emission reduction projects because the time and location of emissions are not taken into consideration while creating carbon offsets.
8. Differential treatment in allocation of projects among developing countries and LDCs.
9. Benefits (major traders are developed countries in the carbon market though investments are taken place in developing countries) to developed countries at the expense of developing countries or poor

10. Not contributing much into the attainment of sustainable development goals such as goal 3 (good health and well-being), 7 (affordable and clean energy), 8 (decent work and economic growth), 10 (reduced inequalities), 11 (sustainable cities and communities), 12 (responsible consumption and production), 13 (climate action), 15 (life on land), 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions), 17 (partnerships for the goals)
11. Investing in carbon offsets are expensive, since credits are not approved until after the project is completed, making the market price for credits unpredictable and more volatile.
12. The entire process of designing a project, having it reviewed and audited, and then evaluating credits takes years and involves a substantial number of transaction costs (Benjamin K Sovacool. 2011. Four problems with global carbon markets: a critical review. Energy and Environment, Vol.22 No.6).

carbon credit contributions owned by people and national governments. In addition to that the latest Paris agreement proposed increase of carbon sinks in developing countries and India's Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) aims to eventually bring 33 percent of its geographical cover under forest cover and expect that by increasing forest or tree cover in non-forest areas could enhance carbon sequestration by about 100 million tonnes CO2 equivalent annually (Government of India. 2014. India's Intended Nationally Determined Contribution: Working Towards Climate Justice. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change). So the carbon credits kept by the people and governments within their geographical boundaries should be recognized as a separate entity of carbon sinks and their carbon credits should be calculated as national contributions instead of global sinks (the reservoirs that absorbs and stores more carbon than it releases over a long period of time, examples include plants, soils, and oceans) while considering emission reductions in national and international strategies then only the world can reach at net zero target ('net zero' is a state in which "human activities result in no net effect on the climate system") and achieve sustainable development goals . Thus, there is a need for a net sink credit system and methods for assessing the carbon credit thereof.
OBJECT OF THE INVENTION
The objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system for ameliorating
climate inequity in the assessment of carbon credit by marginalizing the real owners and
keepers of carbon credit.
Another objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system comprising
carbon sequestration estimation unit, carbon footprint estimation unit, geospatial module,
inclusive wealth estimation module and blockchain module in the assessment of carbon
credits.
Yet another objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system with net
zero carbon emission targets.
A further objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system enabling
improved and sustainable revenue generation for individuals and governments with special
focus on farmers.

promoting better ecosystem conservation and management by safeguarding Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) principle to avoid conservation induced displacements. Yet another objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system for substantially reducing GHGs emissions to achieve net zero targets.
A further objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system for significantly reducing the global temperature in accordance with the Paris agreement. Another objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system by recognizing inclusive wealth parameters to offer a new dimension in environment conservation.
Yet another objective of the present invention is to provide a net sink credit system for increasing carbon sequestration capacity nationally and globally.
A further objective of the present invention is to provide a method for assessment of net sink credit comprising identifying the carbon offset unit, measuring the carbon footprint of carbon offset unit, and estimating the carbon sequestration of the carbon offset unit. A still further objective of the present invention is to provide a method for assessment of net sink credit comprising identifying the carbon offset unit, estimating the carbon sequestration of the carbon offset unit, and measuring the carbon footprint of carbon offset unit. Yet another objective of the present invention is to provide a method for continuous monitoring and updating of the net sink credit after its assessment.
Another objective of the present invention is to provide a method for continuous monitoring and updating of the net sink credit after its assessment using geospatial technologies.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a system for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation, the system comprising:
a. Carbon offset estimation unit configured to:
i. Identify the biomass of a particular region or location;
ii. Exclude the biomass other than trees and shrubs;
iii. Classify the trees and shrubs into three storeys based on height of trees and shrubs;
iv. Quantify the total biomass of trees and shrubs including soil biomass.

b. Carbon sequestration estimation unit configured to:
i. Determine a carbon credit of said particular region based upon the total amount of above ground carbon stock and carbon density of the identified biomass.
c. Carbon footprint estimation unit configured to:
i. Determine the carbon emissions from said particular region or location.
ii. Determine net sink credit by deducting the carbon emission from the carbon credit.
The present invention further relates to a method for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation, the method comprising the steps of:
a. Identifying the biomass of a particular region or location;
b. Excluding the biomass other than trees and shrubs;
c. Classifying the trees and shrubs into three storeys based on height of trees and shrubs;
d. Quantifying the total biomass of trees and shrubs including soil biomass.
e. Determining a carbon credit of said particular region based upon the total amount of
above ground carbon stock and carbon density of the identified biomass.
f Determining the carbon emissions from sources of electricity, fossil fuel, cooking gas from said particular region or location.
g. Determining net sink credit by deducting the carbon emission from the carbon credit.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Definition and Calculations
For purposes of interpreting this specification, the following definitions will apply and whenever appropriate, terms used in the singular will also include the plural and vice versa. In the event that any definition set forth conflicts with any document incorporated herein by reference, the definition set forth below shall control.
The term "Carbon credit" or "Carbon Sequestration", as used herein, refers to the amount of carbon kept on the planet earth along with any mechanism that removes, offsets or sinks carbon from the atmosphere.

The term "Carbon removal", as used herein, refers to the process of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and locking it away for decades, centuries, or millennia. Carbon removal methods include natural strategies like tree restoration and agricultural soil management; high-tech strategies like direct air capture and enhanced mineralization; and hybrid strategies like enhanced root crops, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, and ocean-based carbon removal.
The term "Carbon offset" as used herein, refers to the reduction in emissions of carbon dioxide made in order to compensate for or to offset an emission made elsewhere.
The term "Carbon sink" as used herein, refers to the non-atmospheric reservoir that absorbs and stores more carbon than it releases over a long period of time; examples include plants, soils, and oceans. Sinks are sometimes also referred to as carbon stores, reservoirs, or pools, although unlike the term "sink," these terms do not specify that the carbon reservoir absorbs more carbon than it releases over an indefinite period of time.
The term "Net sink credit" as used herein, refers to the carbon credit along with additionalities owned by the individuals, households, communities, governments and institutions (carbon credit assessed through carbon sequestration estimation and additionality will be used for the improvement) after reducing their carbon footprint along with inclusive wealth approach which will be verified annually (using geospatial technologies) and the data will be stored (use of blockchain).
Carbon credit from home gardens, agricultural land, communities, government property, institutions, plantations and forests, forest lands and all kinds of carbon removal, offset and sink are taken into consideration for the purpose of net sink credit. Owners of any of these categories and their particular area will be considered as a unit. Homegardens are intimate multistory combinations of several trees especially fruit- and nut-producing species—and crops in homesteads; livestock may or may not be present; the size of the garden is small and the garden is managed intensively usually by family labor. Agricultural land (or farmland) is any land used for growing crops and raising livestock. It comprises land used for crops or pasture. Land used for crops (cropland) is the sum of arable land (used for temporary crops) plus land with permanent crops. And land with permanent meadows and pastures (grassland or pasture), either naturally-grown or cultivated. Communities are the areas where people live together as a community. Government means lands owned by the government for running its institutions and activities including various projects. Institutions include any kind of area set aside for any particular activity. Plantations are large areas

cultivated for timber or crops. Forests are tree covered areas not predominantly used for purposes other than forestry and forest lands are areas considered as protected areas.
The term "Carbon Sequestration" as used herein, refers to the storage of atmospheric carbon dioxide in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems which effectively reduces the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Carbon sequestration potential of forest and non-forest resources are quantified using different methods. Each method has its own advantages and limitations. The method which one need to adapt depends on various factors like the objective of study (i.e., for what purpose quantification needs to be done), study area, time, labour and money. Objective or purpose of the study decides the accuracy needed for the results and study area decides the feasibility to carry out the research. Out of the different available methods, plot level studies yield high accuracy. Total carbon stock in a plot is the sum total of five carbon pools namely above ground biomass (AGB), below ground biomass (BGB), litter, dead wood, and soil organic carbon (SOC). Normally adopted two methods of carbon accounting are Stock difference method and Gain loss method. The plot size, number, design, changes with crops to be studied, its variability across the study area, scale of study, and type (i.e., whether species to be studied is tree, shrub, or herb) will be varied.
A "carbon footprint" as used herein, refers to the total amount of greenhouse gases that are generated by our actions. Individual carbon footprint will be calculated based on emissions from fossil fuel consumption, gas flaring, plastic electricity and all other activities causing emissions.
Carbon footprint for individuals and dynamic processes is calculated periodically. Each unit can increase the quantity and quality of their carbon credit through afforestation, plastic free surroundings, water conservation activities, organic farming, using renewable energy sources, decreasing the use of fossil fuels, etc. Carbon footprint of each unit will be estimated. "Carbon footprint estimation" as used herein, refers to the mechanism which calculates the carbon footprint of each individual by evaluating the emissions from the use of electricity, cooking fuels, vehicles, plastic, wastage of water, food and all kinds of waste etc. The parameters in the carbon footprint estimation unit are family size, house type, house area, electricity, natural gas, transportation, number of vehicles, fuel consumption, food and waste, plastic consumption, goods and services etc.
Each emitter can reduce their emissions through various carbon offset initiatives and by reducing their own individual emissions.

Field and plant health monitoring: with the availability of satellite imagery, continuous monitoring of plant growth and health has become quite seamless. Global coverage missions such as the Sentinel-2 has gained much popularity in agricultural monitoring attributed to the following characteristics
• high temporal resolution (with a combined revisit time of 5 days) enabling consistent observations
• multispectral channels providing information at narrow bandwidths
• improved spatial resolution (10 - 20 m) compatible with the preceding satellite missions.
Human eyes are efficient remote sensors, but our capabilities are limited to the visible
spectrum of electromagnetic radiation and hence we recognize plant health by the color and
hue variations. Multispectral data allows us to tap into the information stored in the other
spectral bands namely the red-edge, near-infrared (NIR), shortwave-infrared (SWIR) and so
on. The basic underlying principle involved here is the investigation of absorption and
reflection of light at different wavelengths by the plant cells. Analysis of this spectral band
information provides accurate specifics about the density, health and growth rate of the
plants. The process involves computation of indices that manipulates and translates the
obtained values to predefined scales that aids in the effortless interpretation of various
parameters. The common indices used are listed below.
1. Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI)
NDVI is the most popular parameter used in global monitoring which is specially geared for evaluation of plant density, health, effectiveness of cultivation and seeding rates. It is useful in analyzing large areas for vegetation density.
Chlorophyll present in the plant cells absorbs light in the visible spectrum (particularly red waveband), while the cellular structure of the leaves influences reflection of the NIR bands. For instance, diseased plants show high absorption of NIR light and thus, observing how NIR changes compared to the red waveband provides an accurate indication of the presence of chlorophyll, which correlates with plant health.
NIR - Red
NDVI = NJRTRH
The scale ranges from -1 to +1, where high positive values indicate meadows, temperate and tropical forests with good health, value of 0 indicates rocks and bare soil, and negative values indicate clouds, water and snow.

2. Normalized Difference Red Edge (NDRE)
REDGE (RedEdge) band is a narrow region located between the red and NIR bands of the
electromagnetic spectrum. Plants exhibit an increased reflection between the red and NIR
region, which leads to a sharp increase in the reflection coefficient through the REDGE band.
NIR - REDGE NDRE =
NIR + REDGE The index is scaled from -1 to +1.
Chlorophyll has maximum absorption in the red band and hence light cannot penetrate beyond a few layers of leaf cells, which is the critical point at which NDVI becomes less sensitive. But leaves are more translucent to the red-edge light due to which REDGE penetrates a leaf much more deeply than red or blue wavebands. Hence, REDGE band is more suitable for canopies and during the middle and late growth stages when crops have accumulated high concentrations of chlorophyll in leaves and red light will penetrate poorly.
3. Chlorophyll Index Red-Edge (C1RE)
C1RE is an indicator of the total amount of chlorophyll in plants. As REDGE marks the
boundary between absorption by chlorophyll in the red visible region and scattering due to
leaf internal structure in the NIR region, the cellular structure of the plants tend to reflect
waves within this narrow spectral range. Thus higher the reflection, greener is the plant.
The level of chlorophyll is directly related to the nitrogen content in the crop and hence this
index is often used in fertilizer requirement application.
NIR CIRE = —=—-= - 1 REDGE
It is measured from 0 to +1.
4. Modified Soil Adjusted Vegetation Index (MSAVI)
MSAVI is used to lift limits on applying NDVI to areas with a high composition of bare soil. It is used in areas where indices like NDVI or NDRE provide invalid data, mostly due to a small amount of vegetation or due to lack of chlorophyll therein. Thus, the index reduces the soil background influence and leads to an increase in the dynamic range of vegetation signal. It is useful at the early stages of plant development, when there is a lot of bare soil in the field.
(2 * NIR) + 1 - V[(2 * NIR + l)2 - 8 * (NIR - Red)]
MSAVI = -
The index values range from -1 to +1.

5. Normalized Difference Moisture Index (NDMI)
Also called NDWI (Normalized Difference Water Index), it is an indicator of water content or water stress in the vegetation. SWIR waveband reflects changes in both the vegetation water content and the spongy mesophyll structure in vegetation canopies, while NIR reflectance is affected by leaf internal structure and leaf dry matter content but not by water content. Thus, the combination of NIR and SWIR removes variations induced by leaf internal structure and leaf dry matter content, improving the accuracy in retrieving the vegetation water content.
NIR - SWIR
NDMI =
NIR + SWIR
It is scaled between -1 and +1, where -1 corresponds to bare soil and +1 indicates no water stress.
6. Determination of Carbon sequestration potential
Carbon stock in an area is estimated by summing up the total carbon stock estimated for vegetation component and soil component. Calculation of carbon stock of the vegetation component include measuring the biophysical measurements (DBH, height) from the study area and calculation of biomass and carbon using allometric models available for the location and species. Soil carbon stock is quantified using the percentage soil organic carbon and bulk density measured for the soil in the area up-to lm depth.
Total Number of species in all plots
Density =
Total Number of plots studied
Number of plots of occurance
Frequency =
Total number of plots
Dominance =
Total Number of individual of a species Number of plots of occurance
Density of a species
Relative Density (RD) = —— ' „ x 100
Total density of all species
Frequency of a species
Relative Frequency (RF) = — — — :— x 100
Total frequency of all species

Dominance of a species
Relative Dominance (RD) = — — : —- :— X 100
Total dominance of all species
IVI = RD+RF + RD
Shannon s Index, H = — y (-M In (-M
Where, n; - Number of individual of a particular species N - Total number of Individuals of all species
£ n(n - 1) Simpson Diversity Index = 1 —————
Where, n - Total number of individual of a particular species
N - Total number of individuals of all species "Geotagging", as used herein, refers to the process of adding geographical identification data (latitude & longitude) to an object. Trees in each unit will be geotagged and it could be useful for monitoring and maintaining carbon credit where plant details like age, taxonomic status, ownership, location, habitat, crop cycle etc. can be accessed through the QR code. "Change detection" as used herein, refers to detect tree cover change over time and to compare plant health indicated by various indices like Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) as well as monitoring the change occurred in GHG emissions through remote sensing and image processing.
Additionality is established when there is a positive difference between the emissions that occur in the baseline scenario and the emissions that occur after an additional/added value effect in the GHG scenario. Additionalities are plastic free soil and surroundings (Plastic credit), water conservation modalities, organic farming, renewable energy, e-waste and all kinds of waste are taken into consideration while assessing the grading of carbon credit periodically.
"Inclusive wealth" as used herein, refers to the aggregate value of all capital assets such as human capital, natural capital, financial capital, social capital, and physical capital in which the value of a unit of a capital asset is measured by the contribution it makes to increasing current and future human well-being. Increases in inclusive wealth indicate an improved productive base capable of supporting a higher standard of living in the future consistent with sustainable development, whereas decreases in inclusive wealth indicate unsustainable development. Financial assets are claims on the wealth of society that simultaneously

generate a credit and a liability. In the aggregate, financial assets change the distribution of wealth but do not change total wealth. Financial assets are important for describing the wealth of countries, businesses, or households. Human capital includes the experience, education, and know-how of the population, physical capital includes durable produced items, such as infrastructure, buildings, and machinery. Natural capital includes all natural resources and ecological processes that contribute to the provision of ecosystem services. Ecosystem services are defined as the goods and services supplied by nature of value to people, such as filtration of nutrients to purify water and pollination for agricultural crops. Social capital includes the institutions and relationships among members of society that help make society function. Net sink credit will be graded on the basis of an inclusive wealth approach where each of the capitals such as social capital, human capital, natural capital, physical capital and financial capital in numerical data will be taken into consideration.
In the first embodiment the method for assessment of net sink credit comprises the following steps.
Step 1: Identification of carbon removal/offset/sink unit for carbon sequestration and carbon footprint estimation.
Step 2: Measurement of carbon sequestration for estimation of the carbon credit of the identified unit.
Step 3: Carbon footprint of identified unit is measured for the estimation of carbon footprint. Step 4: Net sink credit is obtained from the difference of carbon footprint and carbon credit.
A second embodiment of the method for assessment of net sink credit comprises the following steps
Step I: Identification of carbon removal/offset/sink unit for carbon footprint and carbon sequestration estimation.
Step 2: Carbon footprint of identified unit is measured for the estimation of carbon footprint. Step 3: Measurement of carbon sequestration for estimation of the carbon credit of the identified unit. Step 4: Net sink credit is obtained from the difference of carbon footprint and carbon credit
A third embodiment of the invention comprises the following steps for assessment of net sink credit.
Step 1: Identification of carbon removal/offset/sink unit for carbon sequestration and carbon footprint estimation.
Step 2: Measurement of carbon sequestration for estimation of the carbon credit of the identified unit.

Step 3: Carbon footprint of identified unit is measured for the estimation of carbon footprint.
Step 4: Net sink credit is obtained from the difference of carbon footprint and carbon credit.
Step 5: The quality and value of net sink credit is evaluated with the help of inclusive wealth
estimation module such as human capital, natural capital, financial capital, social capital, and
physical capital.
Step 6: The evaluated net sink credit obtained is stored as separate data units using
blockchain technology.
Step 7: The stored net sink credit is further monitored using technologies such as geospatial
technologies which includes field and plant health monitoring, geotagging, change detection
etc.
Step 8: The quality and value of monitored net sink credit of step 7 is evaluated with the help
of inclusive wealth estimation module such as human capital, natural capital, financial
capital, social capital, and physical capital.
Fourth embodiment of the invention uses the following steps for assessment of net sink credit.
Step 1: Identification of carbon rem oval/offset/sink unit for carbon footprint and carbon sequestration estimation.
Step 2: Carbon footprint of identified unit is measured for the estimation of carbon footprint. Step 3: Measurement of carbon sequestration for estimation of the carbon credit of the identified unit.
Step 4: Net sink credit is obtained from the difference of carbon footprint and carbon credit. Step 5: The quality and value of net sink credit is evaluated with the help of inclusive wealth estimation module such as human capital, natural capital, financial capital, social capital, and physical capital.
Step 6: The evaluated net sink credit obtained is stored as separate data units using blockchain technology.
Step 7: The stored net sink credit is further monitored using technologies such as geospatial technologies which includes field and plant health monitoring, geotagging, change detection etc.
Step 8: The quality and value of monitored net sink credit of step 7 is evaluated with the help of inclusive wealth estimation module such as human capital, natural capital, financial capital, social capital, and physical capital.

Net sink credit can be used for various applications such as climate change mitigation, sustainable development, climate equity, net zero target, inclusive wealth, bottom to top level approach in environment conservation, ensuring livelihood of the marginalized and achieving sustainable development goals 3 (good health and well-being), 7 (affordable and clean energy), 8 (decent work and economic growth), 10 (reduced inequalities), 11 (sustainable cities and communities), 12 (responsible consumption and production), 13 (climate action), 15 (life on land), 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions), 17 (partnerships for the goals) and moreover effective functioning of the carbon market for attaining net zero target. The obtained net sink credit value is either positive or negative. If it is negative the owner has to take necessary carbon removal/offset/sink measures to neutralize it or can purchase net sink credit from the market to compensate his emissions. If it is positive the owner can sell it. This net sink credit can be traded as an alternative to carbon credit or carbon credit itself in the carbon market on a yearly basis to retain the significance of carbon credit of each unit. An increase in the carbon credit of each unit can also be achieved through additionalities and which will lead to increase in the value of the net sink credit. The net sink credit can be traded in the carbon market on a yearly basis to attain net zero target at the individual level. The experiment was conducted in two land use type near Attapadi in Palakkad district, Kerala, India.
EXAMPLE 1- Carbon sequestration potential - Homestead
An intensive land use system which combine diverse farming components such as annual and perennial crops, domestic animals, occasionally fish maintained and managed to provide environmental services, employment opportunities and household needs are referred as homegardens (HG) or homestead (Jaman, M. S., Hossain, M. F., Islam, M. S., Helal, M. G. J., and Jamil, M. (2016). Quantification of carbon stock and tree diversity of homegardens in Rangpur District, Bangladesh.International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 6(5), 169-180). The study was conducted in a homestead (11.04903 N, 76.65139 E) of 1.25 ha area, located near Attapadi in Palakkad district, Kerala. The elevation of the area is around 2077 ft above sea level.
Methodology
The homestead is well managed and has explicable diversity with Areca catechu (Beetal nut palm) as the dominant tree species. The species planted and managed in the home garden is given in the Tablel. The studied homestead is a multi-faceted multi storey

system in which trees like Areca catechu, Cocosnucifera, Dalbergialatifolia occupying the top storey; Gliricidiasepium, Theobroma cacao, Manikarazapota, Psidiumguajava, Musa paradisiacal occupying the middle storey, and Coffea arabica, Elettaria cardamomum occupying the bottom storey. Bearing in mind the pattern of planting and diversity, five sample plots of 10* 10m were laid randomly in the study area to measure the carbon sequestration potential of the homestead. Only trees (woody plants which develop solitary trunks and well developed crowns) and shrubs (woody plants which branch near the ground and do not have a leading shoot) in the study area is considered for the present investigation. All the trees and shrubs in the sampling units were enumerated taking note of the species name, height, diameter at breast height (dbh) for trees, diameter at 15 cm height above ground for coffee and other shrubs, and age of each planted species. The above ground biomass of each species were estimated using the existing allometry equations and carbon was estimated considering carbon as 50% of biomass (IPCC, 2006)[Eggleston, H. S., Buendia, L., Miwa, K., Ngara, T., and Tanabe, K. (2006). 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories]. The models used for biomass estimation is taken from Kumar, 2011 and Andrade et al., 2018. [Kumar, B. M. (2011). Species richness and aboveground carbon stocks in the homegardens of central Kerala, India Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 140(3-4), 430-440]; [Andrade, H. J., Segura, M. A., Feria, M., &Suarez, W. (2018). Above-ground biomass models for coffee bushes (Coffeaarabica L.) in Libano, Tolima, Colombia. Agroforestry Systems, 92(3), 775-784]
For soil carbon, samples for both organic carbon and bulk density are taken at four depths 0-25, 25-50, 50-75, and 75-100 cm from three out of five sampling units which are distributed diagonally in the homestead. Soil sampler of size 5.2 cm height and 4.7 cm diameter were used for bulk density. The collected soil samples were shade dried, powdered, and sieved using 0.2mm sieve and tested for organic carbon. The soil core sampler is weighed for fresh weight and oven dried at 105° C for 78 hrs to remove the moisture content and dry weight is taken. Soil carbon stock was estimated using the obtained percentage soil organic carbon and bulk density.
Equations used for above ground biomass estimation of individual species
• Areca catechu: Y = 4.5 + 7.7 H; where Y- Biomass (kg/plant), H- Stem height (m) (Brown, 1997; Kumar, 2011)
• Cocos nucifera: Y = 5.5209 x + 89.355; where Y - Dry weight (kg), x - tree age (years) (Kumar, 2011)

• All dicot trees: Y = exp{-2.134 + 2.530 x ln(D)}; where Y - Trunk and canopy biomass per tree (kg), exp - exponential function, D - Diameter at breast height (cm) (Kumar, 2011)
• Coffee: B = -0.357 + 0.371 x Di5; where B - Total above ground biomass (kg/plant), D15 - Diameter at 15 cm above ground (cm) (Andrade et al, 2018)
Home gardens are well known for its high agro biodiversity and high carbon
sequestration potential (Kumar, 2006, 2011)[Kumar, B. M. (2006). Carbon sequestration
potential of tropical homegardens.In Tropical Homegardens (pp. 185-204).Springer,
Dordrecht]; [Kumar, B. M. (2011).Species richness and aboveground carbon stocks in the
homegardens of central Kerala, India. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 140(3-4), 430-
440]. Present invention determined the carbon sequestration potential of a homestead in
Attapadi, Palakkad district in order to know the potential of small holdings of the farmers of
the area in fighting the global warming. The study aimed to quantify only the above ground
and soil carbon stock in the homestead. The plants like Black pepper (Piper nigrum),
Cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum) were excluded from the present study. The study
estimated a total above ground carbon stock and carbon density as 188.348 tC and 149.65
±33.59 tCha"1 respectively. Carbon stock of home garden accounted 152.567 t/ha.
The carbon footprint of homestead was calculated by assessing the the major sources of emissions such as electricity source, fossil fuel such as petrol, diesel etc and cooking gas . Thus the total emissions from the homestead is 4.55 tonne. The net sink credit of the homestead is obtained after deducting the total emissions of the homestead from the carbon sequestration value i.e. 490.565 (Carbon sequestration value) - 4.55 (total emissions) = 486.02 (Net sink Credit).
The carbon footprint was calculated from the standard scale for carbon footprint of each item provided by the ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
EXAMPLE 2 - Carbon sequestration potential - Coffee Plantation
The second study was conducted in a coffee plantation (11.050123 N, 76.65210167 E) located near Attapadi in Palakkad district, Kerala. The elevation of the area is around 2230ft above sea level. Planting a cash crop like Coffee along with a number of shade trees (tress planted to reduce the intensity of sun light and temperature, combat drought effects and maintain moisture levels in coffee plant tissues and protects the plants from low temperature)has a huge potential to store the atmospheric carbon dioxide. The major coffee shrubs planted in the area includes Coffea arabica and Coffea robusta. Coffee plants normally

require some amount of shade for its better growth and production. The major shade trees planted in the study area were Areca catechu, Anacardium occidentale, Dalbergialatifolia, Grewiatilifoloa, Gliricidiasepium etc.
Methodology
In the coffee plantation, coffee shrubs and the shade trees were sampled and their above ground biomass and carbon was calculated. One rectangular sampling plot of 400m was established and all shade trees having a diameter at breast height (dbh) of more than 10 cm were measured for height and diameter at breast height. A subplot of 25m was established in the north east corner of the plot and the plant height and the diameter at a height of 15 cm above ground for all the coffee shrubs in the subplot were measured. The above ground biomass of all the tree species were quantified using the general allometry equations for dicot tree (Kumar, 2011) and above ground biomass of coffee was estimated using the allometry equation given by Andrade et al., 2018 [Andrade, H. J., Segura, M. A., Feria, M., &Suarez, W. (2018). Above-ground biomass models for coffee bushes (Coffeaarabica L.) in Libano, Tolima, Colombia. Agroforestry Systems, 92(3), 775-784].
For soil carbon, samples for both organic carbon and bulk density are taken at four depths 0-25, 25-50, 50-75, and 75-100 cm from two locations in the coffee sampling unit. Soil sampler of size 5.2 cm height and 4.7 cm diameter were used for bulk density. The collected soil samples were shade dried, powdered, and sieved using 0.2mm sieve and tested for organic carbon. The soil core sampler is weighed for fresh weight and oven dried at 105° C for 78 hrs to remove the moisture content and dry weight is taken. Soil carbon stock was estimated using the obtained percentage soil organic carbon and bulk density.
Equations used for above ground biomass estimation of individual species
• All dicot trees: Y = exp{-2.134 + 2.530 x ln(D)}; where Y - Trunk and canopy biomass per tree (kg), exp - exponential function, D - Diameter at breast height (cm) (Kumar, 2011)
• Coffee: B = -0.357 + 0.371 x D15; where B - Total above ground biomass (kg/plant), D15 -Diameter at 15 cm above ground (cm) (Andradeetal., 2018)
The diameter at breast height of the shade trees in the sampling unit ranged from 10 cm to 36 cm. Only above ground and soil carbon in the study area were accounted. The total carbon was estimated by summing the carbon stock in the coffee plants, shade trees and the soil. The coffee alone and the coffee system accounted 3.552 tCha_1and 91.337 tCha"1

respectively in the above ground. The carbon stock in individual coffee plants ranged from 0.70 to 1.5 kg per plant. In the coffee system, soil carbon stock was found to be 119.738 t/ha.
The carbon footprint of coffee plantation was calculated by assessing the emission from fossil fuel such as petrol and diesel as this is the major source of emission. Thus the total emission obtained from coffee plantation is 0.393 tonne. The net sink credit of the coffee plantation is obtained after deducting the total emission value from the carbon sequestration value i.e 211.075 (Carbon sequestration value) - 0.393 (total emissions) = 210.682 (Net sink Credit).
The carbon footprint was calculated from the standard scale for carbon footprint of each item provided by the ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
Table 1

SLNo Species Common name Local name (Malayalam)
Top Storey
1 Cocosnucifera Coconut tree Thengu
2 Areca catechu Beetal nut palm Kavungu
3 Acacia mangium Mangium Mangium
4 Dalbergialatifolia Rosewood Eatti
5 Pterocarpusmarsupium Indian Kino tree Venga
6 Tectonagrandis Teak Thekku
7 Grewiatilifolia Dhaman Chadachi
8 Mangiferaindica Mango tree Maavu
9 Artocarpusheterophyllus Jackfruit tree Plavu
10 Anacardiumoccidentale Cashew tree Kasumaavu
11 Swieteniamahagoni Mahogany Mahagony
12 Albizialebbeck Lebbek tree Vaka

13 Terminaliabe Ulrica Belliricmyrobalan Thaanni
14 Garciniagummi-gutta Malabar tamarind Kudampuli
15 Bombaxceiba Cotton tree Elavu
16 Lagerstroemia microcarpa Ben Teak Vellilavu
17 Bride liaretusa Spinouskino tree Mulluvenga
18 Garugapinnata Grey downy balsam Kilinjil
19 Gmelinaarborea White teak Kumbilmaram
20 Ailanthus excels Tree of heaven Naarimaram
21 Tamarindusindica Tamarind tree Puli
MiddleStorey
22 Myristicajragrans Nutmeg Jathi
23 Emblicaofficinalis Indian gooseberry Nelli
24 Gliricidiasepium Gliricidia Seemakonna
25 Erythrinavariegata Coral tree Murukku
26 Theobroma cacao Cacao tree Cacao
27 Artocarpusaltilis Breadfruit KadaChakka
28 Manikarazapota Sapota Sapota/Chikoo
29 Psidiumguajava Guava Pera
30 Musa paradisiacal Banana Vazha
31 Syzygiumsamarangense Java apple Chaambakka
32 Spondiasmompin Hog plum Ambazham
33 Citrus limon Lemon Naarakam
34 Nepheliumlappaceum Rambuttan Rambuttan
35 Garciniamangostana Mangostin Mangostin

36 Murrayakoenigii Curry leaf Kariveppu
BottomStorey
37 Coffeaarabica Coffee Kaappi
38 Coffearobusta Coffee Kaappi
39 Syzygiumaromaticum Clove Grampoo
40 Elettariacardamomum Cardamom Elakka
Climbing Vine
41 Piper nigrum Black pepper Kurumulaku
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS
Figure 1: Illustrates the Carbon sequestration estimation process.
Figure 2: Illustrates a first embodiment of net sink credit system.
Figure 3: Illustrates a second embodiment of advanced net sink credit system.
Figure 4: Illustrates the steps for assessment of net sink credit according to
embodiment 1.
Figure 5: Illustrates the steps for assessment of net sink credit according to
embodiment 2.
Figure 6: Illustrates the steps for assessment of advanced net sink credit according to
embodiment 3.
Figure 7: Illustrates the steps for assessment of advanced net sink credit according to
embodiment 4.

We Claim:

1. A system for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation, the system
comprising:
a. Carbon offset estimation unit configured to:
i. Identify the biomass of a particular region or location;
ii. Exclude the biomass other than trees and shrubs;
iii. Classify the trees and shrubs into three storeys or two storeys based on height of trees and shrubs;
iv. Determine the soil carbon stock;
v. Quantify the biomass of trees, shrubs and soil carbon stock of identified region or location.
b. Carbon sequestration estimation unit configured to:
i. Determine the carbon credit of quantified biomass of trees, shrubs and soil carbon stock.
c. Carbon footprint estimation unit configured to:
i. Determine the carbon emission of identified region or location.
d. Net sink credit estimation unit configured to:
i. Determine a net sink credit by deducting the carbon emission determined in (c)(i) from the carbon credit determined in (b)(i).
2. A system for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 1, wherein the identified region or location is selected from homestead or coffee plantation.
3. A system for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 2, wherein the carbon offset estimation unit in coffee plantation comprises a top storey and a bottom storey.
4. A system for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 1, wherein the carbon offset estimation unit comprises a top storey of Areca catechu, Cocos nucifera, Dalbergia latifolia and the like; a middle storey of Gliricidiasepium, Theobroma cacao, Manikarazapota, Psidiumguajava, Musa

paradisiacal and the like; and a bottom storey of Coffea arabica, Elettaria cardamomum and the like.
5. A system for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 1, wherein the carbon emission source is selected from electricity, fossil fuel, or cooking gas or its combination.
6. A method for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation, the method comprising the steps of:
i. Identifying the biomass of a particular region or location;
ii. Excluding the biomass other than trees and shrubs;
iii. Classifying the trees and shrubs into three storeys or two storeys based on height of trees and shrubs;
iv. Determining the soil carbon stock;
v. Quantifying the total biomass of trees, shrubs and soil carbon stock of identified region or location.
vi. Determining the carbon credit of quantified biomass of trees, shrubs and soil carbon stock.
vii. Determining the carbon emission of identified region or location.
viii. Determining net sink credit by deducting the carbon emission determined in step (vii) from the carbon credit determined in step (vi).
7. A method for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 6, wherein the identified region or location is selected from homestead or coffee plantation.
8. A method for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 7, wherein the carbon offset estimation unit in coffee plantation comprises a top storey and a bottom storey.
9. A method for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 6, wherein the carbon offset estimation unit comprises a top storey of Areca catechu, Cocos nucifera, Dalbergia latifolia and the like; a middle storey of Gliricidiasepium, Theobroma cacao, Manikarazapota, Psidiumguajava, Musa

paradisiacal and the like; and a bottom storey of Coffea arabica, Elettaria cardamomum and the like.
10. A method for determining net sink credit for climate change mitigation as claimed in claim 6, wherein the carbon emission source is selected from electricity, fossil fuel, or cooking gas or its combination.