Law 7190/2023 creates Paraguay’s carbon credit framework: every credit requires a baseline, a monitoring plan and recurring cycles of measurement, reporting and verification (MRV). That cycle comes back every verification period: the cost almost nobody budgets for when they look at the credit price.
Two clocks and one map: Law 7190 across Latin America
The full cycle is in the diagram above: MADES runs the national registry, additionality (proving the reduction would not have happened on its own) filters eligibility from the first project and the standards decide which methodology qualifies.
Since January 2026 the CBAM requires the European importer to declare the embedded emissions of what it buys in cement, iron and steel, aluminum, fertilizers, hydrogen and electricity. If you export into that chain, your buyer will demand your product’s measured footprint.
Seen through a PESTEL lens, the regional map fits in a single chart; the politics runs through another channel and comes right after:
- Qualitative traffic light · 2026
- Paraguay: Law 7190/2023
- Brazil: Law 15,042/2024
- Colombia: Law 1819/2016 · DIAN 2025
- Chile: Laws 20.780 and 21.210
- Mexico: SEMARNAT
The politics runs through Article 6 of the Paris Agreement: Paraguay holds, since May 2025, its first implementation agreement with Singapore, which is also Singapore’s first with a Latin American country; Peru and Chile already operate agreements with that same buyer (Presidency of Paraguay, 2025).
The opportunity grows with every new green cell on the map: every instrument in force adds demand for verified credits, and of the five on the board Paraguay is the only one stepping in to sell them.
What to certify first
If you have more than one candidate, the order matters as much as eligibility: certifying the wrong one first eats the MRV budget your best project needed. The model we propose returns that decision before you spend anything on certification.
The data: your candidate inventory with expected tCO₂e volume, MRV costs quoted per standard and stage, your available budget and public price ranges per credit type, each with source and date.
The technique: integer linear programming, a knapsack-type model that picks the mix of projects that maximizes expected value within the MRV budget, then tests it against price scenarios.
The decision: which project to certify now, which to hold for the next cycle and which to drop, with the cost of changing the order in plain sight.
Illustrative example with three candidates; the real order would come from your data:
| Suggested order | Candidate | Methodology fit | MRV cost | Expected volume |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | Biogas / methane | high | medium | medium |
| 2nd | Forestry / ARR | high | high | high |
| 3rd | Energy efficiency | medium | medium | low |
Our role
We propose building that comparator model with your data: MRV cost, volume and standard for each candidate. Once the project is chosen, we support it through to verification readiness before MADES and the applicable standard. The first step is an eligibility diagnosis.
How to measure it: set the baseline and the MRV monitoring plan from day one. Without that measurement there is no credit to sell.
This analysis is published to be argued with: if you read the regional map or the certification order differently, if you have a project that Law 7190 or the CBAM already reaches, or if you hold real verification quotes that would sharpen the proposed model, write to us and we will put it up against the real cost of MRV.