The stuff in the high liquidity asset class would make nice candidates.
But if you look at the table most high-impact assets are low liquidity. The earlier discussion made a case for forest and regenerative agriculture land tokens. Whilst we would advocate their inclusion in the reserve to an extent we would tread carefully there.
I spent 7 years at the front line of green field agriculture project development in Africa. By front line I meant we were surveying lands in some of the most remote areas in West African countries from Nigeria to Senegal and every countries in between. We therefore can say that land-based investments in these high impact areas are extremely challenging. The land tenure is mixed between state, local authority and tribal systems. Securing legal titles is challenging but even after title has been secured (and tokenized) there is no guarantee that the land will be used or preserved for intended purposes. The local population surrounding the land/forest need alternative livelihood such as intensive farming, eco tourism or they will resort back to old ways of living. This is our experience in Africa. Other areas of the globe might be different.
So we advocate a balanced asset allocation strategy that takes into account the inherent trade-offs, after extensive analysis and screening. For nature based assets we think it is easier for Celo to partner with NGOs or forest trusts who have many years of experience securing preservation areas, working and learning with local communities. Once this part is sorted, tokenisation is a much simpler exercise.