The explosive growth of the voluntary carbon market has raised concerns about carbon-reduction claims lacking clarity or being misleading. To address this, several refined claims frameworks have emerged to provide transparency and increase credibility.
The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI) framework offers a robust approach to carbon claims. It requires companies to commit to a Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi)-approved net-zero reduction pathway and invest in higher-quality compensation projects. The framework emphasizes transparency, verification, and genuine emissions-reduction efforts.
The Gold Standard’s approach goes a step further by incorporating a commitment to global net-zero emissions. It challenges companies to consider their carbon impact in the broader context of achieving global climate goals. The Gold Standard framework encourages companies to address historical emissions, set an internal price on carbon, engage in policy advocacy, invest in cutting-edge technologies, and collaborate across industries.
South Pole’s approach emphasizes “Funding Climate Action” by companies to contribute to climate action beyond their value chain using high-quality, verified mitigation contributions. This approach avoids potential double counting and aligns with the Paris Agreement. The South Pole approach also provides a simple way for companies to communicate their emissions-reduction efforts through the “Funding Climate Action” label, ensuring transparency.
These frameworks aim to increase the ambition of corporate action, provide funding for ecosystem protection and restoration, and meet the urgent need for transparent and genuine contributions to the global climate challenge.
While these approaches represent the latest efforts to authenticate corporate climate claims, more refinements are expected. The SBTi will update its carbon-credit claims guidance later this year, which will provide another solid framework for companies to consider.
Overall, these refined claims frameworks address concerns about the lack of clarity and potential misleading claims in the voluntary carbon market. They provide transparency, increase credibility, and inspire companies towards more ambitious climate goals.
Source link
