4 OUT OF 5 WORKED: WHY THE IMPACT OF FOREST CARBON CREDITS IS STILL CREDIBLE

Carbon credits have played a vital role in protecting tropical forests from the Congo Basin to the Amazon — despite evidence that many were significantly oversold.

A recent University of Cambridge study examining REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) projects found that nearly 11 times more carbon credits were issued than could be justified. However, despite flaws in carbon accounting and accreditation methodologies, 4 out of 5 REDD+ projects still delivered measurable conservation benefits and helped reduce deforestation.

The findings come at a critical moment for voluntary carbon markets, which have fallen sharply from their 2022 peak of approximately $2 billion following growing scrutiny over credit quality and verification standards, leaving many with a negative opinion on the carbon credit scheme in its entirety. 

Importantly, researchers and climate experts are not calling for carbon credit systems to be abandoned. Co-author of this study, Professor Julias Jones of Bangor University, maintains that bad credits do not equal bad projects- the impact is credible, despite the financial aspect being flawed. Instead, the focus is shifting toward stronger governance, higher integrity standards, improved transparency, and more accurate pricing mechanisms.

Credible climate finance is particularly relevant for emerging markets and smaller economies such as  Armenia, where access to legitimate and reliable information could play a vital role in supporting reforestation, renewable energy, and long-term environmental resilience. 

Protecting tropical forests remains one of the most effective nature-based climate solutions available today. The challenge now is ensuring that future climate finance delivers a credible and lasting environmental impact.