As global pressure to meet carbon neutrality goals intensifies, so do the strategies to reduce and offset emissions.
Among these, carbon credits play a central role—especially in the voluntary market. These credits represent the reduction or removal of one metric ton of CO₂ (or equivalent), allowing companies and individuals to offset unavoidable emissions by supporting certified environmental projects.
The logic is straightforward: those who emit more can balance their impact by purchasing credits generated by those who protect, regenerate, or avoid emissions. But as the market expands, so does the demand for trustworthy, transparent, and measurable mechanisms.
That’s where voluntary carbon market platforms come in—entities that certify and guarantee the environmental and social integrity of projects.
Voluntary vs. Regulated Markets
Before diving into the platforms, it’s important to distinguish two separate paths. The regulated market—such as the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)—operates under legal frameworks and imposes mandatory emission limits on specific sectors.
The voluntary market is more flexible, allowing any organisation or individual to offset part of their footprint voluntarily by purchasing credits linked to certified projects.
While the regulated market deals in emission allowances, the voluntary market trades in carbon credits. Both represent a ton of CO₂, but they differ in origin and purpose. In both cases, the goal is the same: reduce climate impact and promote responsible behaviour.
Trust is Everything: The Role of Certification Platforms
In a time when the risk of greenwashing is high, choosing a credible certification platform is critical. These organisations define standards, verification methods, and quality criteria that determine the credibility of each issued credit.
Among the many options in the market, four platforms stand out for their different approaches and international recognition: Verra, Gold Standard, Plan Vivo, and Planetary Carbon Standard (PCS).
Verra is the most widely used platform worldwide. Founded in 2007, it operates the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) and certifies projects in forestry, renewable energy, waste management, and agriculture. It is known for its technical rigor, independent audits, and strong focus on additionality, permanence, and traceability.
Gold Standard, launched in 2003 with the support of organisations like WWF, links carbon offsetting to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Its criteria go beyond emissions reductions and require projects to demonstrate measurable social and economic co-benefits.
Plan Vivo offers a unique, community-based approach. It focuses on small-scale projects—such as agroforestry or regenerative agriculture—and is known for active local participation and context-sensitive methodologies.
The most recent of the four, Planetary Carbon Standard (PCS), takes a technology-driven approach. Founded in 2021, it uses sensors, satellites, and blockchain to ensure real-time digital traceability, with interactive dashboards and full transparency. It represents a new model that merges climate offsetting with decentralised innovation.
How to Choose the Right Platform?
The answer depends on your project’s goals and nature:
-
- Verra is ideal for companies aiming to scale quickly and seeking a globally recognised certification. With over 1.3 billion credits issued, it is the market leader.
-
- Gold Standard is best for those who want to ensure that carbon offsetting also leads to positive social outcomes. It’s a benchmark for integrating the SDGs into environmental projects.
-
- Plan Vivo is a good choice for those working on community-based projects and looking for close monitoring with visible impact on local populations.
-
- PCS suits organisations that value innovation, real-time data, and full transparency. Its tech-driven model is particularly attractive for startups and digital initiatives.
| Platform | Verra (VCS) | Gold Standard | Plan Vivo | Planetary Carbon Standard (PCS) |
| Year Founded | 2007 | 2003 | 2008 | 2021 |
| Project Focus | Forestry, energy, waste, agriculture | Energy, water, forests, health | Agroforestry, community-based projects | Reforestation, soil, carbon capture |
| Key Criteria | Additionality, permanence, independent audits | Emission reduction + SDG social impact | Local participation, accessible methods | Real-time digital traceability, transparency |
| Verification | Independent technical audits | External audits on environmental and social indicators | Periodic validation of local estimates | Sensors, satellites, blockchain dashboards |
|
Scale (M: million) |
1300 M ton CO2eq reduced/removed | 407 M ton CO2eq reduced/removed | 2.02 M ton CO₂eq reduced/removed | 8.6 M ton CO2eq reduced/removed |
| Reputation | Global market leader | Benchmark for sustainability and co-benefits | Niche, trusted in community-scale action | Emerging, tech-driven and transparent |
Beyond Offsetting: Building Trust
Carbon offsetting should not be seen as an end in itself.
It is one of several tools available to support climate transition, but it will only be effective if based on strict criteria, independent verification, and real impact. Choosing the right platform is, therefore, a strategic decision.
In a world where consumers demand authenticity, investors expect responsibility, and the planet cannot wait, ensuring that each carbon credit is more than just a number—but a true commitment—is essential.
Between reputation, social impact, scalability, or digital innovation, each organisation can find the platform that best matches its climate ambition.
Excerpt written by Beatriz Santos
*Cover Photo by Roger Starnes Sr na Unsplash
