Ensuring environmental integrity of voluntary carbon market claims: understanding and framing VCM contribution claims

The notion of Contribution claims in voluntary carbon markets (VCM) is a relatively novel concept that builds on but differs materially from existing offsetting claims by veering away from the element of ‘counterbalancing’. Since 2016 several organizations have proposed the use of Contributions as a new framing for the VCM, where investments in mitigation outside a company’s value chain contribute to global GHG mitigation as opposed to simply balancing out a company’s GHG emissions. By replacing the zero-sum notion of offsetting, proponents of Contributions contend that these offer a more accurate climate impact claim for VCM buyers, considerably reducing the risk of greenwashing and legal action. This paper examines emerging proposals for the use of climate Contributions by conducting a systematic review of both academic and gray literature associated with Contributions. It finds that while Contribution proposals converge on the final use case – that claimed mitigation outcomes should not be used for counterbalancing unabated emissions within a company’s value chain – they differ on several other aspects, notably on their: (i) relation to the main beneficiary of headline claims; (ii) approaches to a corporate’s responsibility for value chain emissions; and (iii) nuances associated with quantifiability, certainty, and tradability of Contributions. In attempt to prevent further fragmentation of this promising model, this paper proposes a systematic application of Contribution claims under the uniform framing of ‘Contributions to global GHG mitigation’. With corporate offsetting claims often being linked to greenwashing, Contribution claims are gaining momentum with several Voluntary Carbon Market participants beginning to test such claims in the context of corporate climate targets.The use of Contribution claims avoids misguiding representation of GHG benefits and complex GHG accounting issues. It conveys a more systemic approach to mitigation actions outside value chains.Until now there is no coherent and agreed definition of Contributions or Contribution claims. Differences in interpretation on scope, nuance, and application cause confusion and further fragmentation of Voluntary Carbon Markets.A more coherent and integrated approach for framing Contributions is needed. We propose ‘Contributions to global GHG mitigation’ as a uniform headline claim that enables a range of legitimate ways to support climate actions and firmly places the global climate as the beneficiary of these actions. With corporate offsetting claims often being linked to greenwashing, Contribution claims are gaining momentum with several Voluntary Carbon Market participants beginning to test such claims in the context of corporate climate targets. The use of Contribution claims avoids misguiding representation of GHG benefits and complex GHG accounting issues. It conveys a more systemic approach to mitigation actions outside value chains. Until now there is no coherent and agreed definition of Contributions or Contribution claims. Differences in interpretation on scope, nuance, and application cause confusion and further fragmentation of Voluntary Carbon Markets. A more coherent and integrated approach for framing Contributions is needed. We propose ‘Contributions to global GHG mitigation’ as a uniform headline claim that enables a range of legitimate ways to support climate actions and firmly places the global climate as the beneficiary of these actions.