Why a carbon credit strategy is not a one-time decision, and how to build the governance to keep it on track
Director of Sustainability Marketing
7 min read
Introduction
Building a corporate carbon credit strategy takes real effort, the work doesn’t stop once it’s in place. A carbon credit strategy review should be a regular fixture in your ongoing approach to sustainability and climate action.
Why static carbon credit strategies fail
A carbon credit strategy that is designed once and left unchanged will not hold up. The voluntary carbon market is one of the fastest-moving areas of corporate sustainability. Standards are updated frequently, disclosure expectations change, prices move. At the same time, your own emissions profile evolves as your decarbonisation programme progresses. A strategy that was well-designed in 2023 may need meaningful revision by 2026, not because it was wrong, but because the landscape it was designed for has moved on.
Businesses that treat their carbon credit strategy as a fixed document (something to build once and revisit only when forced to) tend to find themselves in one of two positions. Either they are using credits that no longer meet current best practice, or they are missing the opportunity to build the kind of long-term portfolio that reflects where the market is heading. Neither is a good place to be.
The good news is that building adaptability into your strategy is not complicated. It requires a governance structure, a review cadence, and a clear view of the trends that are most likely to shape the market over the next five years.
The OER signal
The most significant structural change on the horizon for corporate carbon credit strategies is the expected publication of the SBTi's V2 Corporate Net-Zero Standard later in 2026. The draft standard, published for consultation in late 2025, proposes a new framework called Ongoing Emissions Responsibility (OER) which would supersede the current BVCM guidance.
The specifics are still being finalised and may change before the standard is adopted. But the direction is clear: businesses will be expected to take explicit, ongoing responsibility for their unabated emissions through a combination of quantified mitigation contributions and broader climate finance contributions. We will publish updated guidance when the new standard is confirmed. In the meantime, businesses that have built structured, well-documented BVCM strategies are in a much stronger position to adapt than those starting from scratch.
The removal shift
One of the most predictable and consequential changes in the carbon credit market over the coming years is the continued shift in portfolio composition towards carbon removals. The Oxford Principles are explicit about this. By the net-zero target date, residual emissions should be neutralised using carbon removals with durable storage, not avoidance credits.
We’re seeing the market move in this direction already. Demand for removal credits, particularly those with high durability, is increasing faster than supply. Prices for high-quality removal credits have been rising, and the gap between removal credits and avoidance credits in terms of both cost and scrutiny is widening.
A strategy that was appropriate a few years ago - perhaps one weighted heavily towards avoidance credits with a small proportion of removals - will need to evolve significantly by the end of the decade. Businesses that are planning that transition now, building supplier relationships and forward contracts for removal credits, will be in a materially better position than those that wait until the transition is forced upon them.
Price divergence
The voluntary carbon market has undergone significant repricing in recent years. The collapse of credit prices for low-quality projects, driven by increased scrutiny and high-profile scandals, has happened alongside rising prices for high-integrity credits from credible projects with strong ratings agency assessments.
This divergence is likely to continue. Businesses that built their carbon credit strategy around the availability of cheap credits will find the market increasingly inhospitable. The credits that genuinely meet current best practice standards cost more, and that cost is going to increase further as demand rises and supply of high-quality projects remains constrained.
If your strategy does not account for this trajectory in budget planning, supplier relationships and portfolio composition, your company is likely to face carbon-credit-related financial surprises in years to come.
What trends will shape 2026-2030
Understanding the specific dynamics likely to define the next phase of the voluntary carbon market helps businesses make better decisions today about which credits to buy, how to structure contracts, and how to build a governance process that keeps pace with change.
Durability demand
The single most significant portfolio trend over the coming years is the increasing premium on carbon removals with durable storage. Category V credits (biochar, direct air capture with geological storage, enhanced rock weathering) store carbon for hundreds or thousands of years rather than the decades associated with nature-based removals. They are significantly more expensive than most avoidance credits, and more expensive than shorter-lived removals, but they are what the Oxford Principles' end state requires.
The practical implication for businesses is that portfolio planning needs to include a trajectory for increasing durability over time. Your portfolio should gradually increase its proportion of removals while also progressively shifting towards the most durable storage types as the net-zero target date approaches. Building that into your strategy now, rather than treating durability as a future problem, is both better climate practice and better risk management.
Long-term contracting
As the supply of high-quality credits (particularly removal credits) becomes more constrained relative to demand, the spot market is increasingly not the right place to source them. Forward contracts and offtake agreements, which lock in supply and price for future delivery, are becoming a more important tool for businesses with serious long-term carbon credit strategies.
Long-term contracting carries its own risks (such as delivery risk), but for businesses that are confident in their net-zero trajectory and their credit quality standards, the supply security and price certainty it offers is increasingly valuable. Businesses that are still buying entirely on the spot market in 2030 will find themselves competing for a shrinking pool of high-quality credits at elevated prices.
Pricing increase
The trajectory for high-quality carbon credit pricing is upward. This follows directly from the combination of increasing demand, constrained supply of credible projects, rising costs for more durable removal technologies, and the expected tightening of standards under frameworks like the V2 SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard.
For businesses doing their financial planning, this means that a science-based carbon price set today is not a fixed cost. It needs to be reviewed regularly against market conditions, and budget planning should include realistic assumptions about how the cost of a credible carbon credit portfolio is likely to change over the medium term.
Stronger transparency expectations
Across carbon credit frameworks and the emerging climate-related regulatory landscape, expectations around disclosure are increasing. Annual greenhouse gas inventories, third-party verification of emissions data, public retirement records for carbon credits, and transparent disclosure of portfolio composition are becoming baseline expectations rather than markers of leadership.
Businesses that have not yet built robust measurement and disclosure processes into their sustainability programmes will face increasing pressure to do so. Those that have will find it easier to adapt as specific requirements evolve.
How to build adaptive governance
A carbon credit strategy that can evolve requires deliberate governance. This looks like a set of processes and accountabilities that ensure the strategy is regularly reviewed, updated in response to market and standards changes, and connected to the financial planning and operational decision-making of the business.
Annual review
At minimum, your carbon credit strategy should be formally reviewed once a year. That review should cover several things:
whether your emissions measurement is up to date and accurate;
whether your reduction targets remain on track and your decarbonisation plan is being delivered;
whether the carbon credits in your portfolio still meet current best practice standards;
whether your science-based carbon price remains appropriate given market conditions; and
whether your portfolio composition is on the right trajectory in line with the Oxford Principles.
This review should be a structured process with clear ownership, not an informal discussion. It should produce documented outputs, including updated portfolio plans, budget revisions, supplier assessments, that feed into your broader sustainability reporting and financial planning.
Market monitoring
Between annual reviews, someone in your organisation needs to be tracking relevant market developments. This does not need to be a full-time function for most businesses, but it does need to be someone's explicit responsibility. Relevant developments to monitor include ratings agency assessments of credits in your portfolio, changes to standards and methodologies from bodies like the ICVCM and SBTi, price movements for key credit types, and emerging regulatory requirements in your operating jurisdictions.
For many businesses, the most practical way to stay current is through a trusted supplier partner (like Ecologi) who is tracking these developments professionally and can flag material changes as they happen. That is one of the things a good long-term relationship with a carbon credit partner should provide.
Portfolio rebalancing
As your annual review identifies gaps or changes in best practice, your portfolio will need to be adjusted. This might mean shifting the balance between credit types, retiring credits from projects that no longer meet quality standards, adding new project types to reflect changing guidance on portfolio composition, or adjusting the split between Goal 1 and Goal 2 activities as your decarbonisation trajectory evolves.
Portfolio rebalancing should be treated as a planned, routine activity rather than a reactive one. Businesses that rebalance annually in response to a structured review process are in a very different position from those that only change their portfolio when a problem forces them to.
The risks of not evolving
Obsolescence
A carbon credit strategy built around the standards and credit types of 2020 or 2021 is increasingly likely to be out of alignment with current best practice. Credits that were considered acceptable a few years ago have been downgraded or scrutinised more heavily by ratings agencies, and methodologies that were widely used have been revised.
Businesses whose strategies have not kept pace with these changes are holding positions that may not be defensible to investors, auditors or regulators, even if they were entirely reasonable when the strategy was first developed. The voluntary carbon market moves quickly, and standing still is a form of falling behind.
Misalignment with frameworks
As the SBTi, VCMI, Oxford Principles and other frameworks continue to evolve, strategies that were aligned with earlier versions of guidance may no longer meet the requirements of current standards. This creates risk in two directions: it may invalidate claims that were previously supportable, and it may mean that contracts or commitments entered into under earlier guidance need to be unwound or renegotiated at cost.
Staying current with framework developments is good practice, but it also provides protection against the specific risk of finding that your strategy, even though it may have been built in good faith against previous guidance, no longer qualifies under the standards your investors and customers are using to assess you.
Financial shock
Businesses that have not planned for the trajectory of carbon credit pricing face the prospect of significant budget surprises. If your current BVCM budget is based on the assumption that credit prices will remain at current levels, and a significant proportion of that budget is in avoidance credits that are due to transition towards more expensive removal credits, the financial exposure can be substantial.
Proactive budget planning that includes realistic assumptions about price trajectories, portfolio evolution costs, and the likely requirements of emerging standards converts that exposure into a manageable, planned cost. Reactive budget planning (adjusting only when the market forces you to) tends to be more expensive and more disruptive.
What this means for your strategy next
Building a carbon credit strategy that holds up over time is not about predicting exactly how the market will evolve, but rather about building the governance, the supplier relationships, and the internal processes to respond well as it does.
Review your strategy annually. Monitor the market between reviews. Plan your portfolio trajectory in line with the Oxford Principles. Build realistic assumptions about price into your financial planning. And work with partners who are invested in keeping you current.
A carbon credit strategy that evolves with the market is one that continues to deliver genuine climate impact and genuine business value over the long term - and one that holds up to the scrutiny that is only going to increase in the years ahead.
Work with Ecologi
Keeping a carbon credit strategy aligned with evolving standards, market conditions and your own decarbonisation trajectory requires ongoing expertise and attention. Ecologi works with businesses not just to design strategies but to review and evolve them over time - tracking market developments, assessing portfolio quality, and helping organisations stay ahead of the changes that matter.
If you want a long-term partner for your carbon credit strategy rather than a one-off transaction, speak to one of our climate experts to get started.