The Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), which was previously called the Voluntary Carbon Standard, is a system used to check if carbon credits are valid and can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Verra, an organization that certifies carbon credits, manages the VCS. As of 2024, more than 2,300 projects were registered under the VCS. These projects cover different areas, such as agriculture, forestry, energy, transportation, waste, and manufacturing. Together, these projects have created over 1.3 billion carbon credits, and more than 776 million of these credits have been used to balance out emissions.
Specific rules apply to REDD+ projects, which focus on protecting forests. Verra is widely used for certifying forest-related carbon credits in the voluntary market and for most REDD+ projects. The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market lists Verra’s VCS as a program that meets certain quality standards for carbon credits.
Verra was created in 2005 by Climate Wedge, a company that provided advice on carbon markets, and its partner Cheyne Capital. The first version of the Voluntary Carbon Standard (version 1.0) was designed to set quality standards for carbon credits that were not part of the Kyoto Protocol.
There are concerns about the VCS and how it is applied. In 2023, an investigation by The Guardian, Die Zeit, and SourceMaterial found that about 94% of rainforest carbon credits certified by Verra may not be effective in reducing emissions. The report suggested that these credits could even make climate change worse. In May 2023, the CEO of Verra, David Antonioli, stepped down from his position after facing criticism about how the organization handled carbon credits.
In June 2024, three carbon credit projects in the Brazilian Amazon were temporarily stopped after police raids targeted Verra-certified projects linked to illegal land use and logging activities.
Usage in voluntary carbon markets
Verra was created in 2005. It is a standard used by many people who want to reduce carbon emissions voluntarily. Verra provides specific ways to measure and manage projects related to REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation). By 2020, more than 1,500 projects had been officially approved under Verra. These projects covered areas such as energy, transportation, waste, forestry, and other industries. In 2021, Verra reported that 300 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂e) in offset credits were issued for 110 projects. Verra is the most commonly chosen program for forest-related credits in the voluntary carbon market, and it is used for nearly all REDD+ projects.
Development
In 2005, a company called Climate Wedge and its partner Cheyne Capital created the first version (version 1.0) of the Voluntary Carbon Standard. This standard was designed to set quality rules for trading and developing carbon credits that were not part of the Kyoto Protocol. These credits came from projects that reduced greenhouse gas emissions and met the quality and verification rules of the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). However, these projects were not eligible for CER credits because the CDM only allows projects in developing countries to earn these credits.
In March 2006, Climate Wedge and Cheyne Capital gave version 1.0 of the Voluntary Carbon Standard to The Climate Group, International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), and World Economic Forum. They also provided starting money for these groups to bring together global carbon market experts to improve the VCS requirements. Later, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) joined the effort. This team became the VCS Steering Committee and worked on creating later versions of the VCS Standard.
In 2008, the Board of Directors chose David Antonioli as the organization’s first chief executive officer. In 2009, the VCS became a non-profit organization based in Washington D.C.
On February 15, 2018, the group that manages the Verified Carbon Standard changed its name from Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) to Verra. The new name was chosen to show "verification" and "terra" (which means earth in Latin) and to reflect the group’s focus on verifying carbon reductions.
In May 2023, after months of criticism about how Verra handled carbon-offsetting projects, CEO David Antonioli resigned from his position.
Controversies
A 2021 study by The Guardian newspaper and Unearthed found problems with Verra's carbon offsetting standard. Projects that protect forests were using different methods to predict emissions reductions and claimed they reduced more emissions than they actually did. Out of 12 projects studied, 11 showed no difference in emissions compared to other groups. The study said these results made people question whether the carbon offsetting market is reliable.
In January 2023, an investigation by The Guardian, Die Zeit, and SourceMaterial, a non-profit journalism group, found that about 94% of rainforest carbon credits approved by Verra do not equal one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent. These credits make up about 40% of all credits Verra approved. The investigation also said the credit program might make global heating worse and that the risk of deforestation was overestimated by 400% on average. In one project in Peru, people reported being forced to leave their homes, which were later destroyed. The findings were based on one study by scientists from the University of Cambridge and another study by international researchers that had not yet been published or reviewed by experts.
In 2024, a Channel 4 documentary discussed these issues and included reports from Human Rights Watch about a Verra project in Cambodia where Indigenous people feared their homes and farmland might be destroyed by armed rangers.
In May 2024, a report by Mongabay, a Brazilian news outlet, found that two Verra-certified carbon credit projects in the Brazilian Amazon may be linked to illegal timber trading. After the report, Brazilian police searched three projects owned by Ricardo Stoppe, Brazil’s largest individual seller of carbon credits. Companies that use these projects include GOL Airlines, Nestlé, Toshiba, Spotify, Boeing, and PwC.
Forestry projects have faced more criticism for being unreliable as offset or credit programs. From 2021 to 2023, news stories criticized nature-based carbon offsets, the REDD+ program, and certification organizations. One report estimated that about 90% of rainforest offset credits under the Verified Carbon Standard might be "phantom credits," meaning they do not accurately represent real emissions reductions.
Tree planting projects have also had problems. Trees take many decades to grow fully, making it hard to know how long the forest will remain intact. Forests may be cleared, burned, or mismanaged. Some projects use fast-growing plants that are not native to the area, which can harm local forests and reduce biodiversity. Some certification standards now require planting multiple types of trees to address this. Planting trees in high latitude forests might actually increase Earth’s warming because the trees absorb sunlight, which can balance out their ability to absorb carbon dioxide. Tree-planting projects can also cause conflicts with local communities and Indigenous people if the projects prevent them from using forest resources.