Why Forests Are Climate Infrastructure, and How We Make Sure Forest Projects Work

Forests cover roughly a third of the Earth's land surface. Protecting them ranks among the most powerful climate levers we have, alongside the energy transition, not behind it. Here's why, and how the industry makes sure forest carbon projects deliver what they promise.

What forests do for the climate

They're a massive carbon sink. Trees absorb CO₂ through photosynthesis and lock it away in trunks, roots, and soil for decades or centuries. When a forest is cut down or burned, most of that carbon returns to the atmosphere.

They regulate rainfall and local climate. Forests release moisture that fuels rainfall patterns far beyond their own borders. The Amazon generates so much of its own rainfall that large-scale deforestation risks tipping parts of the rainforest into permanent drought, a cycle that would release enormous amounts of stored carbon.

They protect biodiversity ecosystems depend on. More species live in forests than in any other land ecosystem on Earth. Losing forest cover collapses the habitat that regulates pests, pollinates crops, and keeps ecosystems resilient to drought and disease.

They support the people who live in and around them. Millions of people, including many Indigenous communities, depend directly on forests for food, water, medicine, and income. Well-designed forest protection projects fund alternative livelihoods, like sustainable agroforestry or eco-tourism, so protecting the forest also means investing in the people who protect it every day.

Halting deforestation and restoring degraded forest could deliver a substantial share of the emissions reductions the world needs this decade. That's why forest carbon projects make up such a major part of the voluntary carbon market.

Not all forest credits are equal

Forest carbon projects have drawn the most scrutiny in the carbon market. Investigations in recent years found real problems: some projects overstated how much deforestation they prevented, or claimed credit for protecting forest that was never seriously at risk. That scrutiny pushed the industry toward stricter standards, more independent oversight, and closer monitoring of whether projects deliver what they claim.

The standards and certifications behind a project matter as much as the project itself.

REDD+: the framework behind most forest protection credits

REDD+ stands for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation, plus the conservation of forest carbon stocks, sustainable forest management, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. It started as a United Nations framework and now underpins most forest-protection carbon credits worldwide.

A REDD+ project compares what would have happened to a forest without protection (the deforestation baseline) against what actually happens once the project gets funded and enforced. The gap, the deforestation prevented, is what gets certified and sold as carbon credits.

That baseline calculation is where most REDD+ controversies started, so the methodology has changed. Verra's newer REDD+ methodology uses conservative, jurisdiction-wide deforestation data instead of letting individual projects set their own baselines, closing a loophole that let some projects claim inflated impact.

The standards, and how our Amazon project meets them

Our Amazon rainforest project in Peru protects over 580,000 hectares of rainforest, plants new trees while respecting existing biodiversity, and creates local jobs through Fairtrade cacao farming. Protecting the forest also means investing in the people living in it.

REDD+ measures the deforestation that would have happened without protection against what actually happens once a project is funded and enforced. That's why a project like ours can claim a specific, verified number of hectares protected instead of a vague promise.

Verra (VCS) certifies most REDD+ projects worldwide, including ours. Every credit issued represents one independently verified tonne of CO₂, audited by an accredited third party before it can be sold.

Gold Standard and Plan Vivo are the other two major standards. Gold Standard, co-founded with WWF, adds stricter requirements for verified community and biodiversity co-benefits. Plan Vivo focuses on community-led, smallholder forestry. Our Sierra Leone and Eritrea projects carry Gold Standard certification, the same rigor applied to a different project type.

CCB certification (Climate, Community & Biodiversity) layers on top of Verra projects to verify co-benefits: jobs, community income, biodiversity protection, not just the carbon math. This is the layer behind claims like "creates jobs for local farmers."

ICVCM Core Carbon Principles (CCP) is the newest layer, introduced after years of scrutiny exposed weak projects across the industry. It's an independent quality benchmark sitting on top of existing standards. A methodology earns it only after separate, independent review.

Why this matters

You can download the certification report for our Amazon project yourself. These standards turn "we're protecting a forest" into a claim you can check, hectare by hectare and tonne by tonne.

Sources

• Regreener — The 5 Best REDD+ Carbon Credits of 2026
• Regreener — The 5 Best Forest Carbon Credit Types of 2026
• Regreener — The 5 Best Verra (VCS) Carbon Credit Projects of 2026
• Regreener — The 5 Best CCP-labeled Carbon Credits of 2026
• Senken — The Buyer's Guide to REDD+: How to Assess, Buy, and Use REDD+ Carbon Credits
• Evertreen — Verra vs Gold Standard: Which Carbon Certification Should You Choose?
• OPIS — Project REDD+ Struggles Amid Quality Push: Future of Voluntary Carbon Credits
• Verra — verra.org