From Offsetting to Contribution: Redefining Corporate Responsibility in Carbon Markets

Sahul Sunbird

27-10-2025

First, for birds immersed in all sorts of disputes, over millennia, making too much noise, Zhuang teaches:
“Birds don’t argue about the sky. They fly.”

In Kingfisherish Wandering [1]

© Wix

In the growing market for voluntary carbon credits, companies have long purchased carbon offsets to claim climate neutrality. However, this “offsetting” logic—where emissions are counterbalanced by external projects—has increasingly been criticized for misleading consumers and enabling greenwashing [2-4]. A new study by Chagas, Streck, and Trouwloon [5] in Climate Policy examines an emerging alternative: Contribution claims, which emphasize genuine support for global greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation rather than symbolic compensation.

Unlike traditional offsetting, Contribution claims detach corporate responsibility from the illusion of net-zero by transaction. Instead of buying credits to erase emissions on paper, companies make non-compensatory investments in projects that advance mitigation globally—such as supporting renewable energy, forest restoration, or breakthrough climate technologies. The study identifies two main approaches:

• Credit-based Contributions, which use measurable carbon units without claiming direct equivalence to company emissions.

• Non-credit Contributions, encompassing broader support like advocacy, policy funding, or innovation in climate solutions.

By systematically reviewing 17 existing proposals, the authors find broad agreement that Contributions offer a more credible framework to align private finance with public climate goals. Yet they also highlight fragmentation in interpretation—over who the main beneficiary is, how corporate responsibility should be framed, and whether claims should be tradable or merely reported [5].

To prevent misuse, the study proposes a uniform framing: “Contributions to global GHG mitigation.” This umbrella claim ensures that the planet, not the company, is the ultimate beneficiary. It distinguishes between direct (quantifiable) and indirect (transformative) mitigation actions and emphasizes transparency through reporting rather than compensatory accounting.

This paradigm shift resonates with the concept of Nature Quotient (NQ)—the capacity to act with awareness of humanity’s embeddedness within nature. By reframing carbon markets around contribution rather than compensation, corporations move toward a relational, peaceful coexistence with nature [6,7]. This approach cultivates societal values of responsibility, humility, and reciprocity, redefining climate action not as transactional guilt management but as an act of stewardship [8]. In this sense, Contribution claims represent an evolution in collective environmental consciousness—a necessary step for achieving both ecological and social peace.

References

[1] Nguyen MH. (2025). Kingfisherish Wandering. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FVLLLXNW/

[2] Battocletti V, Enriques L, Romano A. (2023). The voluntary carbon market: Market failures and policy implications. SSRN Electronic Journal, 95(3), 519. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4380899

[3] Probst B, et al. (2023). Systematic review of the actual emissions reductions of carbon offset projects across all major sectors. https://doi.org/10.3929/ETHZ-B-000620307 

[4] Trouwloon D, et al. (2023). Understanding the use of carbon credits by companies: A review of the defining elements of corporate climate claims. Global Challenges, 7(4), 2200158. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.202200158

[5] Chagas T, Streck C, Trouwloon D. (2025). Ensuring environmental integrity of voluntary carbon market claims: understanding and framing VCM contribution claims. Climate Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2025.2557234

[6] Vuong QH, Nguyen MH. (2025). On Nature Quotient. Pacific Conservation Biology, 31, PC25028. https://doi.org/10.1071/PC25028

[7] Tran TT. (2025). Flying beyond didacticism: The creative environmental vision of ‘Wild Wise Weird’. Young Voices of Science. https://youngvoicesofscience.org/?p=1963

[8] Vuong QH, La VP, Nguyen MH. (2025). Informational entropy-based value formation: A new paradigm for a deeper understanding of value. Evaluation Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X251396210