What you say about your climate action matters. Here’s how to get it right.
Director of Sustainability Marketing
7 min read
Why communicating carbon credit claims brings higher risk than ever
The environment around corporate carbon credit claims has changed substantially in recent years. Scrutiny from regulators, journalists, campaign groups and investors has intensified. Greenwashing enforcement is increasing across multiple jurisdictions. And at the same time, a growing number of businesses are choosing to say nothing at all about their climate action for fear of getting it wrong - a phenomenon known as greenhushing, which carries its own reputational and commercial costs.
Overclaiming is not a productive climate communications strategy, but neither is silence. What businesses need is a clear, grounded approach to communicating carbon credit claims: one that is accurate, transparent, and defensible under scrutiny.
The regulatory landscape is tightening
In the UK, the Green Claims Code sets out clear expectations for how environmental claims should be made. Claims must be truthful and accurate, clear and unambiguous, and substantiated with reliable evidence. Misleading or unsubstantiated green claims are not just a reputational risk; they are a potential consumer protection issue.
The UK's Advertising Standards Authority also plays a role in regulating how climate and sustainability claims are made in advertising and marketing materials. In the EU, the proposed Green Claims Directive would take this further, requiring third-party verification of environmental claims before they are made public. For businesses operating across both markets, or with ambitions to do so, understanding both frameworks is essential.
Both reflect the same underlying trend: stakeholders expect businesses to be able to show their working. Aspirational language and broad environmental associations are not sufficient.
Litigation exposure is real
Greenwashing litigation is no longer confined to large multinationals. Smaller businesses making unsubstantiated carbon claims face genuine legal risk as the frameworks for challenging those claims become more accessible. The cost of getting this wrong - financially, reputationally, and in terms of management time - significantly outweighs the short-term marketing benefit of an overclaimed position.
The safest and most effective approach is to let your actions dictate your claims, not the other way around.
What counts as a carbon credit claim
Before thinking about how to communicate, it is worth being clear about what kinds of claim your carbon credit activity actually supports, and what it does not.
The VCMI framework for carbon credit claims
The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI) provides the most widely recognised framework for communicating tonne-for-tonne carbon credit activity credibly. Their Claims Code of Practice sets out three tiers of Carbon Integrity Claims, each linked to the proportion of unabated emissions matched through high-quality carbon credits:
–> VCMI Silver applies when a business has matched between 10% and 50% of its unabated emissions with high-quality credits.
–> VCMI Gold applies at 50-99%.
–> VCMI Platinum applies at 100% or more.
All three tiers require the business to have publicly disclosed an annual greenhouse gas inventory, set and publicly disclosed science-aligned near-term reduction targets, demonstrated progress on those targets, and obtained independent third-party assurance through the VCMI's Monitoring, Reporting & Assurance (MRA) Framework. The credits themselves must meet ICVCM Core Carbon Principles and be retired publicly in the company's name.
These are specific, verifiable claims - and that specificity is exactly what makes them credible.
ISO 14068 and carbon neutrality
"Carbon neutral" is a term with a formal definition. Under ISO 14068, claiming carbon neutrality requires third-party certification against that standard - a process that involves measuring all relevant emissions, demonstrating genuine reduction efforts, and using carbon credits to address what remains. Simply measuring your emissions and buying credits on a tonne-for-tonne basis does not entitle you to make a carbon neutrality claim.
Using this term without certification creates direct exposure to greenwashing accusations. If you are aiming towards carbon neutrality as a milestone on the way to net zero, the appropriate approach is to say that clearly. Describe your progress and what remains, rather than claiming a status you have not yet certified.
Net-zero claims and the SBTi boundary
"Net-zero" is even more tightly defined. Under the SBTi's Corporate Net-Zero Standard (V2 draft currently in review – read our response here), a business can only claim net-zero status once it has achieved more than 90% emissions reductions across all scopes, with residual emissions neutralised using durable carbon removals. Very few businesses can credibly make this claim in 2026.
This does not mean the journey towards net-zero cannot be communicated. It means the language needs to be accurate: "working towards net-zero", "committed to net-zero by 2040", or "aligned with a 1.5°C pathway" are all defensible framings for a business with a validated science-based target and a credible reduction plan. Claiming net-zero as an achieved status without meeting the SBTi's criteria is a significant greenwashing risk.
Getting claims independently verified
Whatever claims your business intends to make, independent third-party verification is what transforms an internal assertion into a substantiated, defensible claim.
Verification bodies such as Carbonology who are one of our Ecologi partners, support businesses through this process, providing independent assurance of the underlying emissions data, methodology and credit retirement records needed to substantiate claims credibly. In a landscape where regulators and investors are increasingly expecting assurance rather than self-declaration, having a recognised third party verify your position is both a risk management measure and a signal of genuine transparency.
How to communicate carbon credit claims safely
Let actions dictate claims
The most important principle is to start from what you have actually done, not from the claim you want to make. Businesses that begin with a desired marketing position and work backwards to find evidence to support it are the ones that end up in trouble.
Follow the steps in the right order: measure your emissions, set science-based targets, reduce what you can, fund high-quality climate solutions for what remains, and then communicate what you have done clearly and honestly. It’s possible that the claims you desire to make may be part of the initial strategy discussion for your climate action, but they can’t be reverse-engineered. Take action first, and then make the claim.
Use descriptive, specific language
Regulators are targeting vague environmental language like eco-friendly, planet-positive, and climate-conscious. The Green Claims Code is explicit that claims must be clear and unambiguous, and must not omit important information.
Specific, descriptive language is both more credible and more interesting to your audience. Instead of saying "we are committed to the planet" and leaving it at that, explain the action you’ve taken. Consider something like: "In 2024, our total Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions were 101 tonnes. We applied a science-based carbon price of £50 per tonne to fund our BVCM strategy, achieving VCMI Platinum status through 100% tonne-for-tonne mitigation with high-quality carbon credits. The remaining budget was directed to a Forests and Landscapes Impact Fund supporting restoration and rewilding projects globally. Full project details and credit retirement receipts are disclosed here."
That kind of disclosure minimises risk, but it’s also more compelling to the investors, procurement teams and customers who are reading it carefully.
Retirement transparency
Credits must be retired publicly on the relevant registry in your company's name, with your organisation listed as the beneficial owner or using entity. Without this, any claim you make against those credits is unsubstantiated. This is a basic requirement of VCMI alignment, and it is also the practical mechanism that allows third parties to verify your claims.
Retirement records should be linked from your sustainability disclosures. Do not assume that because you have retired credits internally, the evidence is accessible. Transparency means making it easy for anyone to check.
Avoid neutrality shortcuts
It is tempting to reach for shorthand or easy labels like carbon-neutral delivery or net-zero event as a way to communicate climate credentials quickly in marketing contexts. These phrases are almost always either uncertified or misleading, and they are exactly the kind of claim that draws regulatory and media scrutiny.
If you have not certified against ISO 14068, you cannot claim carbon neutrality. If you have not met the SBTi's net-zero criteria, you cannot claim net-zero status. The instinct to simplify is understandable, but the cost of an indefensible shortcut is disproportionate to the marketing benefit.
How the University of Derby got this right
The University of Derby's new Cavendish Building presented a challenge that many organisations face in a different form: how do you build something new without undermining your climate commitments?
Their response was to apply a £70-per-tonne internal carbon fee before breaking ground, making emissions reduction commercially smart from the outset rather than treating it as an afterthought. The result was a series of genuine design innovations: post-tensioning technology that reduced concrete volume without compromising structural strength, low-carbon cement alternatives, and recycled materials throughout. The structural frame (typically the most carbon-intensive element of a construction project) was redesigned from first principles.
For the residual embodied carbon that could not be eliminated, the University worked with Ecologi to build an Oxford Principles-aligned carbon credit portfolio alongside a Transition Fund supporting local peatland restoration in the Peak District. This approach was aligned with UKGBC guidance, which enabled the building to achieve net-zero embodied carbon status.
The importance of that alignment was not lost on the team. As Jaime Oliver, Senior Sustainability Consultant at CPW, put it: "We were very keen not to be seen as greenwashing, or making claims that we couldn't back up. Ecologi impressed us in their approach, their transparency, and the portfolio of projects."
Climate action followed by credible claims worked for the University of Derby, and it can work for your company too.
The risks of overstatement or silence
Reputation and investor trust
Overclaimed carbon positions are increasingly visible. Ratings agencies, journalists and NGOs are actively scrutinising corporate climate claims against disclosed emissions data and credit retirement records. Businesses that have made claims that cannot be substantiated face the prospect of public correction, which is damaging in proportion to the prominence of the original claim.
Investor trust is equally at stake. ESG-focused investors use sustainability disclosures as a signal of governance quality, so inaccurate or inflated climate claims can become a governance red flag.
Regulatory action
The Competition and Markets Authority has made clear that green claims are a priority enforcement area. Several investigations and rulings in recent years have resulted in significant reputational damage and required businesses to withdraw claims and issue corrections. As the regulatory environment continues to tighten, the exposure for businesses making unsubstantiated claims will likely only increase.
The cost of greenhushing
Saying nothing is not a neutral position. Businesses that have done genuine work on their emissions and climate investments but choose not to communicate it are forfeiting the commercial and reputational benefits of that work. They are also ceding ground to competitors who are communicating credibly.
The answer to greenwashing risk is not silence, but accurate, transparent, well-evidenced communication. Getting this right is both a risk management exercise and a competitive one.
What this means for your strategy next
Communicating carbon credit claims credibly requires the same discipline as building the strategy itself: start from the evidence, use accurate language, make the verification trail easy to follow, and be honest about what is work in progress.
Bring your sustainability, legal and marketing teams together to review any climate claims before they are published. What a sustainability professional understands by "carbon neutral" and what a marketing team writes on a product label may be very different things. Alignment across those functions is essential.
From here, the final step in building a complete carbon credit strategy is the one that holds everything together: reviewing and evolving your approach over time as standards, markets and your own emissions profile all change.
Work with Ecologi
Making appropriate carbon credit claims starts with having a strategy that is genuinely worth communicating. Ecologi helps businesses build the underlying approach - the emissions measurement, the reduction pathway, the high-quality carbon credit portfolio and the BVCM contribution structure - that makes transparent, defensible communication possible.
If you want support developing a carbon credit strategy that you can talk about clearly and with confidence, speak to one of our climate experts to get started.