Structuring bodies
ICVCM, VCMI, SBTi: who does what on the carbon market
CSR leadership wanting to understand the governance ecosystem before building a strategy.
ICVCM = supply quality (Core Carbon Principles). VCMI = communication rules (Claims Code). SBTi = reduction trajectories and the place of contribution (BVCM).
The voluntary market relies on three complementary bodies. Understanding who does what avoids costly confusion in a carbon strategy.
ICVCM: assesses methodologies (Core Carbon Principles).
VCMI: frames buyer claims (Silver, Gold, Platinum).
SBTi: defines reduction trajectories and the role of contribution.
Three complementary roles
The voluntary market rests on three bodies sharing a coherent architecture. ICVCM filters supply: it assesses standard methodologies against the Core Carbon Principles. VCMI frames demand: it defines what a company can say about its credits without falling into greenwashing. SBTi defines the strategic upstream: the reduction trajectory within which contribution sits. None of these is a certification standard or a registry. They are quality and communication referees, leaning on existing standards (Gold Standard, Verra, Puro, etc.) and recognised by buyers and investors as benchmarks.
ICVCM: the supply-side integrity referee
The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) is an independent governance body launched in 2023 under the Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM), backed by NGOs, financiers and scientists. Its mission: assess certification-standard methodologies against publicly defined quality criteria, the Core Carbon Principles. If a methodology passes, it receives a CCP-approved label. This is a supply-side quality seal, not a competing standard: ICVCM does not certify projects, it assesses methodologies.
The ten Core Carbon Principles in detail
The CCP covers ten criteria grouped in three families. Governance: programme transparency, robust tracking of issuance and retirement, sound governance, secure credit holding on the registry. Emissions: additionality (the project would not have happened without the credit), permanence (carbon stays locked), no double counting, reliable quantification (scientific methodology). Sustainable development: documented positive impacts on co-benefits and safeguards (human rights, biodiversity, communities). A methodology is CCP-approved only if it clears all of these filters, which de facto excludes many older, looser methodologies.
CCP-approved methodologies in 2026
As of spring 2026, several methodologies are CCP-approved: Verra VM0042 v2.2 for Improved Land Management, the Climate Action Reserve's U.S. Soil Enrichment Protocol v1.1, and several Gold Standard methodologies (rice methane, concrete carbonation). Other methodologies are under assessment. The Gold Standard SOC 402.x methodology used by Gaïago for agricultural soil carbon is not CCP-approved as of today: this is a signal of progressive assessment, not failing integrity. Savvy buyers check the status on icvcm.org before any significant purchase.
VCMI: framing buyer communication
The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI) plays the demand-side mirror role of ICVCM on supply. It publishes the Claims Code of Practice, version 3.1 released in August 2025, after the Scope 3 Action Code added in v3.0 (April 2025). This code defines how a company can communicate about its carbon contribution without greenwashing. Three structuring conditions: have a validated reduction trajectory (typically SBTi), use high-integrity credits (CCP-approved or Article 6.4), and publish a detailed transparency report. From 1 January 2026, using CCP-approved or Article 6.4 credits is required to make a VCMI claim.
The Silver, Gold, Platinum tiers
The Claims Code defines three ambition levels. Silver: the company contributes to at least 20 % of its annual residual emissions, with high-integrity credits and a credible trajectory. The entry tier, accessible to companies starting a rigorous BVCM strategy. Gold: contribution covers at least 60 % of residual emissions. Platinum: contribution equals or exceeds 100 % of residual emissions, implying a significant budget (typically several million euros per year for a mid-cap). The tier picked defines the language the company can use. To start, Silver is already a strong signal, accessible and defensible under the ECGT Directive.
SBTi: reduction trajectories and BVCM
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), a partnership between CDP, UN Global Compact, World Resources Institute and WWF, is the reference body for validating corporate emission reduction trajectories. Its Corporate Net-Zero Standard, V1.3 released in September 2025, defines the requirements to align trajectories with 1.5°C: short-term targets (5-10 years) and long-term (typically 2050), scopes 1, 2 and 3 coverage if material, sector-specific methodologies. More than 7,000 companies have validated targets as of spring 2026. SBTi published in February 2024 its Beyond Value Chain Mitigation (BVCM) position paper formalising the place of carbon contribution in a net-zero strategy.
SBTi V2.0: what changes for 2028
Version 2.0 of the Corporate Net-Zero Standard, expected in spring 2026, introduces a structural shift: BVCM is reframed as 'ongoing emissions responsibility' rather than a one-off act. This signals that contribution must be ongoing and is an integral part of a net-zero company's climate responsibility. V2.0 will apply from 2028 for new target-setting and the renewal of existing targets. For a company designing its 2030+ strategy today, this is the signal to embed contribution in the planning, not just at the margin.
Article 6.4 and the international compliance market
Beyond the voluntary market, the Paris Agreement created an international market mechanism, Article 6, allowing countries to exchange emission reduction units. Article 6.4 sets up a centralised UN-managed mechanism, operational since 2024-2025 following COP28. Article 6.4 credits (Article 6.4 Emission Reductions or A6.4ERs) are recognised as high-integrity by default thanks to the UN methodological framework. VCMI considers them equivalent to CCP-approved credits to validate a claim. For buyers, this is a second integrity path to know, in particular for projects in developing countries.
How these bodies interact in practice
In practice, a serious company combines the three. It first validates its SBTi trajectory (which takes 6 to 18 months). It sources credits via recognised standards (Gold Standard, Verra, Puro), favouring ICVCM CCP-approved methodologies. It communicates according to VCMI rules, positioning itself at a tier (Silver to start, Gold or Platinum depending on budget and ambition). The CSRD ESRS E1-7 report captures the whole picture: SBTi trajectory, credit volume, standards used, associated VCMI claims. This coherent articulation is what distinguishes a credible strategy from an opportunistic purchase.
Together these three bodies draw a clear architecture: high-integrity credits (ICVCM), communicate properly (VCMI), fit a trajectory (SBTi).
Frequently asked questions
Sources & official references
Ready to take action?
Explore buyer support