www.hestiya.com Prepared by HESTIYA October 2026 Carbon Markets in 2027: The Year Credits Have to Prove Their Worth
Table of Content 1. Introduction 2. From Counting Credits to Defending Them 3. What the Numbers Show 4. Six Forces Shaping Carbon Strategy Into 2027 5. The Policy Calendar: What Lands Before and After 2027 6. The Real Bottleneck Is Judgment, Not Access 7. 2027 Readiness Checklist for Climate and Finance Teams 8. Credit Quality Screen You Can Use Before 2027 Budgets 9. How Hestiya Supports This Shift 10. Frequently Asked Questions 11. Looking Ahed 1.
1. Executive Summary For most of its history, the carbon market rewarded motion. Buy credits, publish a number, move on. That habit is becoming less viable. As 2027 approaches, the question buyers, auditors and investors ask has changed from “how much did you retire?” to “what exactly did it do, and can you show us?” The change is not cosmetic. Aviation is preparing to turn offsetting into a legal obligation, corporate target-setting rules are getting stricter, and price data now shows plainly which credits the market trusts and which it does not. 2027 is shaping up as the point where carbon strategy stops being judged on intent and starts being judged on evidence. This article looks at what is driving that shift, what it means for the way companies buy and hold carbon assets, and how to prepare before the next planning cycle. 2.
2. From Counting Credits to Defending Them The old scorecard was simple: tonnes bought, tonnes offset. A large number looked like leadership, and few people asked how the credits were generated or how long the benefit would last. The new scorecard asks harder questions: Ÿ Would the project have happened without carbon finance? Ÿ How durable is the climate benefit, and who verified it? Ÿ Will the credit still be accepted when rules tighten? Price data shows how seriously the market takes these questions. Sylvera reports that the average spot price for high-quality afforestation, reforestation and revegetation credits climbed from about $14 per tonne at the start of 2025 to $26 by December, while lower- rated equivalents of the same project type traded well below that [1]. The same analysis puts total voluntary market spending in 2025 at roughly $1.04 billion, up around 6%, even as the number of credits retired fell by about 4.5% [1]. Spending rose while volumes fell. That is what a market maturing toward quality looks like. The consequence for buyers is uncomfortable but clear. A cheap, weak credit is no longer a harmless shortcut. It can lose value, draw greenwashing challenges, and weaken the claims a company is trying to make. 3.
3. What the Numbers Show Two series from Ecosystem Marketplace’s State of the Voluntary Carbon Market 2025 report show how sharply buyers have separated strong credits from weak ones. The market shrank in value long before it shrank in appetite. Transacted value dropped from about $1.9 billion in 2022 to about $0.54 billion in 2024, and the average price slid from $7.37 to $6.34 per tonne. Yet credit retirements stayed close to 182 million tonnes a year over the same period [6]. Companies kept retiring credits; they simply paid less for each one, and many bought less new supply. The average hides a wide gap underneath. In 2024, forestry and land-use credits transacted at $9.27 per tonne, while renewable energy credits fetched $2.67 and kept losing share, with retirements falling to 67 million tonnes from 80 million a year earlier [6]. The same report found that removal credits carried a 381% price premium over reduction credits in 2024, up from 245% in 2023 Two cautions apply. These figures cover transaction data and are not directly comparable with Sylvera’s retirement-based 2025 numbers quoted earlier, which use a different method. And 2025 data from the same source was not available when this article was written, so the trend shown ends at 2024. 4. Transaction value fell about 72% from 2022 to 20204 Voluntary carbon market, value of credits transacted (US$ billion) with average price per tonne Renewable energy credit sold for under a third of forestry prices in 2024 Average transaction price by project type (US$ per tonn) with volume transacted in million tonnes 2022 to 2024: -72% in value 2021 avg $7.48/t $1.90bn Forestry and land use Household and community devices Renewable energy $1.90bn $0.75bn $0.545bn 2022 avg $7.37/t 2023 avg $6.71/t 2024 avg $6.34/t Figure 2. I-REC price midpoints by scenario and technology ($/Mwh), derived from the ranges in Table 2. Illustrative for scenario comparison, not a market quote. Renewable energy credits sold for under a third of forestry prices in 2024. Source: Ecosystem Marketplace, State of the Voluntary Carbon Market 2025, as reported. $9.27 (37.0mt) $7.30 (5.1mt) Market average $6.34 Renewable energy = 29% of the forestry price $2.67 (22.3mt)
4. Six Forces Shaping Carbon Strategy Into 2027 1. Aviation Becomes a Structural Buyer CORSIA, the aviation industry’s offsetting scheme, runs its first phase from 2024 to 2026 and moves into its mandatory phase from 2027 [2]. In the first phase, airlines must cover emissions above 85% of their 2019 levels [1]. A regulated buyer with a recurring obligation changes the shape of demand: credits that meet the scheme’s eligibility rules become scarcer and more valuable, while credits that do not qualify risk being left on the sidelines. Companies that sell, hold or buy credits should be asking now which of their assets could be eligible for this kind of compliance demand. 2. 2. Price Is Becoming a Quality Signal A single “carbon price” no longer describes anything real. Sylvera’s analysis finds that half of the afforestation and reforestation projects it tracks trade between $5 and $25 per tonne, with outliers at both ends [1]. Project type, rating, vintage, location and contract structure all move the number. Treating the market as one commodity is the fastest route to overpaying for weak credits or missing strong ones. 3. Voluntary and Compliance Worlds Keep Merging Compliance programmes already account for about 24% of demand, and Sylvera expects them to match or exceed voluntary purchases by 2030 [1]. Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, covering bilateral transfers and a UN- supervised crediting mechanism, adds a further layer of cross-border structure [3]. National carbon pricing systems are also expanding across markets including China, India, Japan, Vietnam, Brazil and Türkiye [2]. The practical lesson: a voluntary purchase made today may be judged against compliance-style expectations tomorrow. 4. Standards Are Tightening Around the Buyer In June 2026 the Science Based Targets initiative published version 2.0 of its net-zero standard, raising the bar for corporate target-setting [2]. Alongside it, the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market continues to expand its Core Carbon Principles approvals, giving buyers a recognisable benchmark for credit quality [2][4]. Companies that rely on credits will increasingly need to show not only that they purchased, but that they purchased against a credible standard. 5.
5. Removals: Big Promises, Thin Delivery Durable carbon removal is attracting enormous forward commitments. Sylvera counts about $13.7 billion in announced offtake agreements at roughly $180 per credit, yet fewer than 200,000 durable removal credits were actually retired in 2025 [1]. The gap between what has been promised and what has been delivered is the defining feature of this segment. For 2027, the sensible posture is early, staged engagement: secure access, test supplier delivery track records, and blend removals with nearer-term options rather than betting everything on future supply. 6. Data Decides Who Is Confident Independent ratings, monitoring and project-level analytics are turning the market into an information business. Teams with access to this intelligence can compare projects objectively, track performance over time, and produce records an auditor will accept. Teams without it are left guessing. 5. The Policy Calendar: What Lands Before and After 2027 Three dated rule changes and one projection frame the next planning cycle. CORSIA first phase EU CBAM definitive start SBTi standard v2.0 out CORSIA Mandatory phase Compliance rivals voluntary 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Aviation’s offsetting duty turns mandatory in 2027, after two rule changes in 2026 Policy and market milestones, 2024 to 2030 1 Jan 2026 June 2026 From 2027 By 2030 (projected) 2024 to 2026 Sources: European Commission, Anthesis (June 2026), Sylvera (2030 projection) Aviation’s offsetting duty turns mandatory in 2027, after two rule changes in 2026. Sources: European Commission, Anthesis (June 2026), Sylvera. 6.
The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism moved from its 2023 to 2025 transitional period into its definitive regime on 1 January 2026, when importers began to buy and surrender CBAM certificates for the embedded emissions of goods in six sectors: cement, iron and steel, aluminium, fertilisers, electricity and hydrogen. For any business with exposure to those supply chains, carbon now shows up as a cost line, not only as a voluntary commitment. In aviation, CORSIA’s first phase runs to the end of 2026 and the mandatory phase follows from 2027. Corporate target-setting tightened in June 2026 when the SBTi released version 2.0 of its net-zero standard. Further out, Sylvera projects that compliance programmes could match or exceed voluntary purchases by 2030, which is why a credit bought today is best judged against compliance-grade expectations The 2027 planning cycle therefore has to answer a practical question: which of your current purchases will still look defensible once the mandatory phase and tighter target rules are both in force? Ten years ago the hard part was finding credits to buy. Today supply is visible and platforms are plentiful. The hard part is judging what to buy, why, and how it fits a longer plan. Three things make that judgment dicult: Ÿ Information is scattered across registries, brokers, ratings providers and platforms. Ÿ Rules keep moving, so eligibility today does not guarantee eligibility later. Ÿ Claims are being questioned by regulators, investors and ordinary consumers all at the same time. Underneath all of this sits a stubborn misconception: that credits are interchangeable. They are not, and treating them as if they were is how organisations end up with a portfolio that looks fine in a spreadsheet and fails under questioning. 6. The Real Bottleneck Is Judgment, Not Access 7.
7. 2027 Readiness Checklist for Climate and Finance Teams Before the next budget cycle closes, it is worth working through the following. Audit what you already hold. Rate every credit in your portfolio for additionality, permanence and verification. Flag anything you could not defend in front of an auditor. Map exposure to compliance demand. Identify which assets or planned purchases could be affected by CORSIA eligibility, national schemes or Article 6 arrangements. Plan in years, not transactions. Build a multi-year view that links credit purchases to your operational reduction targets, and run scenarios for price, policy and supply shifts. Diversify deliberately. Spread holdings over different project categories, regions and lifespans of impact, and reserve a set share for removals that take years to deliver. Document decisions as you make them. Record why each purchase was chosen and what evidence supports it. Stakeholders now expect a paper trail, not a promise. Tie carbon to the rest of the business. Operations should own real reductions, finance should own the risk and value view, and communications should own claims that match the evidence. 8.
8. Credit Quality Screen You Can Use Before 2027 Budgets Use this table to rate any credit before it enters a portfolio. A single red flag does not rule a credit out, but it should be explained in writing. Risk Has Three Faces Carbon decisions now carry exposure on three fronts at the same time: Ÿ Financial: overpaying, or holding assets that lose value once buyers crowd toward the most credible projects. Ÿ Regulatory: purchases that fall out of step with evolving compliance frameworks. Ÿ Reputational: claims that cannot withstand scrutiny, leading to greenwashing allegations and lost trust. What once looked like a low-stakes sustainability line item is now a decision that can affect how customers, shareholders and regulators view the company. 9. Criterion What to Ask Red Flag Additionality Would the project have gone ahead without credit revenue? Revenue is a small share of project income, or the activity was already legally required Permanence How long does the benefit last, and what happens if it is reversed? No buffer or insurance for reversal risk Verification Who audited the claims, how recently, and is there an independent rating? Self-reported data or a single, old verification Eligibility Could it qualify under CORSIA, Article 6, or a recognised integrity label? Nobody can say, or the rules were never checked Price and Contract Does the price fit the project type and rating, and is delivery guaranteed? A price far below peers of the same type, or open-ended delivery terms Delivery Record Has the developer actually delivered credits before? Large forward promises with little history of retirements Claim Fit Does your public statement match what the credit can support? Wording that implies the credit cancels emissions it does not cover
9. How Hestiya Supports This Shift 10. Frequently Asked Questions Hestiya is built for a market that rewards evidence over volume Reducing emissions at the source. Rather than leaning on offsets alone, Hestiya's approach prioritises cutting emissions where they are produced, in line with what global frameworks increasingly expect. Curated, high-integrity access. Instead of an overwhelming catalogue, businesses get verified projects with a focus on high-impact solutions such as CCS and CDR. Fewer, better options mean less decision fatigue and more confidence. See how the marketplace works. Intelligence behind every decision. Data, verification and strategic insight are brought together so teams can move from guesswork to informed action. Built to scale and to last. Hestiya helps organisations align with evolving regulation, build long-term climate strategies and expand initiatives with confidence, so that choices made now still hold up later. 10. What changes for carbon markets in 2027? CORSIA moves into its mandatory phase from 2027 [2]. That follows the SBTi’s release of version 2.0 of its net- zero standard in June 2026 [2] and the start of the EU CBAM definitive regime on 1 January 2026 Are high-quality credits really priced higher? The data points that way. Sylvera reports that the average spot price for high-quality afforestation and reforestation credits rose from about $14 to $26 per tonne during 2025 [1]. Ecosystem Marketplace’s 2024 data shows forestry credits at $9.27 per tonne against $2.67 for renewable energy credits How big is the voluntary carbon market? It depends on the method. Sylvera counts roughly $1.04 billion of spending and 168 million credits retired in 2025 [1]. Ecosystem Marketplace measures transactions and puts 2024 value at about $0.54 billion [6]. The two figures describe different things and should not be compared directly. Is carbon removal a practical option today? Only in small volumes. Fewer than 200,000 durable removal credits were retired in 2025, even though announced offtake agreements total around $13.7 billion [1]. Most companies pair near-term options with a staged removals plan. What should a company do first? Start with an audit of the credits already held, using the quality screen above, then link purchases to a multi-year plan. The readiness checklist earlier in this article sets out the steps.
11. Three principles will define the next phase of the market: Ÿ Precision will count for more than participation. Ÿ Strategy will outperform shortcuts. Ÿ Evidence will beat assumption. Companies that prepare early will not just meet new requirements. They will set the standard others are measured against. 11. Looking Ahead Final Thought 1. Sylvera. “Carbon Market Trends 2026: Prices, Quality, and the Future of Carbon Credits.” Sylvera, www.sylvera.com/blog/carbon-market-trends. Accessed 1 Oct. 2026. 2. Anthesis Group. “Carbon Guide, June 2026.” Anthesis, www.anthesisgroup.com/insights/carbon-guide-june-2026/. Accessed 1 Oct. 2026. 3. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Paris Agreement and Article 6 Mechanisms. UNFCCC, 2023, unfccc.int. Accessed 4 Apr. 2026. 4. Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market. Core Carbon Principles. ICVCM, 2024, icvcm.org. Accessed 4 Apr. 2026. 5. Hestiya. Climate Solutions Platform and Sustainability Initiatives. Hestiya, www.hestiya.com. Accessed 4 Apr. 2026. 6. Ecosystem Marketplace. State of the Voluntary Carbon Market 2025: Meeting the Moment. Forest Trends’ Ecosystem Marketplace, 2025. Accessed 1 Oct. 2026. 7. European Commission, Taxation and Customs Union. “Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.” taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border- adjustment-mechanism_en. Accessed 1 Oct. 2026. References Today’s carbon market is not where good intentions get rewarded. It is a place to show your work. The organisations that thrive in 2027 and beyond will be the ones that can turn complex information into clear decisions, and clear decisions into measurable impact.