Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market: Aligning Strategy With CCP-Labeled Credits

The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market sits at the center of a reset in credit quality. Its Core Carbon Principles create a common threshold that buyers, auditors, exchanges, and regulators can work from. This is not abstract. Labels are live, programs are being assessed, and procurement teams are rewriting playbooks. If you purchase, retire, or disclose credits, you should already be aligning to CCP signals.

What the CCP label changes for buyers

The CCP label gives a shorthand for governance, quantification, verification, and safeguards. In April 2024, the Council approved American Carbon Registry, Climate Action Reserve, and Gold Standard at the program level. The action was program eligibility. The outcome was a clear path for labeled issuances from these registries as methodologies clear assessment.

In June 2024, the Council announced the first approved methodologies. The action was methodology approval under CCP. The outcome was that credits issued under those methods can carry the label once programs implement the rules.

Later in 2024, scrutiny focused on avoided deforestation. Reuters reported that three REDD methodologies met CCP criteria, including Verra VM0048, ART TREES 2.0, and the VCS JNR framework. The action was approval of method families. The reported outcome was an expected supply of hundreds of millions of potential credits, subject to project level application and guardrails.

Policy linkages that raise the bar

United States, 2024, the Treasury, Energy, Agriculture, and White House teams released a Joint Policy Statement and Principles for responsible participation in voluntary markets. The action was a federal articulation of integrity rules for buyers and suppliers. The outcome was clearer expectations on claims, transparency, and prioritizing real reductions.

United Kingdom, 2025, the government consulted on implementing principles for voluntary carbon and nature markets, and referenced CCP operationalization. The action was a public consultation. The outcome was a signal that CCP and VCMI could inform UK practice.

Singapore, 2024, facilities covered by the carbon tax can use eligible international credits for up to five percent of taxable emissions, subject to national criteria that emphasize integrity. The action was the start of credit use under the tax. The outcome was a regulated demand signal that rewards higher quality supply.

What to do in procurement this quarter

In our experience, portfolios optimized only for unit price often fail without a clear map to CCP labeled supply and to the claims you intend to make. Start with three fast moves.

• Map your current inventory to program level and methodology status, then flag credits that are likely CCP eligible versus those that are not. Use registry guidance, for example Verra’s 2025 label guidance, and track when automatic labels apply.

• Link procurement to compliance adjacent signals. Where a program is approved for CORSIA in the 2024 to 2026 period, due diligence is often faster. For example, ACR was approved for CORSIA, with eligibility conditions by vintage and start date.

• Tighten claims governance now. Align public statements with the United States principles and your jurisdictional rules. Require disclosure of program, methodology, vintage, host country treatment, and any label status.

In our experience, buyers who embed these steps in sourcing, contracting, and reporting reduce headline risk, and build optionality as CCP labeled volume grows.

Integration with broader ESG and climate strategy

The CCP label is not just a procurement filter. It is a bridge between voluntary markets and the core of ESG performance. Large corporates are already threading CCP-aligned credits into disclosures, particularly in sectors with difficult-to-abate emissions.

Microsoft, United States, 2024, disclosed in its annual sustainability report that its carbon removal purchases now prioritize credits that meet emerging integrity frameworks, including the CCP where available. The action was a shift in sourcing criteria. The outcome was a more transparent portfolio composition and explicit exclusion of lower-quality offsets.

Swiss Re, Switzerland, 2023, adopted a policy to use only high-quality carbon credits that meet robust standards, signaling that labels like CCP will become embedded in insurance-sector procurement. The action was a new purchasing policy. The outcome was stronger alignment with net-zero pathways and reduced reputational risk.

Why some suppliers may not make the cut

Many project developers are finding that legacy methods fall short under CCP scrutiny. In forestry, for example, avoided deforestation projects with inflated baselines are being filtered out. In renewable energy, grid-connected projects in mature markets rarely meet additionality requirements. The result is a smaller pool of eligible supply, which could create short-term upward price pressure for labeled credits.

In our experience, buyers that do not prepare for this supply tightening risk scrambling in later phases of procurement cycles, often overpaying or compromising on quality. The strategic move is to secure multi-year offtake agreements now, tied to methodologies likely to pass CCP review.

Linking CCP with internal decarbonization

The CCP label cannot be a substitute for internal emissions reductions. The United States joint principles, the UK consultation, and voluntary initiatives like the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative all state this clearly. Credits, even high-quality ones, should complement—not replace—direct abatement.

This is where integration with Scope 3 strategy becomes critical. For example, Unilever, United Kingdom, 2023, reported that its climate transition plan uses credits only after aggressive operational and value chain reductions. The action was formalizing the sequencing of abatement and offset use. The outcome was greater credibility in investor engagement and alignment with Science Based Targets initiative guidance.

Risks of misalignment and greenwashing

Failure to align with CCP principles can carry reputational and legal risks. In the European Union, the Green Claims Directive, set to take effect in 2026, will require companies to substantiate any environmental claims, including those involving offsetting. Buyers relying on non-labeled credits will need to justify their quality in detail. Without alignment, claims could be challenged by regulators, investors, or civil society.

Practical next steps for executives

• Review credit inventories and procurement plans against CCP-approved programs and methodologies

• Engage with suppliers early to secure labeled supply

• Update claims governance and reporting to reflect CCP status and relevant jurisdictional rules

• Build internal capacity to assess and monitor integrity beyond the label

In our experience, the highest return on investment comes from integrating CCP alignment into the broader sustainability strategy, rather than treating it as a discrete compliance task. Doing so improves resilience to policy shifts, strengthens investor confidence, and ensures that voluntary market participation supports, rather than distracts from, core decarbonization objectives.

Conclusion

The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market has changed the baseline for credit quality. The CCP label is quickly becoming the currency of trust in voluntary markets, influencing policy, procurement, and disclosure. Organizations that embed CCP principles into their strategy today will be positioned to lead in a market where integrity is no longer optional.

We can help you audit your current portfolio, design procurement frameworks that prioritize integrity, and integrate voluntary market strategy into your wider decarbonization plan. Contact us to explore how to position your organization ahead of regulatory shifts and market expectations.

Contact Us

Written by: Gasilov Group Editorial Team

Reviewed by: Arif Gasilov, Partner – Sustainability Strategy

Meet Our Team →

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ): Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market

What is the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market and why does it matter for buyers in 2025?

The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market is an independent governance body that sets quality benchmarks for carbon credits through its Core Carbon Principles. For buyers, the CCP label serves as a reliable signal of integrity, helping to reduce reputational and compliance risks. In 2025, its relevance has grown due to policy alignment in jurisdictions like the US, UK, and Singapore, which increasingly reference or embed CCP criteria.

How does the CCP label interact with compliance markets like CORSIA or national carbon taxes?

While CCP is designed for voluntary markets, its criteria often overlap with compliance eligibility. For example, credits from programs approved under CORSIA and labeled under CCP can serve both voluntary claims and certain regulated uses, such as Singapore’s carbon tax offset allowance. This dual alignment can streamline procurement and claims governance, but eligibility conditions still vary by jurisdiction and vintage.

What types of projects are most likely to receive CCP labeling?

Projects with robust additionality, conservative baselines, and rigorous monitoring are most likely to qualify. In 2024, early CCP approvals included methodologies for avoided deforestation, afforestation, and certain community-based renewable energy projects in developing markets. Projects in mature renewable energy sectors or with outdated baselines have struggled to meet the threshold.

How should companies adapt procurement processes for CCP-labeled credits?

Start by mapping your inventory to CCP-approved programs and methodologies. Integrate CCP status into RFP requirements and contracts. Build supplier relationships that can deliver labeled supply over multiple years, especially for project types that face tightening availability. Finally, align public claims with CCP principles and jurisdictional guidance to avoid greenwashing risk.

Will CCP labeling increase the price of carbon credits?

Market analysts and public sources suggest that supply of CCP-labeled credits will be smaller than the current voluntary market pool, which could create upward price pressure in the short term. However, buyers paying a premium for labeled credits may gain more stable reputational value and reduced due diligence costs, offsetting higher unit prices.