- A new study looked at the changes in tree cover, project longevity, and the changes in income and assets for participating households in select tree-planting projects, that received carbon credits till 2022.
- While the tree cover increased by 48% in five projects, the longevity and durability depended on long-term engagements with the farming communities and economic benefits to the participants.
- The study emphasises the need for efficient on-ground monitoring of voluntary carbon market (VCM) projects for effective outcomes.
Long-term carbon benefits can be obtained from tree-planting projects in the voluntary carbon market (VCM) when these initiatives bolster the economic well-being of local stakeholders and establish lasting relationships with them, finds a new study. Published in April 2025 in the Environmental Research Letters journal, the study looked at the changes in tree cover, project longevity, and the changes in income and assets for participating households in select tree-planting projects, that received carbon credits till 2022. The voluntary carbon market mechanism allows corporations to meet their carbon neutrality goals by investing in initiatives that offset or reduce carbon emissions.
According to a report by the non-profit organisation Citizen Consumer and Civic Action Group, India’s VCM market has seen phenomenal growth in recent times and is worth more than $1 billion as of 2021. These projects are certified by programmes such as the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) by Verra and the Gold Standard. VCM projects broadly focus on energy efficiency, carbon sequestration, methane capture, forest conservation, and renewable energy. Tree planting projects fall under the ‘afforestation and reforestation’ category.
Based on five tree-planting projects across 21,767 farmer plots, the study found that tree cover increased by 48% in participating plots compared to a 26% increase in non-participating plots. For two of the above projects, the researchers also conducted household surveys to understand the impacts on household incomes and asset acquisition (such as concrete houses, gas connections, mobile phones, cycles, motorbikes, etc). The results show almost a 95.6% increase in income for participating households (households of farmers who are a part of the project) in one project and a significant improvement in assets for another.
The study’s most crucial finding was that along with economic benefits, long-term community engagements are vital in ensuring project longevity and scalable impacts. The researchers, therefore, emphasise the need for careful examination of ground-level implications of VCM projects for successful management and outcomes.
On-ground monitoring is crucial
Despite the increase in demand for VCM projects, these initiatives have also received criticism for overstating their impacts or encouraging greenwashing claims by corporations where on-ground efforts and activities do not match carbon capture or offset declarations.
Due to their voluntary nature, such projects are not subject to the regulations of the compliance market, which has caps on greenhouse gas emissions. In 2024, researchers from the Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley, assessed the impacts of energy-efficient cookstoves that reduced the dependence on greenhouse gas-intensive fuels. Efficient cookstoves are the fastest-growing project type in the global VCM, and the researchers found that across 51 cookstove projects from 25 countries, the reduction in emissions was overstated by 9.2 times.
“During my research on VCMs, I realised that most studies were based on secondary data analysis and remote sensing, but not much focus was given to the on-ground analysis of these projects,” says Shivani Agarwal, lead author of the May 2025 study and former associate research scientist at the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York. Agarwal adds that while the current study looks at a small number of afforestation and reforestation VCM projects in India, it paves the way for systematic analysis across categories.
She further explains that such analysis, while aiding in understanding factors that enable project longevity, also provides insights into why projects cease operations despite positive outcomes. For example, one of the projects in Agarwal’s study involved planting eucalyptus plants for a company’s timber factory. “As obtaining raw materials for the timber factory was the primary motive, the VCM project served as the secondary objective for the company. The investment in the validation process was expensive, as there were fewer buyers for eucalyptus plantation projects. Therefore, the company decided not to participate in the VCM,” the project developer told Agarwal. The project was initiated in 2001 and was on the verge of closing in 2022.
Of the six projects that researchers analysed for longevity, only three were ongoing and scaling, and they were implemented by local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that have long-term associations with the local farming communities. Private corporations, on the other hand, established projects in new areas by approaching the village heads first. The NGOs also provided saplings and training for the community members, with one NGO sharing all of the carbon credit benefits with the farmers. The authors explain that while NGOs focus on the community’s development, private corporations focus on profitability, so they close projects when sufficient returns are not obtained.
The study also revealed that access to extra income is the main reason for farmer participation, and 85% of the non-participant farmers were willing to join future VCM projects if given the opportunity.
Ensuring VCM projects benefit the environment and the people
Researchers note that while the recent study does conclusively provide evidence of an increase in tree cover through satellite analysis, resulting changes in carbon stock can only be measured when there is data on the nature of this increase — tree species, structure, etc. Another limitation of the current study is that ecological parameters such as biodiversity conservation were not assessed, the authors state.
“The main focus of the projects in this study was participation and not biodiversity conservation. However, it is important to understand how participants can be incentivised for non-fruit trees that are native to the landscape and add to their biodiversity. While sharing carbon credit revenue is one way to do so, it is not popular among project developers as the initial investment in the carbon market is higher,” explains Agarwal.
Co-author of the study Ruth DeFries, professor of ecology and sustainable development and co-founding dean of Columbia Climate School, Columbia University, adds that while the focus on biodiversity is slowly gaining attention, it requires further analysis. “The carbon market was not designed to be biodiversity-friendly, so it’s possible for monoculture, non-native tree-planting projects to receive credit for sequestering carbon without providing a biodiversity benefit. There is a lot of discussion about biodiversity markets that would reward projects that enhance diversity. It is unclear at this point what the market demand is for such projects and how they could be monitored,” she says.
Trishant Dev, programme officer, Climate Change, Centre for Science and Environment, says that on-ground analysis of VCM projects is vital in ensuring these markets work for the people who safeguard the carbon sinks. “It is crucial to ask if the economics of the current system work in their favour. In our studies, we have seen that communities rarely reap the benefits of what has been promised to them when it comes to projects under forestry and agriculture. This is also a question that governments must address when designing or setting policies for offset mechanisms. Without adequate returns, we risk asking communities in the Global South to subsidise the emissions of wealthier nations,” shares Dev, who is not associated with the study.
Banner image: Mango trees planted in Bagepalli, Karnataka. Based on five tree-planting projects across 21,767 farmer plots, tree cover increased by 48% in participating plots compared to a 26% increase in non-participating plots. Image by Shivani Agarwal.
