Ireland's Commitment to Carbon Credits Market at COP31
Ireland has joined 14 other countries in a new international agreement aimed at expanding carbon credit markets while tightening environmental standards. The coalition signed the Antalya Declaration at COP31 in November 2026, committing to a shared framework for regulating how businesses can invest in climate and land restoration projects through tradable carbon credits. Minister for Climate Darragh O'Brien signed on Ireland's behalf, describing voluntary carbon markets as increasingly relevant to Ireland's climate strategy and land use policy.
For UK businesses operating in Ireland or with Irish supply chains, the development creates potential new compliance considerations. It also signals growing international interest in using private finance to fund environmental projects. However, the agreement has attracted sharp criticism from groups who argue that carbon markets allow companies to avoid cutting their own emissions.
The central question for businesses is whether these markets will create credible opportunities for climate investment or simply provide a mechanism for purchasing environmental claims without meaningful atmospheric benefit. The answer depends entirely on how tightly the rules are written and enforced.
Ireland enters 15-country coalition on carbon market expansion
The Coalition to Grow Carbon Markets issued its declaration on Thursday, November 12, 2026, during the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Türkiye. Alongside Ireland, members include Canada, France, Indonesia, Kenya, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Zambia. Three additional countries also signed but were not named in early coverage.
The coalition's stated purpose is to increase private sector investment in climate projects while improving market credibility. Specifically, the agreement commits governments to developing legal and regulatory oversight, stronger quality standards, greater transparency and independent monitoring systems for carbon credits.
A policy playbook published alongside the declaration outlines measures governments could adopt to increase demand. These include tax incentives, recognition schemes and preferential treatment in public procurement for businesses purchasing credits. Consequently, companies supplying public sector contracts in coalition countries may soon face incentives to use carbon markets as part of their environmental commitments.
Minister O'Brien highlighted Ireland's work on the European Union's Carbon Farming Certification Framework and noted the country's growing position as a sustainable finance centre. He described voluntary carbon markets as connected to Ireland's land sector ambitions, particularly peatland restoration and woodland creation.
How the carbon credit system operates
A carbon credit typically represents one tonne of carbon dioxide, or an equivalent volume of another greenhouse gas, that a project claims to have reduced, avoided or removed. Credits can finance various activities including peatland rewetting, forest protection, land restoration and cleaner technology deployment.
Businesses purchase credits to claim responsibility for climate benefits generated elsewhere. In voluntary markets, companies are not legally required to buy credits but may use them to support climate commitments or environmental claims made to customers, investors or procurement authorities.
The critical test is additionality. This means the climate benefit must genuinely result from the carbon market payment rather than something that would have happened anyway. For example, if a landowner had already secured public funding to restore a bog, selling credits for that same restoration generates revenue but does not create an additional emissions reduction.
Other technical challenges include permanence (whether carbon remains stored for the claimed period), leakage (whether protecting one area pushes damaging activity elsewhere), accurate measurement and fair distribution of benefits to local communities. These problems have repeatedly undermined confidence in carbon markets over the past two decades.
Peatland restoration emerges as key focus for Ireland
Ireland published its first Peatland Standard in 2025 and began pilot testing. The standard aims to provide a framework for private investment in peatland restoration while recognising benefits beyond carbon storage, including biodiversity improvements and water retention.
Peatlands hold particular significance in Ireland because restoring degraded bogs can reduce emissions while potentially improving water quality and providing habitat. However, the environmental gains depend heavily on restoration quality, the land's initial condition and the reliability of long term monitoring.
Ireland's Land Use Review identified private finance as a potential investment source for sustainable land management. This policy context suggests the government views carbon markets as a way to supplement public funding for environmental work that might otherwise remain unfunded.
The approach could create income opportunities for farmers and landowners willing to restore peatlands or plant trees. Nevertheless, the financial returns depend on credit prices, which fluctuate based on market demand, regulatory requirements in other countries and competition from cheaper credits elsewhere.
Environmental groups express cautious interest and concerns
Irish environmental organisation Hometree, which works on woodland restoration, said it was cautiously interested in whether well designed financial mechanisms could support ecological recovery. Ray Ó Foghlú, head of partnerships and development, emphasised that strong environmental standards, credible monitoring and approaches suited to Ireland's landscape would be necessary.
Importantly, Ó Foghlú noted that Hometree's interest was not in growing carbon markets for their own sake. Instead, the organisation wants to understand whether such mechanisms can genuinely support ecological recovery and provide fair, long term income for farmers and landowners. This distinction matters because a larger market does not automatically mean greater climate benefits.
Meanwhile, protesters at COP31 described carbon credits as greenwashing and argued they enable continued fossil fuel use while creating risks of land grabs and human rights abuses. Cassandra Smithies of the Global Justice Ecology Project called carbon credits scientifically unfounded and false solutions, arguing they do not deliver the emissions reductions claimed by promoters.
The criticism reflects recurring problems documented across carbon markets globally. Projects often receive credits for actions that would have occurred without carbon finance. Forests and peatlands can later burn or be disturbed, releasing stored carbon back into the atmosphere. Estimating how much carbon a project has reduced involves substantial assumptions and measurement difficulties.
Furthermore, intermediaries and large businesses may capture more value than local landowners or communities doing the environmental work. A recent report by UN Special Rapporteur Elisa Morgera raised concerns that carbon markets can disproportionately benefit powerful companies while providing uncertain returns to communities.
What UK businesses need to know
- Ireland has joined a 15-country coalition committed to expanding carbon credit markets under tighter environmental standards and regulatory oversight.
- The coalition published a policy playbook suggesting tax incentives and preferential procurement treatment for businesses purchasing carbon credits.
- Carbon credits represent claimed emissions reductions or removals, but their credibility depends on additionality, permanence, accurate measurement and fair benefit distribution.
- Ireland published its first Peatland Standard in 2025 and views private carbon finance as a potential supplement to public funding for land restoration.
- Critics argue carbon markets enable companies to purchase environmental claims rather than reducing operational emissions, with risks of greenwashing and community harm.
- The Antalya Declaration frames carbon credits as supporting additional climate action, not delaying direct emissions cuts, though enforcement will determine outcomes.
- UK businesses with Irish operations or supply chains may face new compliance considerations as Ireland develops its carbon market framework.
Implications for procurement, compliance and supply chains
For businesses tendering for public sector contracts, the coalition's policy playbook creates potential new considerations. Procurement authorities in member countries may begin offering preferential treatment to suppliers using certified carbon credits. This could affect competitive positioning, particularly for companies working across multiple coalition countries.
However, relying on credits to meet environmental requirements carries reputational risk. If the credits lack genuine additionality or permanent carbon storage, customers and investors may view them as substitutes for operational emissions reductions rather than genuine climate action. Therefore, businesses should carefully evaluate any carbon credit purchases against their direct emissions reduction programmes.
Supply chain implications also deserve attention. Companies sourcing agricultural products or materials from Ireland may encounter suppliers participating in carbon credit schemes. Understanding whether these schemes genuinely improve environmental performance or simply generate certificates requires scrutiny of the underlying standards, verification processes and monitoring systems.
Compliance teams should monitor how Ireland implements its peatland framework and carbon farming certification. The rules governing additionality, permanence, measurement and disclosure will determine whether Irish carbon credits represent credible investments or create compliance risks for businesses making environmental claims based on purchased credits.
For manufacturers and service providers, the broader policy trend suggests that carbon markets are becoming embedded in government climate strategies across multiple jurisdictions. Consequently, businesses may face increasing expectations to engage with these markets, either through purchasing credits or through procurement requirements favouring suppliers who do so.
The critical business question is not whether to participate but rather how to distinguish credible carbon investments from weak ones. This requires understanding the technical standards, verification processes and legal frameworks in each market. It also requires keeping direct operational emissions reductions as the primary focus while treating carbon credits as a supplementary tool at most.
What credible implementation requires
The Antalya Declaration reportedly frames carbon credits as supporting additional climate action rather than delaying direct emissions cuts. That principle is crucial for Ireland and coalition partners. Carbon finance should complement emissions reductions rather than substitute for them.
For Ireland specifically, credible implementation would require clear rules preventing credits from being issued for existing or legally required activities. Independent validation and verification must be mandatory, with public disclosure of project ownership, methods and revenues. Long term monitoring of carbon storage is essential, as is protection against double counting where the same reduction is claimed by multiple parties.
Fair and transparent contracts for farmers and landowners matter both for equity and for programme sustainability. If landowners receive minimal returns while intermediaries capture most of the value, participation will decline. Similarly, strong safeguards for communities and land rights are necessary to prevent the documented problems seen in carbon markets elsewhere.
Restrictions on misleading corporate claims represent another key requirement. If businesses use Irish carbon credits to make net zero claims without proportionate operational emissions cuts, the programme risks becoming a greenwashing mechanism. Separate accounting for carbon, biodiversity and other ecosystem benefits would help avoid oversimplifying complex environmental outcomes into single tradable units.
Ireland's peatland framework will likely provide an early test case. A well designed system could reward restoration while recognising that peatlands deliver multiple public benefits beyond carbon storage. However, overly complex certification requirements could favour large operators with resources to manage technical and legal processes, excluding smaller landowners.
UK businesses evaluating Irish carbon credits should therefore look for evidence of these safeguards in practice. Documentation showing genuine additionality, independent verification, transparent pricing and long term monitoring commitments would indicate higher quality credits. Conversely, vague claims, lack of public disclosure or absence of permanence guarantees should raise concerns.
Ultimately, the regulatory framework for carbon reporting and environmental compliance will determine whether these markets support genuine climate action or simply create new avenues for questionable environmental claims. Businesses need to assess credits against the same rigorous standards they would apply to their own operational emissions reductions.
Policy direction and strategic considerations
Ireland's decision signals that the government sees private climate finance as a potential complement to public funding for land restoration and ecosystem improvement. The approach could help address the substantial costs of restoring degraded peatlands and establishing new woodlands, while strengthening Ireland's position in sustainable finance markets.
The policy also creates political and reputational risks. Ireland will face scrutiny over whether credits represent genuine, measurable and lasting climate benefits. If companies primarily use them to make environmental claims without cutting operational emissions, the policy could reinforce public scepticism about carbon markets more broadly.
For businesses, the strategic question is how to position environmental commitments in a landscape where carbon markets are increasingly normalised by governments but remain controversial among environmental groups and scientific critics. Companies making net zero commitments and carbon reporting need to demonstrate that purchased credits supplement rather than replace direct emissions reductions.
This requires clear disclosure about the proportion of emissions reductions achieved through operational changes versus purchased credits. It also requires explaining why specific credits were chosen, what verification standards apply and how permanence is guaranteed. Transparency reduces greenwashing risk and builds credibility with customers, investors and procurement authorities.
The most credible measure of success for Ireland's participation will not be the volume or value of credits sold. Instead, it will be whether the market produces verified additional emissions reductions, improves ecosystems, delivers fair income to rural communities and operates transparently. These are the same criteria businesses should apply when evaluating whether to purchase credits.
Ireland's participation is consequently less an endorsement of unrestricted offsetting than a test of whether carbon markets can be governed tightly enough to support real climate action. The answer will depend on enforcement, scientific integrity and whether direct emissions reductions remain the government's overriding priority. Businesses should watch how Ireland implements its framework over the next 12 to 24 months before making significant commitments.
Where to find authoritative guidance
Businesses seeking detailed information on carbon markets and environmental standards can consult several authoritative sources. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero provides UK policy guidance on carbon markets and climate commitments.
For technical standards on carbon accounting and verification, the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment offers professional guidance and training resources. Companies evaluating carbon credits should review IEMA's materials on additionality, permanence and verification requirements.
The Procurement Policy Note 06/21 on carbon reduction plans outlines UK government expectations for suppliers bidding on major contracts. This guidance clarifies how carbon commitments, including purchased credits, should be documented and reported.
For updates on Ireland's specific peatland and carbon farming frameworks, businesses should monitor announcements from Ireland's Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications. The department will publish implementation details as the coalition's commitments translate into national policy.
Finally, businesses developing sustainable procurement strategies or evaluating carbon market participation may benefit from specialist advisory support to navigate the technical, compliance and reputational considerations involved.