Skip to the disclosure focus
Courses

GRI Training Partner GRI 102 · Climate Change · Disclosure GRI 102-10

Effective 2027

Effective for reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027; early adoption encouraged. Replaces GRI 305.

Carbon Credits

GRI 102-10 · mandatory · metrics + narrative

Disclosure 102-10 requires an organization to report carbon credits generated outside its value chain and purchased by the organization. A carbon credit is a transferable or tradable instrument representing one metric ton of CO₂ equivalent of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal.

Legal status

GRI 102: Climate Change 2025 is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 January 2027, with earlier adoption encouraged.

Start preparing ↓ Official Global Reporting Initiative source ↗

Disclosure focus

The organization must report the total amount of carbon credits cancelled during the reporting period in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent and provide a numerical breakdown between credits from GHG emission-reduction projects and credits from GHG-removal projects. It can additionally report the percentage represented by each project type.

The organization should also report the total amount of carbon credits purchased but not cancelled during the reporting period. Where it purchases removal credits, it should identify whether the underlying projects are nature-based or technological.

For every project whose credits were cancelled, the organization must report the project name and ID, project type, cancellation serial number or range, cancellation date, vintage, host country and issuing registry. Vintage is the year in which the GHG reduction or removal occurred rather than the year in which the credit was purchased or cancelled.

For each cancelled-credit project, the organization must explain how the project adheres to the eight quality criteria: additionality, credible baselines, permanence, leakage avoidance, unique issuance and claiming, regular monitoring, independent validation and verification, and GHG programme governance.

Where a project does not meet one or more quality criteria, the organization should explain why and describe the actions taken or planned to achieve compliance. It should also report whether credits cancelled in earlier periods failed to meet quality criteria during the current reporting period.

The organization should explain how double use, double issuance and double claiming are prevented and report whether the credits are associated with a corresponding adjustment. It should report the crediting and monitoring periods, the validation and verification standards and certifications, and the GHG programme’s rules, auditor-accreditation procedures, stakeholder-consultation procedures and grievance mechanisms.

The organization must report the purpose of each carbon-credit cancellation. Relevant purposes can include compliance with a mandatory or voluntary carbon-crediting programme, beyond-value-chain mitigation or climate contributions, and counterbalancing residual GHG emissions in the context of a net-zero target.

Carbon credits must be excluded from gross GHG emissions and gross GHG emissions-reduction targets. The organization should explain how the use of credits does not impede achievement of its gross reduction targets and describe their role in its climate-change transition plan.

Only GHG-removal credits can be used to counterbalance residual GHG emissions, and only as the final step of the mitigation hierarchy after the organization has reduced at least 90% of its emissions, unless an applicable sectoral pathway provides otherwise. Credits from emission-reduction projects cannot be used to counterbalance residual emissions.

The organization must describe the impacts on people and the environment associated with all carbon-credit projects whose credits were purchased during the reporting period, whether or not the credits were cancelled. It must explain how it continuously monitors and evaluates these impacts.

The organization should have a due-diligence process for selecting projects that maximizes positive impacts and prevents or mitigates negative impacts. It should report the impact-monitoring period and identify impacts related to pollution, corruption, land acquisition, human rights, vulnerable groups, livelihoods, food security, water rights, land rights and the risk of forced eviction.

The organization must report the categories of stakeholders consulted and explain how stakeholder engagement informed project implementation. Where projects affect Indigenous Peoples’ lands, territories or resources, it should explain whether free, prior and informed consent was obtained and how.

The organization must explain how socio-economic benefits are provided to local communities and Indigenous Peoples, including evidence of payments, employment, skills development or training. It must also describe both positive and negative biodiversity impacts and how biodiversity is conserved.

Carbon-credit projects can create trade-offs, such as land-based removal projects reducing land available for food production. The organization must explain how these trade-offs are assessed and should describe the process used to mitigate them.

Information already published by a third party can be incorporated through a clear reference where it covers all relevant quality criteria or impact elements. The organization remains responsible for ensuring that the referenced information is complete, current and applicable to the credits it purchased or cancelled.

This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official Global Reporting Initiative source.

Prepare

What to collect before drafting

Tick each field as the evidence lands. Owners are the teams that usually hold the source files.

  • External carbon-credit definition and boundary

    GHG Accounting / Sustainability reporting

    Disclosure 102-10 requires an organization to report carbon credits generated outside its value chain and purchased by the organization. A carbon credit is a transferable or tradable instrument representing one metric ton of CO₂ equivalent of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting external carbon-credit definition and boundary.

    Watch for The published response for external carbon-credit definition and boundary is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown

    GHG Accounting / Sustainability reporting

    The organization must report the total amount of carbon credits cancelled during the reporting period in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent and provide a numerical breakdown between credits from GHG emission-reduction projects and credits from GHG-removal projects. It can additionally report the percentage represented by each project type.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown.

    Watch for The published response for cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type

    Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting

    The organization should also report the total amount of carbon credits purchased but not cancelled during the reporting period. Where it purchases removal credits, it should identify whether the underlying projects are nature-based or technological.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type.

    Watch for The published response for purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Project and cancellation metadata

    Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting

    For every project whose credits were cancelled, the organization must report the project name and ID, project type, cancellation serial number or range, cancellation date, vintage, host country and issuing registry. Vintage is the year in which the GHG reduction or removal occurred rather than the year in which the credit was purchased or cancelled.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project and cancellation metadata.

    Watch for The published response for project and cancellation metadata is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Eight project quality criteria

    Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting

    For each cancelled-credit project, the organization must explain how the project adheres to the eight quality criteria: additionality, credible baselines, permanence, leakage avoidance, unique issuance and claiming, regular monitoring, independent validation and verification, and GHG programme governance.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting eight project quality criteria.

    Watch for The published response for eight project quality criteria is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Quality-criterion failures and corrective actions

    Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting

    Where a project does not meet one or more quality criteria, the organization should explain why and describe the actions taken or planned to achieve compliance. It should also report whether credits cancelled in earlier periods failed to meet quality criteria during the current reporting period.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting quality-criterion failures and corrective actions.

    Watch for The published response for quality-criterion failures and corrective actions is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance

    Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting

    The organization should explain how double use, double issuance and double claiming are prevented and report whether the credits are associated with a corresponding adjustment. It should report the crediting and monitoring periods, the validation and verification standards and certifications, and the GHG programme’s rules, auditor-accreditation procedures, stakeholder-consultation procedures and grievance mechanisms.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance.

    Watch for The published response for double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Purpose of each cancellation

    Climate / Sustainability reporting

    The organization must report the purpose of each carbon-credit cancellation. Relevant purposes can include compliance with a mandatory or voluntary carbon-crediting programme, beyond-value-chain mitigation or climate contributions, and counterbalancing residual GHG emissions in the context of a net-zero target.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purpose of each cancellation.

    Watch for The published response for purpose of each cancellation is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets

    GHG Accounting / Sustainability reporting

    Carbon credits must be excluded from gross GHG emissions and gross GHG emissions-reduction targets. The organization should explain how the use of credits does not impede achievement of its gross reduction targets and describe their role in its climate-change transition plan.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets.

    Watch for The published response for exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy

    Climate / Sustainability reporting

    Only GHG-removal credits can be used to counterbalance residual GHG emissions, and only as the final step of the mitigation hierarchy after the organization has reduced at least 90% of its emissions, unless an applicable sectoral pathway provides otherwise. Credits from emission-reduction projects cannot be used to counterbalance residual emissions.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy.

    Watch for The published response for residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased

    Operations / Sustainability reporting

    The organization must describe the impacts on people and the environment associated with all carbon-credit projects whose credits were purchased during the reporting period, whether or not the credits were cancelled. It must explain how it continuously monitors and evaluates these impacts.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased.

    Watch for The published response for impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring

    Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting

    The organization should have a due-diligence process for selecting projects that maximizes positive impacts and prevents or mitigates negative impacts. It should report the impact-monitoring period and identify impacts related to pollution, corruption, land acquisition, human rights, vulnerable groups, livelihoods, food security, water rights, land rights and the risk of forced eviction.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring.

    Watch for The published response for project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Stakeholder consultation, human rights and FPIC

    Stakeholder Engagement / Human Rights / Sustainability reporting

    The organization must report the categories of stakeholders consulted and explain how stakeholder engagement informed project implementation. Where projects affect Indigenous Peoples’ lands, territories or resources, it should explain whether free, prior and informed consent was obtained and how.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting stakeholder consultation, human rights and fpic.

    Watch for The published response for stakeholder consultation, human rights and fpic is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts

    Stakeholder Engagement / Human Rights / Sustainability reporting

    The organization must explain how socio-economic benefits are provided to local communities and Indigenous Peoples, including evidence of payments, employment, skills development or training. It must also describe both positive and negative biodiversity impacts and how biodiversity is conserved.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts.

    Watch for The published response for socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Project trade-offs and mitigation

    Operations / Sustainability reporting

    Carbon-credit projects can create trade-offs, such as land-based removal projects reducing land available for food production. The organization must explain how these trade-offs are assessed and should describe the process used to mitigate them.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project trade-offs and mitigation.

    Watch for The published response for project trade-offs and mitigation is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

  • Complete and current third-party cross-references

    Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting

    Information already published by a third party can be incorporated through a clear reference where it covers all relevant quality criteria or impact elements. The organization remains responsible for ensuring that the referenced information is complete, current and applicable to the credits it purchased or cancelled.

    Evidence Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting complete and current third-party cross-references.

    Watch for The published response for complete and current third-party cross-references is incomplete or does not match the supporting records.

Before you start

  • Report carbon credits generated outside the organisation's value chain and purchased by the organisation. Cover every project whose credits were purchased for impact information, whether or not the credits were cancelled.
  • Only GHG-removal credits can counterbalance residual emissions and only as the final mitigation-hierarchy step after at least 90% reduction unless an applicable sectoral pathway specifies otherwise.
  • Have the supporting records and the final response been reconciled?
＋ Show GRI 102-10 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)

How to prepare it

Report carbon credits generated outside the organisation's value chain and purchased by the organisation. Cover every project whose credits were purchased for impact information, whether or not the credits were cancelled.
Collect and reconcile the records for: External carbon-credit definition and boundary; Cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown; Purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type; Project and cancellation metadata; Eight project quality criteria; Quality-criterion failures and corrective actions; Double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance; Purpose of each cancellation; Exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets; Residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy; Impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased; Project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring; Stakeholder consultation, human rights and FPIC; Socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts; Project trade-offs and mitigation; Complete and current third-party cross-references.
Only GHG-removal credits can counterbalance residual emissions and only as the final mitigation-hierarchy step after at least 90% reduction unless an applicable sectoral pathway specifies otherwise.
Draft the response using the defined terms shown in the disclosure focus; do not substitute broader internal labels.
Review the final wording against every requirement and the supporting governance or data records before sign-off.

Request the data

Request the disclosure evidence

Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.

Provide the complete credit transaction and project register; cancelled total and reduction/removal breakdown; purchased-but-not-cancelled total; project, serial, vintage, host-country and registry data; assessment of all eight quality criteria and failures; double-counting and corresponding-adjustment controls; cancellation purpose; inventory and target exclusions; due diligence, impact monitoring, stakeholder, FPIC, socio-economic, biodiversity and trade-off evidence.

Use the organisation's own role and document names, but preserve the defined GRI terms and the scope described above.

Better request

Provide the complete credit transaction and project register; cancelled total and reduction/removal breakdown; purchased-but-not-cancelled total; project, serial, vintage, host-country and registry data; assessment of all eight quality criteria and failures; double-counting and corresponding-adjustment controls; cancellation purpose; inventory and target exclusions; due diligence, impact monitoring, stakeholder, FPIC, socio-economic, biodiversity and trade-off evidence.

Draft your disclosure

Notes that turn data into a disclosure

LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.

Method note

Keep carbon credits outside gross Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 inventories and gross reduction targets. Distinguish reduction credits from removal credits, cancellation from purchase and vintage from purchase or cancellation year.

Context note

A third-party reference can be incorporated only when it covers the relevant quality or impact elements completely and currently. The organisation remains responsible for the resulting disclosure.

Download Centre

Preparation tools & forms

Download preparation tools for GRI 102-10 with free verified email access for 24 hours. Source-report links remain public.

Free · Email access
01XLSPrep & Assurance workbookDatapoints, risks, evidence to check, owner and evidence pack.Get it free ↧ 02XLSData-request packRequest email, message template, response fields and sign-off structure.Get it free ↧ 03PDFLibrary CardPrintable one-page summary of this disclosure card.Get it free ↧

Check

For each claim, check the evidence

  • External carbon-credit definition and boundary is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates external carbon-credit definition and boundary.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting external carbon-credit definition and boundary.

  • Cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown.

  • Purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type.

  • Project and cancellation metadata is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates project and cancellation metadata.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project and cancellation metadata.

  • Eight project quality criteria is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates eight project quality criteria.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting eight project quality criteria.

  • Quality-criterion failures and corrective actions is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates quality-criterion failures and corrective actions.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting quality-criterion failures and corrective actions.

  • Double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance.

  • Purpose of each cancellation is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates purpose of each cancellation.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purpose of each cancellation.

  • Exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets.

  • Residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy.

  • Impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased.

  • Project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring.

  • Stakeholder consultation, human rights and FPIC is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates stakeholder consultation, human rights and fpic.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting stakeholder consultation, human rights and fpic.

  • Socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts.

  • Project trade-offs and mitigation is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates project trade-offs and mitigation.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project trade-offs and mitigation.

  • Complete and current third-party cross-references is reported accurately and completely.

    Risk The response omits, misclassifies or overstates complete and current third-party cross-references.

    Evidence to check Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting complete and current third-party cross-references.

Evidence pack to prepare

Common reporting gaps

  • Reporting only the cancelled total without a reduction-versus-removal breakdown.
  • Omitting credits purchased but not cancelled.
  • Using reduction credits to counterbalance residual emissions.
  • Treating registry transfer or internal write-off as cancellation.
  • Calling a project high quality without assessing all eight criteria and any failures.
  • Assessing impacts only for cancelled credits rather than every purchased project.
✓ Knowledge Hub AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop
Dr Ross Kurinko

Ask the Knowledge Hub AI Assistant about this disclosure

Get practical answers for your reporting context.

Try How do I prepare GRI 102-10? What data do I need to collect? What mistakes should I avoid?

Framework references

Relevant GRI requirements and related disclosures

GRI

GRI 102-10

within GRI 102: Climate Change

Open official source →

Guides that settle this question

GRI 102 Scope 3 Reporting: Categories, Data Hierarchy and Supplier Estimates →GRI 102 Transition Plans and Just Transition: What Companies Need to Disclose →GRI 102: Climate Change 2025 - What Changes and How to Prepare for 2027 →One GHG Inventory for GRI 102, ESRS E1 and IFRS S2: Boundaries, Metrics and Remaining Gaps →

Related & explore

Transition plan for climate change mitigation → CardClimate change adaptation plan → CardJust transition → CardGHG emissions reduction targets and progress → CardScope 1 GHG emissions → CardBrowse all disclosures →

More in GRI 102 →Browse full catalogue →Search all disclosures →

How this library is built 1,211 published reports indexed 315,012 pages with page-level citations 272 published cards in the active catalogue
/en/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/gri-102-10/