This disclosure asks an organisation to explain whether it uses carbon credits, and if so, to report the relevant information in a clear and consistent way. The practical point is to show how credits are being used in relation to the organisation’s reported emissions, rather than leaving readers to guess whether they are part of the picture.
The focus is on transparency across the organisation’s reporting boundary: users should be able to see whether carbon credits are being applied broadly across operations or only in certain parts of the business, such as specific sites or activities. The aim is to make the treatment of credits easy to understand and comparable, not to present them as a substitute for explaining the underlying emissions performance.
This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Key datapoints to prepare
How to prepare it
Request the carbon credit cancellation records
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
Use your organisation’s own terms first, then map them to the reporting disclosure. For example, if your team says ‘retired’, ‘used’, ‘written off’ or ‘offset units’, keep that internal language in the request and only translate it when preparing the disclosure pack. Check the source guidance before sign-off.
Please provide the GRI 102-10 carbon credits disclosure data.
Why it fails: This uses framework language only, so the owner may not know which internal records to pull, which system to use, or how to separate cancelled units by project. It also does not ask for the supporting evidence needed to explain the figures and project context.
Please send the cancelled carbon credit records for [period] in [boundary], from [source system/register]. Include the total cancelled amount and one line per project with the project name/code, project type, cancellation reference, date, vintage, host country, registry, the reason for cancellation, and the supporting notes or documents on project quality, governance, and any people or environment impacts. Use your team’s normal terms, and we will map them for the reporting pack.
Notes that turn data into a disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
State how you counted cancelled credits, what you treated as a project, which identifiers and dates you used, and how you assessed and described the project-quality checks for each listed project.
Explain what the total cancelled volume means in practice, how the project mix, locations and registries shape the picture, and why the listed project-quality checks matter for understanding the reliability of the cancellations.
If the total or project mix changed materially, link the movement to changes in the number of projects, their sizes, vintages, locations or registries, and note any shifts in the project-quality checks you were able to describe.
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for GRI 102-10 — free with an LRA Community membership. Register once (it's free) and every download unlocks, together with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant.
For each claim, check the evidence
Evidence pack to prepare
Common reporting gaps
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
Where judgement is often needed
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
We have cancelled 120,000 tCO2e of carbon credits in the year, all from two projects. For each project, we show the project details, the cancellation record, and a short note on how we checked the project design and controls around extraity, baseline setting, durability, leakage, no double use, ongoing checks, and outside review.
Synthetic illustration only. The figures and project details are invented for training purposes and are internally consistent.
We cancelled 48,000 tCO2e of credits across three projects. For each one, we give the project identifier, type, cancellation reference, timing and vintage, where it was issued, and a brief explanation of the checks we relied on for extraity, baseline quality, permanence, leakage, exclusive use, monitoring, and independent review.
Synthetic illustration only. The figures and project details are invented for training purposes and are internally consistent.
How companies report GRI 102-10 in practice
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.

Scenarios to work through
Your team retired 12,400 tCO2e of credits this year from two offset projects. One project file is complete, but the other only shows the total retired and the registry statement; it does not yet list the project ID, vintage, or cancellation date.
One of your projects was cancelled to support a net-zero claim, while another was retired to meet a customer contract. Both sit in the same reporting pack, and the narrative currently says only that the credits were “used for climate action.”
A forestry project in Country A has been monitored quarterly, independently checked, and registered with a recognised programme. The project manager says the report can simply note that it is “well managed” and leave out how the project was assessed against issues like durability, leakage, and double counting.
A cookstove project was cancelled to support a product claim. Community meetings were held, but the draft report only mentions that “stakeholders were engaged” and says nothing about local people, Indigenous Peoples, human rights, biodiversity, or any trade-offs from the project.
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Questions this page answers
Use the page’s datapoint list as your starting checklist: it sets out the core project, cancellation, quality, monitoring, oversight and stakeholder items to collect. The page also has a step-by-step preparation section, which is designed to help you turn that list into a workable drafting plan.
The page breaks the disclosure into project-level cancellation details, project identity, project type, location and registry, and cancellation record details, so you can scope the work around each project rather than only the total credits cancelled. That helps you avoid treating the disclosure as a single headline number with no supporting detail.
The page is set up for practitioner use, so ownership should sit with the people who hold the underlying records for cancellations, project information, monitoring, stakeholder input and assurance evidence. In practice, that usually means assigning each datapoint to a named owner before drafting starts so the evidence pack can be built without gaps.
The page includes six assurance claims to verify and an evidence pack with five items, so it is designed to help you assemble support before review. Use those sections together to check the claim, the risk and the evidence for each key point, rather than relying on the narrative alone.
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format and a printable Library Card in .pdf format. Use the workbook to organise the datapoints, evidence and draft text, and use the card as a quick reference while you are collecting information or reviewing the disclosure.
The page includes a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, which is there to help you spot missing project detail, weak explanations and incomplete support before sign-off. A practical way to use it is to compare your draft against the datapoint list and the assurance claims so you can catch omissions early.
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a GRI content-index line. That means you can move from collected data to a first draft by using the suggested structure for the narrative and then checking the content-index line for completeness.
The page asks for a project quality explanation alongside items such as extraity case, reference scenario, long-term durability, leakage controls and single claim control. Use that cluster to explain why the project is considered credible and how the cancellation is controlled over time.
The datapoints include consulted stakeholder groups, human rights safeguards, local benefit delivery, nature protection and benefit trade-off review, so the page expects you to show who was consulted and what was considered. Keep the evidence pack aligned to those items so the consultation story is supported, not just stated.
The page includes synthetic illustrative example disclosures with a quantitative table, so you can see how the disclosure might look in practice without treating it as a real company report. It is useful for checking how the data, narrative and table can fit together in a draft.
Get your GRI 102-10 tools — free
Your preparation tools are free for LRA Community members and students. Register once (it's free) and your download starts right away — plus the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant.
You're in — your download is starting
Your file is downloading now. Your Community Cabinet — with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant — is ready too.
Open your Cabinet →