Trust and safety
Carbon markets need public confidence to accelerate. Here’s how Patch helps build it.
An iterative approach to managing risk
We’re constantly improving our trust and safety framework so you can be confident your climate action is based on the latest science and leading standards.
Risk: one problem, two parts
Risk that your carbon credit doesn’t deliver on its promise.
Carbon credits have some built-in risk. It’s the job of regulators, governments, and market infrastructure to reduce that risk as much as possible, so buyers can trust that one carbon credit equals one tonne of carbon removed or avoided.
But unlike other transactions, there’s another type of risk carbon markets must hedge against: the risk of inaction. If our civilization doesn’t invest in scaling climate solutions fast enough, we endanger our chances of a livable future.
Risk that we don’t scale climate solutions quickly enough to meet global targets
Trust and safety standards must minimize risk to the buyer and maximize funding toward as many climate solutions as possible.
To mitigate planetary risk, you could accept most or all projects — regardless of red flags.
To mitigate buyer risk, you could raise the bar so high that only a precious few projects meet that standard.
To balance the risks, Patch’s framework optimizes for both risk reduction and access to projects.
Patch has six layers of protection:
How do we balance risk reduction with access? By layering multiple types of protection, Patch can filter out more risk while also enabling more buyers and sellers to engage with the VCM.
Our project acceptance criteria represent the synthesis and curation of leading standards based on thorough scrutiny alongside internal and external leaders in the space. There are three categories of requirements:
Verification and validation:
These requirements ensure every project on the Patch marketplace has had its methodology, project, and outcomes verified by a third party.Additional eligibility requirements:
Our framework excludes certain project types and measurement approaches based on the latest scientific consensus.Supplier accountability:
We require suppliers to disclose their role in project development, share the name of the project developer, and confirm that the project aligns to the ICVCM CCPs.
Patch’s platform surfaces project-level ratings and analysis, and provides neutral, scientific reviews to help buyers understand the attributes and expected outcomes of each project. With rich, transparent project data, buyers can make better decisions.
Even sophisticated buyers rely on expert guidance to navigate the complexity of the VCM. Patch’s Climate Solutions team has decades of expertise, and offers personalized advice — from market insights to portfolio construction and insights from suppliers.
A portfolio approach to carbon credit purchasing has the benefit of hedging against risk as well as spreading investment to more projects. Patch makes it much simpler to build a portfolio by using software to streamline the evaluation and purchasing process.
Climate projects have some inherent risk which can’t be completely eliminated. One of those risks is delivery failure. If a project is unable to deliver the credits promised, Patch provides the same volume of a comparable credit type at no cost.
Patch will continuously modify and update our approach based on the best-available science. As solutions scale, we’ll learn more about their risks and adapt our framework to keep pace. Our experts have deep connections to policy and standards bodies, and as such are able to incorporate new guidance as soon as — and often before — new rules are released.
A framework to reduce risk and increase transparency
Read Patch’s full framework for trust and safety, including our complete project acceptance criteria:
- The first principles that guide our approach
- Detailed requirements for project acceptance
- Acceptance criteria checklist for easy reference
- And much more
Related content
