Carbon credits can drive climate action, and there are three key factors that become significant in qualifying for them, which in fact also contribute to their quality and credibility.

🌱 Additionality: Was the project truly dependent on credit funding, or would it have happened anyway?
🔥 Permanence: What happens when forests burn or logging restarts?
↔️ Leakage: Are emissions simply shifting somewhere else?
To help build trust and real climate benefits, some of these fundamental need credible answers

👉 Do you think these are valid questions to ask in determining the quality of carbon credits?  If not, why not and what additional ones need to be included ?