To the Editor of Follow the Money,
I am writing in response to your article “US charges against carbon-offsetting boss highlight wider industry problems,” published on October 16.
My name is Mandy Rambharos, and I recently took on the role of chief executive officer at Verra, having been in the environmental and climate sector for the better part of the last 20 years.
While I fully recognize the complexity of the issue and understand the editorial focus on conflicts of interest and broader market challenges in the voluntary carbon market (VCM), I must respectfully push back on the suggestion of ill intent on Verra’s part and flaws in our processes.
In particular, I take issue with the following paragraph:
For example, non-profit Verra receives 18 euro cents per approved carbon credit. The organization therefore has a financial interest in not being too exacting when it assesses project calculation methods.
As a nonprofit, Verra is driven by its mission to advance climate action through carbon markets, delivering strong social impacts and environmental benefits that directly serve communities, particularly in regions that rely on these markets for both environmental and socio-economic support. The fees Verra receives are strictly used to maintain our operations, improve our standards programs, and continue enhancing the rigor of the VCM.
Importantly, our investments in methodology improvements and program development are made without a view on revenue. We undertake these initiatives at our own risk, driven by our commitment to delivering high-integrity climate solutions, not financial incentives.
The suggestion that Verra “has a financial interest in not being too exacting” misrepresents our role and commitment and, quite frankly, is offensive. Our priority is to ensure that carbon credits represent real, measurable, and lasting emission reductions or removals in accordance with the requirements under our standards. In fact, we consistently invest in improving the integrity of our methodologies, which undergo rigorous expert review and public consultations to ensure they meet the highest standards of transparency and scientific validity and reflect the most recent technology and best practices. In short, being “exacting” is at the core of what we strive for.
The piece also raises concerns about the independence of auditors, stating:
…the auditors engaged by Verra are paid not by the organization but the entrepreneurs behind the projects themselves.
While it is true that project developers engage third-party auditors, these auditors, known as validation/verification bodies (VVBs), must hold accreditation or approval for validation or verification for specific areas and therefore are held to strict international standards, ensuring impartiality and integrity. Besides, the point that is made in the article is in direct contradiction with the standard practice across all industries: the party seeking an audit tends to cover the cost of that audit. Whether in the financial, environmental, or other sectors, the independence of auditors is then maintained through strict regulatory frameworks and accreditation processes. The VCM is no exception.
As your piece infers, this particular matter is incredibly complicated, with several U.S. enforcement agencies involved. In its press release announcing the criminal charges (external), the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York alleges that “false and misleading data” was provided to Verra (referred to as Issuer-1 in the charges), “tricking” Verra into certifying emission reductions that, according to our methodology for calculating such reductions, “had not in fact been achieved.”
While Verra is fully committed to doing its part—continually improving standards, enhancing transparency, and addressing any challenges head-on—journalistic pieces like this must also tell the whole story.
The voluntary carbon market is not without its complexities, but it remains a crucial tool in the fight against climate change, especially in regions that depend on it for both environmental and socio-economic benefits. It’s essential that these discussions are grounded in a balanced view that recognizes both the challenges and the robustness of the existing system, as well as the significant progress being made to strengthen it.
I am available to discuss this further at your convenience.
Warm regards,
Mandy Rambharos
Verra CEO