To be OER not to be

Will the VCM make the most of a demand driver buried in SBTi’s new net zero standard?

Welcome to September! This quarter for the ‘Conversations on Integrity’ series, we thought we’d take on a great will-they-or-won’t-they drama in the carbon market: Ongoing Emissions Responsibility (OER). 

OER is a new mechanism introduced by the Science-based Targets Initiative (SBTi) in its revised Net Zero Standard 2.0. The revised standard came out in June 2026. OER was one of a raft of changes in it. Consequently, it didn’t receive a lot of attention at the time.

This is how OER works: Starting in 2035 SBTi will require companies in its system to invest in carbon removals equal to at least 1% of their ongoing emissions, defined as the emissions a company continues to be responsible for during the decades-long transition period to net-zero. That 1% ratchets up over time to 100% and toward supporting a greater proportion of long-term removals. 

Before 2035, addressing ongoing emissions is voluntary. But under 2.0, companies must now explain why they’re not participating in the OER mechanism. That disclosure mechanism could flip companies’ incentives from today’s status quo of widespread “greenhushing” (companies stay quiet about their carbon credit purchasing for fear of reputational attacks) to a near-term future where companies instead have to defend why they’re not doing anything about their ongoing emissions. (Worth noting: carbon reduction and avoidance credits are also eligible for OER, but only removal credits are eligible once the voluntary phase ends in 2035.)

So there’s a time-bound demand signal, and the scaffolding for a formal recognition program incentivizing participation. That makes OER one of the clearest and more interesting opportunities to mobilize demand for carbon credits over the next nine years.

But will it mobilize demand? How many companies right now are actually planning to change procurement behavior pre-2035? What will encourage or discourage participation? Are the reputational/recognition incentives on the table attractive enough?  What kinds of claims will companies be able to make?

More fundamentally, is greater transparency enough to unlock demand, or are there other barriers to more corporate adoption and more high-quality credit supply?

In the coming weeks, we’ll publish a series of invited commentary on these themes from experts in the market who are tracking OER closely. 

Our goal is to start the conversation about what needs to happen for the market to meet the moment. As Nathan Truitt, Executive Vice President of Climate Funding at the American Forest Foundation, notes in the piece that opens this series, we only have about 18 months to shape how OER will be operationalized.