South Korea urged to drop questionable international carbon credits from its climate goals

A new report argues that South Korea, which intends to use tens of millions of international carbon credits to meet its climate goals, should avoid credits from projects of doubtful quality.

Korea’s reliance on international mitigation is significant. The government plans to use 37.5 million credits by 2030 under Article 6 to meet its NDC target of a 40% reduction from 2018 levels, which is about 13% of the total reduction required. Korea has signed Article 6.2 agreements with more than 10 countries, including Vietnam, Cambodia and Mongolia, and is fast-tracking talks with the Philippines. In July 2025, Korea and Cambodia launched the first authorised Article 6.2 project under their partnership, an e-mobility and charging infrastructure programme.

The quality debate has been building. A 2025 report by the Korean NGO Plan 1.5 and Carbon Market Watch, co-authored with Berkeley’s Barbara Haya, analysed 21 cookstove projects that supplied credits to Korean companies under the K-ETS. It found they were generating on average 18.3 times more credits than justified. It recommended banning international credits from the K-ETS, particularly from cookstove and REDD projects. A separate 2025 report concluded Korea was highly likely to miss its target of securing millions of Paris-aligned units by 2030.

Signals to watch

• Integrity pressure on a major buyer: Korea is one of the largest planned sovereign buyers in Asia. If the government responds to criticism by tightening eligibility criteria, for example by excluding certain cookstove methodologies, requiring PACM-equivalent baselines or prioritising technology-based activities, supply strategies across Southeast Asia and Africa will need to adjust.
• Compliance and NDC channels are linked: Korea’s international credits flow into both NDC accounting and the K-ETS. Any move to restrict credits in the K-ETS, or to keep the offset limit at 5% rather than raising it to 10%, would directly reduce corporate demand for ITMOs.
• Volume versus quality trade-off: Korea’s 37.5 million-unit target has already been questioned for feasibility. Stricter quality rules would widen the supply gap. That could push Korea towards government-to-government programmes in sectors such as e-mobility, renewables and methane, where baselines are easier to defend.
• Opportunity for high-integrity hosts: Host countries offering credits with conservative methodologies, strong MRV and transparent authorisation, such as the Philippines, Vietnam and Cambodia, could gain preferential access to Korean demand.
• Read-across for other buyers: The criticism mirrors debates over Switzerland’s cookstove purchases and Japan’s JCM expansion. Expect buyer governments to face growing domestic scrutiny over whether ITMOs represent real emission reductions, which strengthens the case for rated and reviewed credits.

Sources:

• Carbon Market Watch – Recipe for greenwashing report
• REDD-Monitor – Report calls for ban on international credits in Korea’s ETS
• Carbon News – Cookstove carbon credits: recipe for cooking the climate books
• Columbia CGEP – South Korea project-based carbon credit framework
• Carbon Pulse – South Korea likely to fail international credit purchase target