The Three-Pillar Evaluation Framework
How AltStreet evaluates carbon and climate platforms for integrity, market structure, and governance — with an emphasis on claims defensibility, disclosure quality, and real buyer risk.
This framework is cited across all AltStreet carbon & climate platform reviews. It is designed to explain why two platforms selling “carbon credits” can represent radically different risk profiles — even when prices, certifications, or marketing claims appear similar.
Why a Carbon-Specific Framework Is Necessary
The voluntary carbon market spans fundamentally different products: retail offsets, avoidance credits, engineered removals, forward offtake, procurement marketplaces, MRV infrastructure, and registry access layers. Treating these as interchangeable obscures material differences in durability, accountability, and buyer risk.
Key Insight: Carbon platforms should not be evaluated as “good” or “bad.” They should be evaluated based on what role they play in the market, who carries risk, and how defensible their claims are under scrutiny.
The Three Pillars
Pillar I — Integrity & Verification
This pillar evaluates whether the underlying climate impact is credible, durable, and defensible. It focuses on the integrity of the credit or removal itself — not the platform selling it.
- Additionality, leakage, and baseline credibility
- Permanence and durability (including reversal risk and buffers)
- MRV methodology and monitoring cadence
- Registry reliance vs proprietary verification
- Evidence artifacts (retirement records, serial numbers, audits)
Interpretation: A platform can score well on integrity while still being a poor fit economically or contractually. This pillar answers “Is the impact real?” — not “Is this a good deal?”
Pillar II — Market Structure & Economics
This pillar evaluates how the platform is positioned in the carbon value chain and how economic incentives are structured. It clarifies who bears risk, who controls pricing, and what the buyer is actually purchasing.
- Platform model (retail reseller, marketplace, MRV layer, registry access)
- Pricing mechanics (fixed pricing, markups, negotiated fees)
- Liquidity assumptions (immediate retirement vs forward delivery)
- Whether carbon is framed as procurement or as an “asset”
Interpretation: Many buyer risks originate here. Platforms that abstract pricing, portfolio composition, or delivery timelines often reduce friction — but increase opacity.
Pillar III — Governance, Legal & Disclosure
This pillar evaluates what happens when something goes wrong. It focuses on contractual clarity, remedies, data access, and disclosure posture — areas often omitted from marketing.
- Contract terms and liability limitations
- Replacement or remediation policies
- Data access, exportability, and audit rights
- Disclosure of conflicts, sourcing, and uncertainties
Interpretation: Strong governance does not eliminate climate risk — but it determines whether buyers are left holding reputational, legal, or financial exposure alone.
How to Use This Framework
Individual platform reviews apply this framework with evidence, tradeoffs, and fit classifications. No composite scores are generated. Each pillar is assessed independently to preserve decision-relevant detail.
What This Framework Enables
- Clear differentiation between platform types
- Identification of hidden buyer risk
- Claims defensibility analysis
- Fit-based platform selection
What It Does Not Do
- No rankings or star ratings
- No investment recommendations
- No verification of underlying credits
- No “best platform” claims