Nature-Based
Afforestation · Soil carbon · Blue carbon
Ecosystem-based sequestration where quantification, permanence, and community safeguards are inseparable from the credit.
Real tonnes. Verified impact. Lasting integrity.
Recognizing carbon offset and removal projects that demonstrate exceptional additionality, permanence, measurement integrity, and co-benefits — evaluated by an independent, cross-disciplinary panel.
Program · November 2026
The Prize will evaluate projects across the full spectrum of carbon action — from soil to silicon — under a single, transparent rubric.
Afforestation · Soil carbon · Blue carbon
Ecosystem-based sequestration where quantification, permanence, and community safeguards are inseparable from the credit.
DAC · Enhanced weathering · Biochar · BECCS
Technological removal pathways evaluated on lifecycle rigor, energy accounting, and durable storage.
Methane · Cookstoves · REDD+ with new MRV
Avoidance projects that materially advance baseline setting, leakage controls, and modern measurement.
Monitoring · dMRV · Registry innovation
Tools, protocols, and platforms that raise the ceiling on transparency and verifiability across the market.
Five stages, published transparently, so every judgment is traceable to the panel that made it.
Evaluators submit a CV, declared domains — soil science, LCA, atmospheric measurement, carbon finance, MRV/dMRV, community safeguards — and a statement of expertise. The Prize actively seeks disciplinary and geographic diversity, including reviewers from the regions where projects are sited.
Applicants are tagged by specialty so every project is matched to evaluators covering each claim type. A DAC submission, for example, is reviewed by an engineer, an LCA specialist, and a carbon finance reviewer.
Mandatory disclosure of any financial interest, project affiliation, or advisory link. Evaluators are firewalled from any project in which they hold a stake, and the screening record is published transparently.
Each project receives at least three cross-disciplinary evaluators. A calibration brief and a sample scored submission align standards across the panel before scoring opens.
Senior evaluators interrogate finalist projects, review third-party validation evidence, and reach consensus recommendations for the awards committee.
Every submission is scored against the same public rubric. Weights reflect what matters most for genuine climate impact.
Would these tonnes exist without the project or credit revenue?
Quantification accuracy, uncertainty handling, and use of dMRV.
Durability of storage, buffer pools, and leakage controls.
Biodiversity, community equity, FPIC, and SDG alignment.
Cost-per-tonne trajectory and replicability across contexts.
Data openness and third-party auditability.
The six panelists below are named subject to agreement and independence screening.
Evaluators commit approximately 10–15 hours across a four-week review window; senior Technical Review Panel members add a half-day Finals session. Evaluators receive formal credentialing, named recognition with consent, and inclusion in the published methodology.
Research Director · CNRS
Soil carbon & nature-based sequestration
France
Panelist
LinkedIn ↗Research Department Co-Head · Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Carbon removal economics & policy
Germany
Panelist
LinkedIn ↗Co-founder · Puro.earth
Engineered removal standards & verification
Finland
Panelist
LinkedIn ↗Research Coordinator, International Climate Policy · Oeko-Institut
Carbon markets & credit integrity
Germany
Panelist
LinkedIn ↗Executive Director, Carbon Trading · First Abu Dhabi Bank
Carbon markets & trading
United Arab Emirates
Panelist
LinkedIn ↗Expert on Global Carbon Markets · Carbon Market Watch
Community impacts & rights-based safeguards
Belgium
Panelist
LinkedIn ↗