Esg
March 30, 2026
Carbon Market: Brazilian leadership
Brazil has the most valuable asset, nature, but still needs to consolidate governance to lead sustainably
There is a topic that has ceased to be a technical issue to occupy the center of strategic decisions of governments and companies: the carbon market. And, as we have already seen in other ESG agendas, discomfort here is also necessary, because it reveals both the potential and the fragilities of a system still under construction.
The discussion has matured, gained global scale and, more recently, has been strained at COP30. Brazil, which historically oscillates between leadership and regulatory delay, is now trying to assume a more active role, albeit amid structural and regulatory challenges (PWC, 2025; EY, 2025).
What is the carbon market
Simply put, the carbon market is a mechanism that assigns value to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. It operates through carbon credits, where each credit represents one ton of CO₂ that has not been emitted or has been removed from the atmosphere (G1, 2025; BNDES, s.d.).
In practice, companies or countries that emit less than permitted can sell these credits to those that exceed their limits. This is a logic that combines environmental regulation with economic incentive (BNDES, n.d.).
There are two major models. The regulated market, which is mandatory and has goals defined by governments, and the voluntary market, in which companies buy credits to offset their emissions, often for reputation strategy or climate commitment (G1, 2025).
The promise is powerful, transforming sustainability into market language. The risk also exists, transforming impact into financial asset without due integrity, something that has already been questioned in recent crises in the voluntary market (Capital Reset, 2024).
Brazil occupies a unique position in this debate. With its relatively clean energy matrix and vast natural capital, especially in the Amazon, the country has the potential to be one of the largest global suppliers of carbon credits (PWC, 2025).
In recent years, there have been important advances. These include more structured discussions about a regulated national market, greater involvement of the Ministry of Finance in the climate agenda, and growing mobilization of the private sector (Brazil, 2026).
Brazilian companies already operate in the voluntary market, especially in projects related to forest conservation and regenerative agriculture. However, we still face relevant challenges, such as the lack of clear and consolidated regulation, socio-land risks, especially in projects involving traditional territories, and questions about the credibility of credits (Jornal da USP, 2024).
Brazil has the most valuable asset, nature, but still needs to consolidate governance to transform this asset into sustainable leadership, and not just a short-term economic opportunity.
European and American scenarios
While Brazil structures its model, other markets are already operating at more advanced stages, offering important learnings.
In Europe, the European Union leads the regulated market with a robust and constantly adjusting system. The model demonstrates institutional maturity control of supply of credits and price stability, although it faces challenges in the face of economic crises and industrial pressures (Investing, 2025).
In the United States, the scenario is more fragmented. There is no unified national market, but rather regional initiatives and strong action from the voluntary market, with the private sector taking the lead (EY, 2025). This difference reveals a relevant point. There is no single model, but a common need for credibility, transparency, and standardization.
Net Zero
If the carbon market is the instrument, the objective behind it is clear: to achieve the so-called Net Zero — reaching a balance between greenhouse gas emissions generated and those removed from the atmosphere, so that the net impact is zero (UN, 2024; Net Zero Climate, n.d.). In practice, this implies drastically reducing emissions and offsetting only a small residual portion with solutions such as forests, capture technologies, or other removal mechanisms (UN, 2024).
This concept has become central to the global climate agenda, because it is directly linked to the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. To achieve this, the world needs to reduce emissions by almost half by 2030 and reach Net Zero by 2050 (UN, 2024; Net Zero Climate, n.d.).
In Brazil, this agenda is also beginning to gain traction, including with governmental and sectoral initiatives that seek to accelerate decarbonization, recognizing nature’s role as a strategic ally in this process (MMA, 2026; Poder360, 2025).
However, as in the carbon market, the challenge lies not only in the goal, but in the credibility of the path. Net Zero commitments without concrete plans can become mere rhetoric.
COP30
COP30 marked a relevant moment for Brazil on the global climate stage. The country presented the proposal for global integration of carbon markets, advocating for greater connection between national and international systems (COP30 Brazil, 2025).
The proposal seeks to create a more fluid environment, with greater scale and efficiency in credit transactions. However, the topic exposed important divergences, especially around Article 6, which deals with carbon exchanges between countries.
The central point of contention lies in the integrity of these transactions. Questions arise about how to avoid double-counting credits, how to ensure that emission reductions are accounted for fairly between countries, and how to ensure that these credits represent real impact (Capital Reset, 2025). The criticism is legitimate. Without clear rules and robust oversight, the market can lose its credibility. And, without credibility, it loses environmental and financial value.
The market is inevitable, but it needs to be trustworthy
The carbon market is not a perfect solution, but it is increasingly an inevitable one. It connects climate and economy in a pragmatic way, creates incentives, mobilizes capital, and, if well-structured, can accelerate the transition to a low carbon economy (BNDES, n.d.; G1, 2025).
But it is important to make it clear: the carbon market is not an end. It is a means to achieve a greater objective, Net Zero. And this is the central point of the discussion. It is not enough to create financial mechanisms or establish ambitious goals. We must ensure that we are, in fact, reducing emissions consistently and structurally.
Brazil has the chance to be a protagonist. It possesses natural assets, technical capacity, and political relevance. But protagonism demands more than discourse, it demands regulatory consistency, legal security, and real commitment to impact(PWC, 2025).
COP30 made it clear that the world wants a global carbon market. But it also brought an important warning: without trust, this market cannot be sustained (EY, 2025). In the end, the question that remains is not just about the market. It’s about direction. Are we using the carbon market as a real tool to reach Net Zero, or just as a convenient shortcut to postpone more difficult decisions?
| To access the references of this text click here |
Who wrote this column
Rodrigo Thomaz
