akar.earthBiodiversity Credits vs Carbon Credits
Biodiversity credits vs carbon credits for Indonesian nature projects: units, metrics, standards, buyers and how to stack the two responsibly.
Carbon credits are a mature, fungible market: one unit equals one tonne of CO2e, with established standards, registries and buyers. Biodiversity credits are an early-stage market where each unit measures a site-specific gain in nature, using different metrics per standard, and buyers mostly use them for nature-positive contributions rather than offsets. For most Indonesian land projects, carbon remains the main revenue stream, and biodiversity credits are an emerging add-on for sites with strong, measurable ecological outcomes.
Side-by-side comparison
| Attribute | Carbon credits | Biodiversity credits |
|---|---|---|
| Unit | 1 tCO2e reduced or removed | Varies: area-weighted condition score, species or habitat metric |
| Fungibility | High: a tonne is a tonne | Low: tied to place and ecosystem |
| Market maturity | Established since the 2000s | Early; first issuances in recent years |
| Main standards | Verra VCS, Gold Standard, Plan Vivo PV Climate, ART TREES | Plan Vivo PV Nature, Verra Nature Framework, newer schemes |
| Integrity benchmark | ICVCM Core Carbon Principles and CCP label | No single global benchmark; several principles frameworks |
| Measurement | Biomass plots, remote sensing, allometry | Species surveys, habitat condition, acoustics, eDNA, camera traps |
| Typical buyer use | Net-zero, contribution, compliance (some) | Nature-positive commitments, TNFD-aligned disclosure |
| Offsetting claims | Common, subject to guidance | Usually discouraged |
| Indonesian domestic recognition | Recorded in SRUK for exchange trading | No domestic biodiversity credit framework identified |
| Price discovery | Ratings and exchange data available | Thin, mostly bilateral deals |
Key differences
What is measured. Carbon has one metric. Biodiversity has many: species richness, habitat intactness, populations of key species, ecosystem condition. Each standard picks its own, so a “credit” under one scheme is not comparable with another. See biodiversity credit methods.
Integrity framework. Carbon buyers can rely on ICVCM’s two ticks: a CCP-Approved methodology under a CCP-Eligible program. Biodiversity buyers rely on each standard’s rules and on emerging high-level principles. Due diligence is harder.
Claims. Carbon credits support offsetting or contribution claims within guidance. Biodiversity credits are usually framed as contributions, because a gain in a Kalimantan peat forest does not cancel a loss elsewhere.
Monitoring. Biodiversity monitoring needs ecologists and new tools such as passive acoustics and environmental DNA. See acoustic and eDNA monitoring.
When each fits in Indonesia and Southeast Asia
Indonesia’s forests, peat swamps and mangroves hold exceptional biodiversity, including orangutans, hornbills and many endemic species in Sulawesi and Papua. That makes the country a natural candidate for biodiversity finance, but carbon still drives most current deals.
- REDD+ or peat projects in orangutan habitat (Kalimantan, Sumatra): carbon credits as the base; biodiversity credits or certified co-benefit labels (such as CCB) as add-ons.
- Mangrove restoration: carbon via blue carbon methodologies; biodiversity outcomes for fisheries and birds can support nature claims.
- Community and smallholder landscapes: Plan Vivo runs both PV Climate and PV Nature, which suits community-led projects that want both.
- Corporate disclosure: companies preparing TNFD reports often want site-level nature data more than credits.
Cost and effort considerations
We do not quote prices. Effort drivers:
- Carbon: established plot designs and remote sensing; costs are well understood.
- Biodiversity: baseline surveys across seasons, specialist identification, repeat monitoring, and choosing a metric that buyers accept.
- Stacking: combining both needs clear separation of what each unit claims and agreement on additionality for each.
- Valuation: before any credit, many land companies benefit from biodiversity valuation to see whether nature outcomes are material enough to monetise.
Questions to ask before you add biodiversity credits
- Is the biodiversity gain measurable and attributable? Buyers will ask what changed because of the project, not only what lives there.
- Which metric will buyers accept? Choose a standard whose metric your target buyers understand.
- Can you fund monitoring for the full period? Biodiversity surveys must repeat over years to show change.
- How will you prevent double claims? Define in contracts which outcomes each unit covers, and keep carbon and biodiversity data linked to the same plots and boundaries.
- Do communities support it? Nature outcomes depend on local land use, so consent and benefit-sharing apply as much as for carbon.
Common misconceptions
- “Biodiversity credits are carbon credits with animals.” They measure different things and serve different claims.
- “Carbon projects automatically benefit biodiversity.” Monoculture ARR can add carbon while harming biodiversity; see agroforestry vs monoculture.
- “There is a standard biodiversity price.” There is not; deals are bespoke.
- “Indonesia regulates biodiversity credits like carbon.” We have not identified a domestic biodiversity credit framework; check current rules before marketing units.
More in the biodiversity hub.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a biodiversity credit and a carbon credit?
A carbon credit represents one tonne of CO2e reduced or removed, a fungible unit. A biodiversity credit represents a measured gain or avoided loss in biodiversity at a specific site, using metrics that differ by standard and are not fungible.
Can a project issue both carbon and biodiversity credits?
Yes, under some standards. The project must avoid selling the same outcome twice and must make clear to buyers what each unit represents.
Which standards issue biodiversity credits?
Examples include Plan Vivo's PV Nature standard (Plan Vivo Biodiversity Certificates) and Verra's Nature Framework. Several newer schemes exist; the field is young and methods are still changing.
Can biodiversity credits offset harm elsewhere?
Most voluntary biodiversity credit frameworks discourage offset-style claims because nature is local and not interchangeable. They are usually framed as contributions to nature-positive goals.