CSO Survey Highlights Confidence as the Key to Unlocking Climate Capital

Concerns over project credibility and reputational risk are actively delaying or preventing corporate investment in climate and nature initiatives, according to a new survey of sustainability leaders released this week. The research, conducted among more than 200 Chief Sustainability Officers and senior decision-makers across the UK, EU and North America, found that 51 percent of respondents cited integrity concerns as a direct barrier to investment.

The findings point to a growing confidence gap in voluntary carbon and nature markets. Twenty-three percent of respondents said fear of criticism or greenwashing now outweighs concern about the risks of inaction, while 14 percent reported difficulty publicly defending claims linked to nature-based projects despite internal ambition and board-level pressure to act.

 

Explore Earthly on the OneStop ESG Marketplace: here

 

Project Quality Scrutiny Highlights Structural Weaknesses

 

The survey results are reinforced by assessment data from Earthly, which has screened more than 1,000 nature projects over the past five years. According to the company, 92 percent of projects failed to meet minimum quality thresholds when assessed holistically across carbon integrity, biodiversity outcomes and social safeguards.

While many projects performed strongly on carbon metrics, Earthly found that most fell short on areas such as Indigenous rights protections, water quality safeguards, evidence standards and additionality. The findings underline concerns that climate impact claims are often evaluated in isolation from ecological and social outcomes.

 

Read more: Dcycle Acquires ESG-X to Expand ESG Data Management in DACH Region

 

Keystone 3.0 Introduced to Address Investment Paralysis

 

In response to the confidence gap identified in the survey, Earthly has launched Keystone 3.0, a new science-led project assessment framework designed to help sustainability leaders defend investment decisions and public claims.

Survey respondents identified independent, science-based project assessments as the single most important factor that would increase confidence to invest in and communicate about nature restoration. Keystone 3.0 evaluates projects across more than 160 data points, structured around three equally weighted pillars covering carbon integrity, biodiversity outcomes and social safeguards.

The framework applies strict minimum thresholds, rejecting projects that fail to meet baseline standards even where carbon performance appears strong. Earthly said this reflects growing recognition that climate outcomes cannot be separated from ecological integrity or community impact.

 

Technology and Evidence Play Larger Role in Verification

 

Keystone 3.0 introduces an AI-assisted pre-assessment designed to screen projects at scale and flag integrity risks early in the process. Final scoring remains grounded in human expert scientific review. The framework integrates advanced evidence sources including geospatial monitoring, satellite imagery, bioacoustics and environmental DNA to validate claims and reduce reliance on narrative-based reporting.

Earthly said the framework is both ecosystem-agnostic and registry-agnostic, allowing consistent comparison across project types, geographies and verification standards.

 

Disclosure Pressure Raises Stakes for Nature Markets

 

The launch comes amid tightening disclosure expectations globally, with frameworks such as the International Sustainability Standards Board and the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures raising the bar for verifiable, decision-useful data. At the same time, voluntary carbon and nature markets remain under scrutiny following a series of high-profile integrity failures.

Earthly said Keystone 3.0 is already being used by businesses, investors and project developers seeking to identify high-integrity nature-based solutions and communicate impact with greater confidence.

 

Industry Participants Welcome Deeper Due Diligence

 

Early users of the framework described the level of scrutiny as overdue. Ivan de Klee, Head of Natural Capital at Nattergal, said the assessment enabled more structured evidence gathering and reduced time spent responding to ad hoc integrity questions. Kate Truby, Head of Sales and Partnerships at The Future Forest Company, said the framework addressed biodiversity and social narratives often overlooked in other assessments.

From a buyer perspective, Graham Odds, Chief Strategy and Sustainability Officer at Scott Logic, said Earthly’s approach reflects the growing role of business in delivering credible climate and social outcomes.

 

Explore OneStop ESG Marketplace: Carbon offset services

 

“Confidence, Not Ambition, Is the Blocker”

 

Oliver Bolton, Chief Executive and Co-founder of Earthly, said the survey highlights a shift in the sustainability challenge facing corporates. He noted that ambition remains high, but leaders increasingly require defensible evidence to support investment decisions and external claims.

According to Earthly, Keystone 3.0 is intended to set a clearer, science-based benchmark for what constitutes high-integrity climate and nature projects, as scrutiny from regulators, investors and civil society continues to intensify.

 

Source: https://earthly.org/project-assessment-keystone-3

Explore Earthly on the OneStop ESG Marketplace: here