By Abbas Nazil
The European Commission (EU) is considering a shift in its climate strategy by potentially allowing international carbon credits to count toward its upcoming 2040 emissions reduction goal, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.
This move would mark a departure from the European Union’s (EU) longstanding policy of meeting climate targets exclusively through domestic measures.
The proposed approach is being discussed by EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra with member states and lawmakers amid growing political resistance to the bloc’s green policies.
The Commission had originally aimed to propose a 90 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2040, but missed its March deadline due to internal disagreements and mounting opposition.
Some EU countries and lawmakers argue that strict climate rules are adversely affecting local industries already grappling with external pressures, including U.S. tariffs and cheaper imports.
As a result, the Commission is reportedly exploring a less stringent domestic target, supplemented by international carbon credits.
Under the potential new strategy, member states could purchase carbon credits from abroad—such as from forest restoration or renewable energy projects in developing countries—and apply those reductions toward the EU’s overall climate target.
This would effectively outsource part of the EU’s emissions-cutting obligations, easing pressure on domestic industries while supporting climate action globally.
However, the Commission has not officially confirmed this strategy, and a spokesperson declined to comment.
This potential shift raises concerns about the credibility and integrity of carbon offset mechanisms.
The EU had banned international credits from its Emissions Trading System (ETS) in 2013 after a surge of low-cost credits contributed to a collapse in carbon prices and questionable environmental outcomes.
Critics, including Linda Kalcher of the think tank Strategic Perspectives, warn that past scandals—such as fraud and projects failing to deliver promised emissions cuts—underscore the risks of relying on international offsets.
Kalcher stressed that introducing international credits could undermine both the environmental integrity and credibility of the EU’s climate leadership.
Nonetheless, proponents argue that international credits, if properly regulated, could help channel much-needed climate finance to developing countries while bolstering the EU’s diplomatic leverage in global climate negotiations.
Andrei Marcu, executive director of the European Roundtable on Climate Change and Sustainable Transition (ERCST), noted that many developing nations would likely welcome such a move, as it could bring investment and support for their carbon-reduction projects.
Hoekstra maintains that a 90% reduction remains the Commission’s starting point for negotiations, with a proposal expected before summer.
The final 2040 target will require approval from both the European Parliament and EU member states, setting the stage for what is expected to be a contentious political debate over how best to balance environmental ambition with economic pragmatism.
