are paramount (Kim et al. 2024). With the heightened scrutiny of corporate ESG ratings, transparent and credible carbon credit verification methods are critical (Berg et al. 2021). Given the scrutiny from shareholders and consumers, companies have an increasing incentive to undertake ESG practices (Kim et al. 2024; Christensen 2021). Additionally, organizations face substantial carbon transition risk as global markets move to a low-carbon future (Bolton and Kacp erczyk 2 023). In this context, companies have a perverse incentive to greenwash and obscure their sustainability practices, particularly in the field of VCMs (Kim et al. 2024; Christensen et al. 2021). The integrity of VCMs has become undermined by issues of integrity, particularly regarding the legitimacy of their carbon abatement claims, and equity, with regard to which they further entrench institutional power asymmetries in carbon markets and lock-out less powe rful s takeholders (Christensen et al. 2021). Despite challenges in ensuring additionality and issues with liquidity and pricing, the carboncredit market could surge in importance due to upcoming regulations that require decarbonization targets and aim to incentivize emissions reductions. According to MorganStanley (2023), the voluntary carbon-offset market is projected to expand from $2 billion in 2020 to around $100 billion in 2030 and approximately $250 bill ion b y 2050. Morgan Stanley (2023) also asserts that the world must remove at least one billion tons (one gigaton) of carbon dioxideannually by 2030 to meet various national and corporate targets and forthcoming regulatoryrequirements. Avoidance or reduction credits could total up to 10 gigatons per year (MorganStanley 2023), although there is continued debate regarding how to define scientifically-sound carbon credit verification (SBTi 2024c). To establish demo nstrably s ustainable incentive structures and transparency in VCMs, climate foresight is necessary locally, regionally, and globally. This is essential to overcome the current shortcomings of the market - underpinned by narrow-minded, transactional understandings of VCMs that do not have an orientation for long-term effectiveness. In turn, a lack of climate foresight is exacerbating the crisis of credibility and trust in VCMs (see Spitz 2023). This article explo res a venues for promoting actionable futures intelligence through climate foresight within organizations, particularly in the context of VCMs. Specifically, it interrogates Climate Foresight: Transforming the Voluntary Carbon Markets, by Roger Spitz & James Balzer 9 © Disruptive Futures Institute, March 2025

Climate Foresight 2025