In the system described earlier, where expansion no longer solves debt limits, voluntary environmental action gives way to measurable, enforceable standards. 

Carbon markets are often discussed as if they already function as a mature financial system. In reality, they are still in transition structurally fragmented, inconsistently regulated, and struggling to align voluntary demand with compliance obligations. That gap is precisely where the next phase of value creation is forming.

A recent roundtable convened by Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy made this point clearly: voluntary carbon markets will not scale meaningfully until they converge with compliance systems, and that convergence depends on regulatory clarity, interoperability, and credible MRV infrastructure.

Today, most forest carbon credits sit squarely in the voluntary market. Companies purchase them to meet investor expectations or sustainability commitments, but demand remains discretionary. Pricing reflects that reality. Credits trade at modest levels because buyers are not legally required to purchase them, and quality differentiation remains difficult in a fragmented ecosystem of registries, methodologies, and verification bodies.

However, the Columbia discussion highlights an important inflection point: as Article 6 of the Paris Agreement becomes operational, carbon credits are expected to move from a purely voluntary construct into a framework that supports regulated, cross-border compliance use. This transition is not instantaneous, but it is already underway through bilateral agreements, emerging demand-side regulations, and early convergence between voluntary and compliance markets.

The implication is straightforward but often overlooked: assets being developed today under voluntary standards may become eligible for compliance-linked demand tomorrow.

This shift fundamentally changes the risk-reward profile of high-quality nature-based projects. The downside remains limited  voluntary buyers already exist, and credits can be retired today. The upside, however, becomes asymmetric if those same credits are later recognized within compliance frameworks, where demand is mandatory and pricing dynamics are structurally different.

The Columbia roundtable makes clear that governments and regulators increasingly see convergence as necessary rather than optional. Participants emphasized that voluntary markets cannot remain isolated indefinitely; they must harmonize with compliance systems to achieve scale, credibility, and liquidity. Importantly, they also noted that demand-side regulation has lagged supply-side standards, creating an environment where forward-looking buyers begin paying premiums for credits that are “future-ready”, meaning they are built to withstand regulatory scrutiny rather than merely satisfy present-day voluntary criteria.

This is already visible in jurisdictions such as Alberta, where industrial emitters face real constraints on domestic decarbonization and are exploring how nature-based offsets can complement emissions reduction strategies. While today’s compliance rules remain largely local, the direction of travel points toward interoperability, particularly for high-integrity projects that meet evolving MRV and accounting standards.

Costa Rica provides a useful case study in how access to these assets is already being quietly secured. Through its national forest finance mechanism, FONAFIFO has locked in long-term stewardship agreements with landowners, paying modest fees in exchange for environmental service commitments. While these programs were not originally designed for global carbon markets, they demonstrate two critical truths: landowners are willing to enter long-term contracts, and access rights can be secured without outright land acquisition.

The opportunity now is not simply to replicate those arrangements, but to upgrade them, layering robust, digital MRV on top of biologically productive forest assets so they become compatible with future compliance frameworks. As the Columbia analysis emphasizes, interoperability across jurisdictions and credible MRV systems are prerequisites for convergence between voluntary and compliance markets.

In practical terms, this means that projects developed today with high-quality measurement, transparent data pipelines, and audit-ready verification may command increasing premiums well before formal compliance recognition arrives. Buyers are already signaling that future eligibility matters, and that they are willing to differentiate between credits that merely exist and credits that are structurally prepared for regulatory integration.

The carbon market of the next decade will not be built on volume alone. It will be built on credibility, interoperability, and regulatory durability. Assets that meet those criteria early will not need to speculate on policy outcomes; they will be positioned to benefit from them.

These compliance dynamics are not abstract. They reshape how assets are valued, financed, and retained. In "Real Estate After the Bubble", we look at how this shift expresses itself in property and land markets. 

This essay is intended as structural analysis, not prediction