Respira International

Does the core business genuinely avoid or reduce emissions, or build climate resilience? Share of revenue that is actually 'green'. Fossil-dependent models score low.

The core business genuinely channels private capital into forest conservation, mangrove restoration, and reforestation at scale, but impact claims (~5 MtCO2e/yr) rely heavily on first-generation REDD+ methodology crediting that independent peer-reviewed synthesis finds overcredits by ~10x on average, materially undermining verified additionality.

Credible, science-based targets (SBTi), a real net-zero plan with progress to date, and CDP disclosure — not just a dated press release.

No evidence of SBTi-validated targets, CDP disclosure, or a published net-zero roadmap for Respira's own operational emissions was found; the company's public commitments focus entirely on portfolio impact claims rather than its own Scope 1-3 trajectory.

Operational footprint, labour and social practices, and governance quality across the company's own operations and supply chain.

Respira demonstrates meaningful social co-benefits through projects such as Carbon Tanzania (USD 6.9M paid to local communities in 2023, women's microfinance loans, trained female game scouts), and publicly engages with FPIC and indigenous-community standards, but no independent ESG audit of Respira's own operations or supply-chain labour practices has been located.

Quality of disclosure, independent third-party verification, and how much hard data backs the company's claims.

Respira publishes a biweekly newsletter, press releases, and project-level narratives, and participated in a transparent public auction via CIX with a published demand curve, but there is no independently audited annual impact report, no quantified portfolio-level MRV disclosure, no CDP filing, and no third-party verification of its headline 5 MtCO2e/yr claim.

Controversies, litigation, pollution, fossil-fuel lobbying, conflict-zone involvement and governance scandals. Higher means cleaner.

No litigation, governance scandal, fossil-fuel links, or conflict-zone involvement was found specifically involving Respira; the primary integrity risk is inherited sector-wide — the REDD+ market's documented over-crediting and, in some third-party projects, land-tenure and FPIC violations — which Respira explicitly acknowledges and attempts to mitigate through due diligence and jurisdictional nesting.