Blockchain in REDD+ Projects: Potential and Challenges for Transparency and Efficiency in the Forest Carbon Market

Abstract

Green finance and carbon markets are key to the global fight against climate change. Among them, Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) projects represent a critical mechanism for channeling resources into forest conservation. However, these projects face challenges related to monitoring, reporting, and verification, which require transparency and low operating costs. These challenges, including opaque data, high operational costs, manual processes, and reliance on trusted intermediaries, fuel market skepticism, increase fraud risks, and ultimately constrain project financing. This systematic review examines the growing role of Blockchain technology in addressing these systemic challenges. By synthesizing the existing literature, this article analyzes how the inherent properties of Blockchain, such as decentralization, immutability, and transparency, can increase the credibility of carbon credit management, mitigate the risks of double-counting and fraud, and democratize access to carbon markets through credit tokenization. However, the findings indicate a significant gap between theoretical promise and practical application. Conceptual proposals, lacking empirical validation and detailed technical architectures, dominate the field. The review also critically assesses persistent barriers, including regulatory uncertainty, technological complexity, and concerns about energy consumption and governance. The study's main contribution is a synthesis that reframes the problem, moving beyond technological optimism to underscore the necessity of holistic, interdisciplinary integration. It concludes that successful integration of Blockchain technology requires multidisciplinary collaboration, standardized frameworks, and inclusive governance models. Finally, the review identifies key research gaps and proposes research directions for advancing the field beyond conceptual discourse toward practical implementation.

Received: 16 November 2025 | Revised: 21 January 2026 | Accepted: 9 February 2026

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to this work.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Author Contribution Statement

Marcela Ceschim Caburlão: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. Carlo Kleber da Silva Rodrigues: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration.