Brussels - The latest climate debate in Brussels has highlighted a troubling reality. The European Union's efforts to achieve its ambitious climate goals often rely on "international offsets." This strategy – paying other countries to reduce emissions on behalf of the EU – is not only misleading, but also highly risky for environmental integrity, according to a new report from the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change (ESABCC).

The ESABCC report assesses international compensation as "significant risk" to environmental integrity. The science is definitive on this point: international carbon offsets are no substitute for real, domestic emission reductions. This assessment is a condemnation not only of policy but also of political courage. As Europe strives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 90-95% by 2040, the temptation to reach for international credits is strong.

The report's shocking finding points to the massive inefficiency of these schemes: of all credits issued globally, only 16 % led to real emission reductionsThe rest is at best “creative accounting” and at worst “outright fraud.” The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) welcomed the report, saying that “most international compensation is not worth the paper it is written on.”

Relying on these dubious schemes not only undermines Europe’s climate credibility, but also hinders its own economic transformation. Money spent on buying offsets abroad is not invested in modernising Europe’s energy systems, greening infrastructure or equipping workers with the skills needed in a post-carbon economy. Every euro spent on dubious compensation in a developing country is a euro lost on domestic investment, such as modernizing steel mills, electrifying transportation, or building green innovation centers. Outsourcing emissions reduction measures means outsourcing the opportunity to become a world leader in green technologies and squandering the associated geopolitical and economic advantages.

There is also a vexing moral question. Europe has historically had some of the highest cumulative emissions in the world. Asking poorer countries, many of which have contributed far less to climate change, to make reductions on Europe’s behalf smacks of “old colonial logic repackaged in green packaging.” Worse, offsets can distort global efforts. If developing countries see a financial advantage in maintaining high emissions so they can later “sell” them as reductions, it undermines the very premise of global cooperation. According to the ESABCC report, this is not climate leadership but “climate free-riding.”

Persisting in international offsets is not only bad climate policy, but also bad economics. Europe has every reason to double down on domestic measures that will spur innovation, reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels, and give European companies a head start in a key industrial factory of the 21st century.

The report also soberly reminds us that even 95 % reductions by 2040 may not be enough to meet the EU's "fair share" in the global effort to mitigate climate change; pace is also important. There is a risk of delaying real action, which increases the costs and the scope of action needed in the future.

Europe prides itself on being a global leader on climate, but leadership requires integrity, not illusions. It is time for Brussels to make tough decisions: Reject offsets, invest at home and ensure that the EU's green transition consists of real and tangible changesNo accounting tricks or certificates purchased abroad will stop global warming or prepare Europeans for the challenges ahead. The only road that counts is the one we build ourselves. Spring