A new investigation by Swedwatch has raised serious concerns about the way carbon credit projects are being developed and managed in Zimbabwe, highlighting weak community engagement, a lack of informed consent, and the absence of transparent benefit sharing with local households.

The report focuses on cookstove projects developed by US-based carbon project developer C-Quest in Zimbabwe, which generated and sold carbon credits to international buyers between 2022 and 2024. According to Swedwatch, while the credits were sold to high-emitting corporations abroad, communities hosting the projects were largely unaware that the stoves were part of a commercial carbon offset scheme.

“Community members thought the stoves were a donation, not part of business selling credits worth millions of dollars abroad,” says Lubna Hawwa, author of the report and programme officer at Swedwatch.

The report, titled “Missing benefit-sharing and poor community engagement in carbon projects — a Zimbabwe case study”, documents how an estimated 20,000 households in the Chimanimani region received improved cookstoves intended to reduce firewood use and emissions. These emissions reductions were then used to generate carbon credits for sale on the voluntary carbon market.

Based on interviews with community members, local leaders, and national authorities, Swedwatch concludes that C-Quest failed to obtain informed consent from participating communities, did not disclose financial information related to carbon credit sales, and did not negotiate any formal benefit-sharing agreements.

“The findings raise serious concerns about whether carbon projects can credibly be treated as climate finance when revenues do not reach the communities whose resources and participation enable the projects,” says Hawwa.

Lack of transparency and consent

Field research for the report was carried out by Green Governance Africa (GGA), which conducted interviews in Chimanimani district, one of several areas where the projects were implemented. According to the findings, neither community members nor local authorities were informed that carbon credits were being issued and sold internationally, nor were they aware of the value generated by the projects.

The report states that communities were not provided with clear information about how the projects worked, how long they would last, or how revenues would be distributed. No grievance mechanisms were established to allow participants to raise concerns, and follow-up support for broken or malfunctioning stoves was reported to be limited.

“This case exposes a systemic injustice we often find in carbon markets: the people most affected by climate change are treated as a resource, not as rights-holders,” Hawwa says.

GGA warns that the issues identified in the C-Quest projects are not isolated. “We continue to see carbon projects being implemented in low-income societies as short-term interventions rather than long-term partnerships,” says Nyasha Frank Mpahlo, Executive Director at Green Governance Africa.

“Short-term, extractive carbon projects undermine trust and damage the credibility of climate finance. When developers prioritise quick credit generation over long-term community engagement and benefit-sharing, they leave behind broken infrastructure, unresolved grievances, and communities worse off than before,” Mpahlo adds.

Fraud investigation and financial value

The Swedwatch report also draws attention to wider concerns surrounding C-Quest’s operations. While not part of the original field investigation, the report references the company’s involvement in a major fraud case related to cookstove projects registered under the Verra carbon standard.

In 2024, C-Quest admitted to a fraud scheme involving the over-issuance of carbon credits, valued at approximately US$250 million. US authorities subsequently issued a cease and desist order, fined the company, and charged former senior executives with alleged manipulation of emissions data and misleading investors.

Court filings cited in the report allege that more than US$16 million worth of shares held by the company’s founder were sold as part of the scheme. Swedwatch notes that this illustrates the scale of financial value that can be extracted from carbon projects, while host communities remain excluded from meaningful economic benefits.

Swedwatch estimates that by October 2025, more than 1.4 million carbon credits had been issued across the two Zimbabwe projects, with a market value of between US$6.5 million and US$13.7 million. Based on available data, 557,253 credits were sold and retired, generating estimated revenues of between US$2.4 million and US$5.3 million for C-Quest.

Community testimonies cited in the report indicate that almost none of this value reached local households. Instead, residents reported broken stoves, limited maintenance, and no access to complaint or redress mechanisms. While C-Quest has stated that revenues were used to subsidise stove distribution and cover project costs, Swedwatch found that no project-level financial data was disclosed.

“This makes it impossible to assess whether revenue use was fair or equitable,” the report states.

Carbon markets under scrutiny

Swedwatch places its findings within the wider debate around the voluntary carbon market, which has expanded rapidly despite growing criticism over inflated emissions claims, greenwashing, and weak protections for host communities.

The report points to previous research by Carbon Market Watch showing that 62 percent of companies involved in voluntary carbon market projects in Africa are headquartered in countries classified as having “very high human development”. Evidence that revenues are shared with host countries and communities remains limited.

“Without mandatory requirements for benefit-sharing, free, prior, and informed consent, and project-level financial transparency, carbon markets will continue to enable green washing and climate injustice under the guise of climate action and financing,” Hawwa says.

In Zimbabwe, regulatory changes are beginning to emerge. In 2025, the government introduced new carbon market regulations requiring 30 percent of proceeds from all carbon projects to be allocated to the state, with a portion directed to a national climate fund.

Swedwatch recommendations

Swedwatch calls on governments and carbon standards bodies to introduce clear and enforceable rules that guarantee local communities an equitable share of revenues from carbon projects. The organisation also urges project developers to treat meaningful community engagement and benefit-sharing agreements as core human rights safeguards, rather than optional practices.

The report stresses that companies in high-income countries should prioritise cutting emissions at source before relying on offsets. When carbon credits are purchased from projects in low- and middle-income countries, buyers are urged to carry out due diligence to verify that revenues reach local communities.

Swedwatch also calls on governments in high-income countries to support capacity development for communities affected by carbon projects, and to increase grant-based climate finance for climate-vulnerable countries, in line with commitments under the Paris Agreement.

According to Swedwatch, the Zimbabwe case study offers a clear warning that without stronger oversight, transparency, and community protections, carbon markets risk reinforcing existing inequalities rather than supporting fair and effective climate action.