As reported by Parkswatch Scotland, investments by the Scottish National Investment Bank in Gresham House appear to be being used for Verra accredited carbon offset projects. Our full comment and article linked below:

“The research published by Parkswatch raises more troubling questions for the Scottish National Investment Bank and their decision to put public money into the asset management corporation Gresham House.

In October 2025 we wrote about SNIB’s investment and Gresham House’s seemingly strange land purchases, which Parkswatch have again highlighted. SNIB seem to be inadvertently fuelling speculation on carbon markets and driving eye-watering land value inflation. This actively works against the Scottish Government’s land reform and community wealth building policies, and SNIB’s own mission to foster inclusive economic growth.

This latest research raises particular questions about Gresham House’s use of Verra carbon credits. Verra methodologies have been internationally controversial when carbon offset claims didn’t match reality, contributing to global loss of confidence in voluntary carbon offset markets.  Why have Gresham House opted for the questionable Verra credits, whilst the Scottish Government expects natural capital developments like this to be ‘high-integrity’? There is seemingly some nervousness from Scottish Forestry around this decision, and it’s hardly surprising given it oversees the UK-Government backed Woodland Carbon Code. 

While the Woodland Carbon Code has some serious issues, the intention to make use of alternative Verra methodologies for the vast majority of reported sites, presents a real increased risk of ‘greenwashing’ and further undermines whatever credibility these offset markets have left. 

Given their recently reported losses, SNIB might want to rethink their investment strategy. The public money they manage should deliver transparent and accountable investment that drives actual innovation in the public interest for climate, nature, and communities in Scotland. Instead, they appear to be throwing money at opaque forestry investments, propping up inflated land values, and potentially exacerbating the climate and nature crises.”