To access this work you must either be on the Smith College campus OR have valid Smith login credentials.

On Campus users: To access this work if you are on campus please Select the Download button.

Off Campus users: To access this work from off campus, please select the Off-Campus button and enter your Smith username and password when prompted.

Non-Smith users: You may request this item through Interlibrary Loan at your own library.

Publication Date

2025-5

Document Type

Capstone

Study Type

ENV 312

Department

Environmental Science and Policy

Advisors

Alexander Barron

Abstract

Smith College has expressed interest in exploring alternatives to carbon offsetting to address its remaining greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, a distinct gap remains between the recommendation of such alternatives and their actual implementation. This memo outlines the climate contributions approach as a strategy that aligns with the college’s values and decarbonization goals. It assesses the feasibility of this approach and identifies key questions that must be addressed for its successful execution. The shift toward a contributions model is motivated by growing concerns about the integrity of the carbon offset market. Carbon offsets have been widely criticized by researchers and policy experts for issues including non-additionality, double counting, and impermanence. The variability in carbon credit pricing also makes it easy for institutions to purchase cheap, low-quality credits tied to projects that may not deliver real emissions reductions. In light of these challenges, we recommend that Smith account for its remaining Scope 1 and 3 emissions—after the completion of its geothermal transition—through a climate contributions framework rather than by purchasing offsets. Unlike offsets, which require the purchase of carbon credits on a ton-for-ton basis, the contributions model operates on a money-per-ton framework. Contributions are directed toward climate adaptation, local decarbonization, and environmental justice initiatives—projects which are often excluded from traditional offset schemes. This approach allows Smith to support a broader array of meaningful climate actions while reinforcing its institutional values of justice, sustainability, and community partnership. If implemented, Smith would be the first known higher education institution to both fully adopt and explicitly name a climate contributions model—setting a precedent for peer institutions. This memo recommends structuring the contributions fund through an equitable governance model, such as Participatory Grantmaking or Trust-Based Philanthropy, which share decision-making power between community stakeholders and institutional representatives. A grant advisory committee, selected by the Committee on Sustainability, would oversee project selection and ensure that this process reflects Smith’s values. Financially, the contributions fund would be calculated by multiplying Smith’s remaining emissions by an internal carbon price. Our analysis provides a cost range using a lower-bound price of $50 per ton (Second Nature’s carbon tax recommendation) and an upper-bound price of $115 per ton (Smith’s projected 2030 proxy price). These are illustrative estimates, and any final pricing decision should be flexible while still reflecting a commitment to high-impact, justice-centered climate action. In conclusion, we recommend that Smith College implement a climate contributions approach to address its remaining emissions. This model avoids the pitfalls of the offset market and provides an opportunity for Smith to lead with integrity—prioritizing justice, equity, and sustainability in its path to decarbonization.

Rights

©2025 Victoria Gualario, Jayola Reid, Devon Fischer, and Al Torrens-Martin

Download

Smith Only:
Off Campus Download

Share

COinS