Integrating Forest Conservation Contributions into Online Travel Agencies

Many conservation organizations work to protect ecologically important land through purchase, legal designation, or long-term management in partnership with local communities. Groups such as Rainforest Trust, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Wildlife Conservation Society, World Land Trust, and Conservation International each use variations of this model, ranging from targeted land acquisitions to supporting the creation and stewardship of large protected areas. Projects are selected based on biodiversity value, carbon storage potential, and vulnerability to threats such as logging, agricultural conversion, or urban expansion. Tropical deforestation would be the fourth‑largest emitter of greenhouse gases if it were a country, yet the remaining tropical forests still remove twice as much CO₂ as they emit each year²¹. Halting deforestation is essential both to keep historical carbon locked in wood and soil and to maintain this ongoing carbon sequestration. Unlike traditional offsets that claim a one‑to‑one balance, contributions to these organizations are best understood as climate investments that reduce environmental impacts compared  to a business‑as‑usual deforestation trajectory.

Example: Rainforest Trust and The Peruvian Amazon Project

Rainforest Trust is a non‑profit organization that protects tropical forests by establishing and expanding protected areas through partnerships with local organizations and Indigenous communities. Rainforests are critical as both store more carbon per acre than other types of forest, and they are quickly being lost. Many projects safeguard forests for $5–10 per acre, and 99% of the forests they have protected remain intact²¹. Contributions to the Rainforest Trust support the purchase and protection of high‑carbon frontier forests that store billions of tons of carbon. 

Rainforest Trust and its local partner, Center for the Development of an Indigenous Amazon (CEDIA), have already protected nearly 14 million acres of rainforest in Peru through several large‑scale projects and are working to protect an additional 1.6 million acres²¹. These protected areas span an area larger than the entire U.S. state of Maryland. The project’s benefits are multifaceted. At least 68 threatened species now thrive within the reserves. Rainforest Trust and CEDIA have helped 189 Indigenous communities gain legal title to their ancestral lands so they can sustainably manage and protect their forests. The protected areas safeguard about 2.8 billion tons of carbon²¹, equivalent to roughly seven years of Germany’s annual CO₂ emissions. This immense carbon stock would likely be released if the forests were logged or converted to agriculture.

Additionality

Organizations like Rainforest Trust and The Nature Conservancy strengthen the case for additionality by directing their efforts toward frontier forests—regions under acute threat from logging, agriculture, or other human pressures. By focusing on areas with imminent risk, these interventions are more likely to result in conservation outcomes that would not occur under a business-as-usual scenario. This approach is particularly urgent given the alarming rates of forest loss. In 2023 alone, approximately 9.1 million acres of primary tropical forest were cleared, releasing an estimated 2.4 billion tons of CO₂ into the atmosphere¹⁶ ²². That equates to roughly 10 soccer fields disappearing every minute. These staggering losses demonstrate the critical importance of protecting high-risk forest areas.

Governance and Monitoring

These groups have achieved high success rates because they combine rigorous project selection with strong governance and on‑the‑ground monitoring. They partner with trusted local NGOs and Indigenous communities, ensuring projects have broad social support. They use legal mechanisms such as land titles, conservation easements and government‑designated protected areas to secure land tenure. Furthermore, Rainforest Trust ensures that 100% of public donations go directly to conservation action because board members and major donors cover administrative and fundraising costs²¹. 

Contributions versus offsets

Traditional carbon offsets claim to “neutralize” a ton of CO₂ by financing an equivalent reduction elsewhere. However, many forest offsets have been criticized for over‑crediting, inadequate monitoring and lack of permanence. Donating to forest‑protection organizations avoids the pitfalls of carbon accounting and frames the contribution as a climate benefit rather than a licence to pollute. By supporting conservation through voluntary forest protection contributions, travelers help prevent future emissions and protect ongoing carbon sequestration without making unrealistic claims of full compensation. Forest‑protection contributions should complement, not replace, efforts to reduce aviation emissions. Airlines must continue investing in fuel efficiency, sustainable aviation fuels, operational improvements and emerging zero‑emission aircraft. By combining these strategies, the aviation sector can accelerate its progress towards net‑zero.

Co-Benefits Beyond Carbon Sequestration

It is also useful to consider the potential carbon released if an acre of forest is cut down in a typical deforestation event (e.g., removing forests to plant new soybean crops or for cattle grazing). While this process is discussed in detail by Noon and colleagues¹⁸, across all ecosystem types, the average carbon loss is 37.7 tons per acre. Policies to reduce tropical deforestation by half by 2050 could avoid up to 50 Gigatons of carbon emissions this century¹³. 

Forest conservation also preserves biodiversity and aids in water regulation. Tropical rainforests harbor more than half of Earth’s species. Protecting these forests safeguards thousands of plant and animal species from extinction. Intact forests regulate regional rainfall, reduce flood risk, and moderate temperatures. They also protect watersheds that supply water to millions of people.