Uzbekistan’s Rise in CORSIA Supply: What New Aviation Credit Sources Mean for Buyers and Project Developers

Why the Phase 2 CORSIA Supply Crunch Is Becoming a Procurement Problem

CORSIA is no longer just a policy framework. It is becoming a procurement market.

ICAO has confirmed that the scheme applies to 85% of international aviation CO₂ above the 2019 baseline for 2024 to 2035. That means buyers need CORSIA Eligible Emissions Units, not generic voluntary offsets. For airlines, procurement, registry readiness, and credit labelling now sit at the center of compliance planning.

The approved supply pool is still narrower than the wider voluntary market. ICAO has expanded the approved programme set for Phase 1 and Phase 2, but the Phase 2 list remains limited. That is why airlines and intermediaries are already competing for bankable, eligible supply.

The shortage is not only about volume. It is also about timing, vintage, and host-country authorization. ICAO requires programmes to address double claiming and to show that the host country agrees to account for emissions reductions used by airlines under CORSIA.

That changes sourcing logic for B2B buyers. Long-term offtakes matter more. Portfolio construction across eligible programmes matters more. So does due diligence on registry tagging, corresponding adjustments, and retirement mechanics.

The procurement problem is likely to intensify as more airlines move from planning into compliance buying. That raises the obvious question: where can credible new supply come from, and why is Uzbekistan suddenly relevant?

What Makes Uzbekistan an Attractive Source of Eligible Aviation Credits

Uzbekistan is becoming investable in carbon markets because it is building Article 6 infrastructure.

UNFCCC’s authorizations page shows a Letter of Authorization submitted by Uzbekistan on 18 December 2025. That is a key precondition for avoiding double counting and making credits usable in international markets.

The country also has a policy-crediting track record. The World Bank reported that Uzbekistan received a $7.5 million payment for verified emissions reductions of 500,000 tons under the iCRAFT project. That signals institutional capacity to measure, verify, and monetize climate outcomes at scale.

That matters for aviation-credit buyers because Uzbekistan is not starting from zero. It has already shown government participation, MRV discipline, and the ability to structure climate finance around energy-transition interventions. Those are the kinds of building blocks needed for eligible credit issuance.

Uzbekistan’s broader clean-energy buildout also supports a future project pipeline. World Bank-backed solar financing and energy-transition measures point to a larger funnel of projects that could generate credits from renewables, energy efficiency, and grid decarbonization.

For project developers, the opportunity is not just local issuance. It is the chance to build an Article 6 and CORSIA-ready pipeline in a jurisdiction that is already signaling readiness. That leads to the next issue: which demand nodes will pull those credits into the market.

How the Middle East CORSIA Support Alliance Could Shape Regional Demand

The Middle East is structurally relevant because ICAO’s Middle East Regional Office covers 15 Member States, including major aviation hubs such as the UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, and Bahrain. That concentration of airline traffic can amplify regional demand for CORSIA-compliant supply.

UNFCCC’s 2025 materials also show growing regional carbon-market readiness in MENA, including dialogue and training on Article 6 and carbon pricing. That suggests stronger institutional capacity to source, authorize, and trade compliant credits.

ICAO has also been building market infrastructure around aviation sustainability financing, including the Finvest Hub and related investment platforms. That may draw more attention from regional investors and buyers toward aviation-adjacent climate assets.

For airlines and brokers, a regional support alliance matters because it can standardize buyer expectations around authorization letters, host-country accounting, and registry interoperability. That reduces friction for cross-border deals with Central Asian suppliers.

If Middle East demand becomes more organized, Uzbekistan’s advantage could be proximity plus political fit. Central Asian supply can serve procurement desks looking for diversified exposure beyond the usual supply geographies. The next question is how airline buyers should screen these new Asian-origin units.

What Airline Buyers Should Watch When Evaluating New Asian Supply

The first filter is actual CORSIA eligibility, not generic high-integrity branding. ICAO’s CORSIA Eligible Emissions Units document is the binding reference, and only units meeting the eligibility criteria can be used for compliance.

The second filter is authorization and corresponding adjustment logic. Buyers should ask whether the host country has issued a Letter of Authorization, whether the programme can support Article 6 accounting, and whether the registry can evidence cancellation or retirement for CORSIA use.

The third filter is registry tagging and traceability. ICAO programme materials emphasize unit labelling and public reporting, so procurement teams should verify that credits can be tagged as CORSIA eligible and tracked through retirement without ambiguity.

The fourth filter is vintage and scope. ICAO’s approved programmes differ by compliance period, and buyers need to match delivery schedules to the 2024 to 2026 or 2027 to 2029 compliance windows rather than assuming all credits are fungible.

These checks are operational, not theoretical. Airline buyers will need them in term sheets, KYC packs, and supplier questionnaires, because the project developer that cannot pass diligence will lose the offtake. That shifts the focus to what developers must prove to stay competitive.

What Project Developers Need to Prove to Compete in a Tightening Market

Developers need a bankable compliance story. The project must sit inside a programme that ICAO has approved or is willing to approve, with clear programme rules, methodology alignment, and registry infrastructure suited to CORSIA labelling and retirement.

Host-country authorization is now a commercial asset. UNFCCC’s authorization registry and ICAO guidance both point to the importance of letters of authorization, making the ability to secure Article 6 backing a differentiator in buyer negotiations.

Developers also need credible MRV and third-party verification. The World Bank’s verification-backed Uzbekistan carbon payment shows that buyers and financiers respond to independently verified emissions reductions, not just project narratives.

In a tighter market, developers should expect buyers to ask for proof of additionality, permanence where relevant, registry serialisation, anti-double-claim safeguards, and clear delivery timing aligned to airline compliance needs.

The competitive edge will likely come from compliance-ready packaging. That means authorization documentation, escrow or delivery guarantees, and multi-year supply visibility. That sets up the final market question: how fresh Central Asian supply might affect pricing and deal terms.

How New Supply From Central Asia Could Affect Pricing, Liquidity, and Deal Terms

If Uzbekistan-origin supply scales, it could improve liquidity by adding another authorized jurisdiction into a market that is still constrained by programme eligibility and host-country approval. That matters especially for buyers seeking diversification away from a small set of incumbent supply geographies.

Near-term pricing may remain firm because eligible supply is still more restrictive than the broader carbon market. But credible new origin countries can reduce the scarcity premium that buyers pay for compliance-grade inventory.

Deal terms are likely to become more structured. Buyers may push for fixed-price tranches, delivery bands, replacement clauses, and representations on authorization status. Developers may seek prepayment, floor prices, or take-or-pay structures to finance project development.

Central Asian supply could also create benchmarking value. Once a few Uzbekistan-linked projects transact, procurement teams will have reference points for vintage, methodology, and host-country risk pricing. That should make the market more transparent over time.

The strategic takeaway is simple. New supply will not remove CORSIA compliance pressure, but it could reshape how buyers source, hedge, and contract. For developers, the winners will be the ones that can combine eligibility, authorization, and scale into one credible offer.