Views on the use of carbon markets under a post-2020 climate deal

Carbon Market Watch argues that international carbon markets must be supplementary to domestic action and governed by strict eligibility, accounting, and integrity rules to avoid the failures of previous mechanisms like the CDM and EU ETS. The organization recommends excluding REDD-plus and agriculture from carbon markets, implementing a 'negative list' of ineligible project types, and establishing a UN-led standard-setting body to prevent double-counting and ensure net atmospheric benefits.

• Previous market-based mechanisms have failed due to a demand-supply imbalance and lenient rules, leading to a surplus of allowances. Specifically, the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and International Emissions Trading (ET) under the Kyoto Protocol were oversupplied by 2 billion and 13 billion allowances, respectively.
• To ensure environmental integrity, Carbon Market Watch proposes strict eligibility criteria for countries trading units. Only those with absolute reduction targets based on historical reference levels and ambitious mitigation targets aligned with the 2°C goal should participate, and the use of traded units must be supplementary to domestic efforts.
• The document recommends the creation of a 'negative list' to exclude project types with low additionality or high risk of perverse incentives. Specifically, it argues that REDD-plus, agriculture, industrial gas projects (such as HFC-23), nitrous oxide reduction from adipic acid production, and large fossil or hydro power projects should be excluded from carbon markets.
• To prevent double-counting and ensure a net atmospheric benefit, the document suggests that host countries selling units must subtract them from their INDC allowable emissions. It also proposes 'discounting' units—requiring the purchase of more units than are used for compliance—to ensure reductions exceed targets.
• The organization advocates for the exclusion of any internationally traded units generated before 2021 from being used to meet pledges under the 2015 agreement to prevent the carry-over of Kyoto-era 'hot air'.
• Governance recommendations include appointing a UN body as a standard-setting organization to assess environmental integrity and establishing an institutional safeguard system with grievance mechanisms to protect human rights and locally affected communities.
• The document suggests improving consistency with other international frameworks, including supporting the Montreal Protocol for a global phase-out of HFCs without using carbon markets and increasing cooperation with the ICAO process for aviation emissions.

APA

Carbon Market Watch (2015). Views on the use of carbon markets under a post-2020 climate deal. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CMW_Position_FVA_31052015_FINAL-2.pdf

Chicago

Carbon Market Watch. Views on the use of carbon markets under a post-2020 climate deal. 2015. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CMW_Position_FVA_31052015_FINAL-2.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Carbon Market Watch |title=Views on the use of carbon markets under a post-2020 climate deal |date=June 2015 |url=https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CMW_Position_FVA_31052015_FINAL-2.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{carbonmarketwatch2015views, author = {{Carbon Market Watch}}, title = {{Views on the use of carbon markets under a post-2020 climate deal}}, publisher = {Carbon Market Watch}, year = {2015}, month = jun, url = {https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CMW_Position_FVA_31052015_FINAL-2.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }