Search Climate Insights Directory

This research paper analyzes how the accounting of international greenhouse gas (GHG) offsets affects the integrity of global climate mitigation pledges. Using a spreadsheet model based on marginal abatement costs, the authors examine scenarios where offsets are either double-counted (credited to both the buyer and seller) or counted only for the buyer. The study finds that double-counting could significantly dilute the ambition of current pledges, potentially reducing global abatement by up to 1.6 billion tons of CO2e by 2020, thereby increasing the gap to meet 2°C warming targets.

This policy brief by the Stockholm Environment Institute compares greenhouse gas mitigation pledges made by developed (Annex 1) and developing (non-Annex 1) countries under the Copenhagen Accord and Cancún Agreements. By analyzing four detailed studies, the brief concludes that developing countries have pledged more absolute mitigation than developed countries, yet global pledges remain insufficient to limit warming to 2°C.

This policy brief by the Stockholm Environment Institute analyzes the impact of international greenhouse gas offsets on the fulfillment of emission reduction pledges under the Cancún Agreements. It specifically examines the risk of 'double-counting'—where both the buyer and seller count the same emission reduction toward their targets—and how this could dilute global climate ambition and hinder the pursuit of a 2°C pathway.