Search Climate Insights Directory

Carbon Market Watch asserts that the supply of carbon credits from the three largest voluntary programmes is sufficient to cover CORSIA's demand until well into 2025. The author argues that ICAO should focus on the quality of units rather than inflating supply and warns that including Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) credits could undermine CORSIA's integrity. Additionally, the document highlights the need for rules to prevent double-counting of emission reductions.

The failure to establish rules for international carbon markets at COP 25 prevented the adoption of loopholes and double-counting but shifted the responsibility for environmental integrity to individual countries. This creates a risk of a 'wild west' scenario where low-ambition countries may trade 'junk credits' from the Kyoto Protocol era. While the San Jose Principles and Article 77d of the transparency framework offer some paths toward integrity and reporting, the lack of a global agreement leaves carbon markets potentially undermining overall climate action.

The document outlines the scale of food loss and waste in South Africa, noting that 27% of produced and imported food was wasted in 2011. It emphasizes a shift in the Western Cape toward mandatory organic waste diversion from landfills by 2027. The brief identifies key drivers for beneficiation, such as the Carbon Tax Act and Sustainable Development Goal 12.3, while detailing barriers including lack of source separation and liability fears regarding food donations. It proposes 29 solutions across prevention, recovery, and recycling categories and advocates for the adoption of the World Resource Institute's FLW Standard for better data recording.

The report identifies significant economic potential in diverting waste from landfills in South Africa, particularly in the Western Cape. Key opportunities are highlighted in the organics, plastics, e-waste, and construction sectors, driven by dwindling landfill airspace, rising disposal costs, and emerging regulations like Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and the Carbon Tax Act. The Western Cape is positioned as a greentech hub, with the City of Cape Town generating the majority of the region's waste and offering the highest market value for beneficiation.

The statement highlights the failures of the UN Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) through examples of hydroelectric projects in Chile and Panama that caused environmental destruction and human rights violations. It calls for mandatory stakeholder consultations and independent grievance redress mechanisms in future carbon markets under the Paris Agreement to ensure a just transition.

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement establishes frameworks for international carbon markets, allowing countries to trade emissions reductions to meet their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). While it offers potential cost savings of $250 billion per year by 2030 and can catalyze private finance, poor design risks increasing global emissions through double-counting and a lack of additionality. Key points of contention for negotiators include the application of 'corresponding adjustments' to prevent double-counting, the implementation of 'overall mitigation in global emissions' (OMGE), the 'share of proceeds' for the Adaptation Fund, and the potential carryover of up to 4 billion pre-2020 Kyoto Protocol units.

The briefing warns that up to 40 billion carbon credits lacking environmental integrity could undermine the Paris Agreement. These include legacy units from the Kyoto Protocol's CDM, JI, and IET mechanisms, as well as projected 'hot air' from NDCs set above business-as-usual levels. The author advocates for strict rules on the timing of reductions, the transferability of credits from weak targets, and the use of old credits to ensure the 1.5°C goal is not compromised.

The document examines the transition from Kyoto-era carbon credits to ITMOs under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, detailing the two primary cooperation avenues (Article 6.2 and 6.4) and the remaining challenges in establishing a rulebook. It categorizes potential project types, analyzes Canada's preparations—including waste sector partnerships in Chile and LNG exports—and highlights the economic potential of Article 6 to reduce NDC implementation costs by half by 2030 if properly regulated to avoid double counting and 'hot air'.

WWF provides guidance for corporations on the voluntary purchase of carbon credits, emphasizing that such purchases must be supplementary to a transparent, science-based strategy to reduce Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. The document cautions against using terms like "carbon neutral," "net zero," and "offsetting" due to potential misleading interpretations and the evolving regulatory context of the Paris Agreement. It establishes seven quality criteria for "high-quality" credits—real, measurable, additional, permanent, avoiding leakage, monitored/verified, and complying with safeguards—and advises against credits from nuclear, fossil fuel, or certain biomass projects. Additionally, it introduces the concept of "insetting" as a way to address emissions within a company's value chain, though it notes that standards for insetting are still evolving.

The document highlights the critical need for countries to reach an agreement on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement before COP25. It identifies four primary areas of contention: the transition of old Kyoto Protocol credits, the prevention of double counting through corresponding adjustments, the move away from offsetting logic toward true emission reductions, and the necessity of integrating social and environmental safeguards to protect human rights and support sustainable development.

The report finds that while nearly USD 4.7 billion in results-based finance has been committed since 2010, only 35% has been disbursed as of April 2019. It highlights the slow pace of negotiating Emission Reductions Payment Agreements (ERPAs) and a critical funding gap in the implementation phase of REDD+ activities. While forest carbon markets show some growth in voluntary demand, they remain a small fraction of global deforestation emissions. The document also details domestic payment mechanisms in Brazil, Colombia, and Costa Rica, and outlines various forms of support for jurisdictional-sourcing initiatives.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) describes the progress at the SB50 talks in Bonn as "glacial," noting that while a non-consensus text for Article 6 was established for COP25, critical language on human rights remains in brackets. CIEL emphasizes that Article 6 mechanisms—which include carbon credit markets and sustainable development mechanisms—must incorporate independent grievance bodies and social safeguards to avoid the failures of the Clean Development Mechanism. The statement also highlights the importance of the Escazú Agreement for environmental democracy in Latin America and condemns countries that questioned the IPCC's Special Report on 1.5°C during the negotiations.

The authors examine the 'financialization of nature,' arguing that securitizing ecosystem services creates incentives to maximize a narrow set of commodifiable outputs at the expense of overall ecosystem health. They contend that the fungibility required for financial markets ignores the complex, location-specific nature of ecosystems. While they identify limited exceptions—such as tradable permits for widely-dispersed gases (e.g., CO2 and SOx) and socially responsible investing (SRI) for already-managed lands—they warn that most environmental credits and offsets fail to protect biodiversity or ensure genuine additionality.

The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation (ICSA) advocates for the strict adoption of the Emissions Unit Criteria (EUCs) to maintain the environmental integrity of CORSIA. The coalition warns that allowing double-counted emissions credits—where reductions are claimed by both airlines and host countries—would increase global emissions. ICSA recommends a vintage date restriction for eligible units to projects starting in 2020 or later to avoid the use of low-quality accumulated credits. Additionally, the letter demands greater transparency for the Technical Advisory Body (TAB), including public membership lists, conflict-of-interest declarations, and open meetings to prevent secret deals and ensure fair program eligibility assessments.

The document critiques carbon markets, specifically cap-and-trade and offsetting, asserting they fail to reduce global emissions and instead facilitate corporate power and human rights abuses. It highlights the failures of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and REDD, and warns that the negotiation of Article 6 at COP25 could lock in these flawed mechanisms, further delaying urgent emissions cuts at the source.

The document argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) should be terminated by 2020 to prevent it from undermining the Paris Agreement. The authors claim the CDM encourages a 'zero-sum game' that hinders domestic climate action, has increased global emissions due to 'junk' credits, and has led to human rights violations and inequitable benefit distribution.

The paper examines the risk of "hot air" in international carbon markets under the Paris Agreement, where countries with targets higher than their projected emissions could transfer excess credits, potentially increasing global emissions. It proposes a typology of limits to prevent these transfers, testing them across 15 countries, and concludes that while such limits can prevent most hot air transfers, they involve policy trade-offs. The author recommends a cautious, portfolio-based approach to ensure environmental integrity.

Carbon Market Watch argues that Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement must be designed as a set of mandatory rules for all credit transfers to avoid undermining climate ambition. The brief recommends that Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) be limited to project-based emission reductions, excluding sector-based approaches and Emissions Trading System (ETS) allowances. To prevent double counting, the author advocates for corresponding adjustments at the first point of transfer and the creation of a publicly accessible international transaction log covering both UNFCCC and non-UNFCCC mechanisms.

The Ecosystem-based Adaptation and Financing for Alpacas Herders and Vicuña (AbE-FAV) project aims to address the vulnerability of Andean herders to climate-induced water scarcity. The project proposes a combination of ecosystem restoration, technological innovations in irrigation and fodder, and a sustainable microcredit mechanism to intensify alpaca production and conserve wild vicuña habitats. With a total indicative cost of USD 13,499,092, the project seeks to benefit 10,500 households and protect significant areas of peatlands and grasslands to avoid soil organic carbon emissions.

The report concludes that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) largely failed its objectives of producing high-quality, additional emission reductions and promoting sustainable development. It highlights systemic issues such as a lack of environmental integrity, perverse incentives for pollutant production, and the absence of social safeguards. Through four case studies in Uganda, India, Chile, and Guatemala, the document demonstrates how CDM projects led to land grabs, pollution, and the violation of indigenous and community rights. It recommends that post-2020 climate targets should not use CDM credits and that future mechanisms, such as the Sustainable Development Mechanism under the Paris Agreement, must incorporate binding stakeholder consultations and independent grievance mechanisms.