The Good Is Never Perfect: Why the Current Flaws of Voluntary Carbon Markets Are Services, Not Barriers to Successful Climate Change Action

The world's current level of climate change action does not match its ambitions to tackle the issue, and its ambitions do not currently meet the levels of action science recommends. Voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) are one option proposed to lessen those disparities, and have been both criticized and championed by various groups. Critiques note them as being opaque, flawed, and ineffective. Yet they demonstrate tremendous potential for impact and unprecedented levels of finance. We contend that the critiques of these markets are not only resolvable, but are unavoidable challenges that must be addressed on the path to mobilizing climate change ambition and achieving targets. Furthermore, we believe that by 2050, the current discrete market-based solutions in climate action will become internalized aspects of our economies rather than separate remediations. This goal of internalizing the externalities that cause climate change will result in massive, sustained decarbonization, rapid reorganization of global economies, and an extraordinary push to invent, solve, and scale strategies that facilitate the transition. Pricing carbon is a key contemporary step for transitioning to that future. Voluntary carbon markets are one means to catalyze this action and while needing improvements, should be given appropriate leeway to improve and fulfill that role.

Unintended Consequences of Agricultural Participation in Voluntary Carbon Markets: Their Nature and Avoidance

Greenhouse gas (GHG) trading markets have been widely discussed for climate change mitigation. However in implementation coverage has not been universal. Agriculture, despite being the source of nearly 25% of net emissions, has not commonly been capped. But it has been mentioned as voluntary source of net emission offsets. Such offsets could arise from action reducing GHG emissions, enhancing sequestration, or producing feedstocks for low emitting bioenergy replacements for fossil based energy. This could be harnessed by setting up voluntary carbon markets that producers could join at their discretion. However, such a scheme could have unintended consequences. We conduct theoretical and empirical analyses of a voluntary “carbon” market examining both intended and unintended effects. We find certain participation rules can stimulate rebound effects from emitters and suppress participation from sequestration and bioenergy producing entities. To overcome this we develop and simulate offset participation limitations that could preclude unintended consequences.

Estimation of carbon storage of forest biomass for voluntary carbon markets: preliminary results

Estimating the carbon storage of forests is essential to support climate change mitigation and promote the transition into a low-carbon emission economy. To achieve this goal, voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) are essential. VCMs are promoted by a spontaneous demand, not imposed by binding targets, as the regulated ones. In Italy, only in Veneto and Piedmont Regions (Northern Italy), VCMs through forestry activities were carried out. Valle Camonica District (Northern Italy, Lombardy Region) is ready for a local VCM, but carbon storage of its forests was never estimated. The aim of this work was to estimate the total carbon storage (TCS; t C ha−1) of forest biomass of Valle Camonica District, at the stand level, taking into account: (1) aboveground biomass, (2) belowground biomass, (3) deadwood, and (4) litter. We developed a user-friendly model, based on site-specific primary (measured) data, and we applied it to a dataset of 2019 stands extracted from 45 Forest Management Plans. Preliminary results showed that, in 2016, the TCS achieved 76.02 t C ha−1. The aboveground biomass was the most relevant carbon pool (48.86 t C ha−1; 64.27% of TCS). From 2017 to 2029, through multifunctional forest management, the TCS could increase of 2.48 t C ha−1 (+ 3.26%). In the same period, assuming to convert coppices stands to high forests, an additional TCS of 0.78 t C ha−1 (equal to 2.85 t CO2 ha−1) in the aboveground biomass could be achieved without increasing forest areas. The additional carbon could be certified and exchanged on a VCM, contributing to climate change mitigation at a local level.

Private Governance in Developing Countries: Drivers of Voluntary Carbon Offset Programs

In the Paris Agreement era of climate governance, private market-based initiatives are expected to play a catalytic role in achieving global commitments. However, the literature has been largely silent on the political causes of the variable and often limited uptake of such initiatives in the Global South. This article uses original project-level data to investigate the participation in voluntary carbon offset (VCO) programs across developing countries. We argue that, paradoxically, access to formal international institutions and linkages with domestic priorities are key factors for participation in voluntary carbon markets, reducing asymmetries in information, capacity, and interest in developing contexts. Our statistical analysis finds that institutions such as the Clean Development Mechanism and targeted foreign aid, as well as domestic concerns such as climate vulnerability and advancing renewable energy, shape in important ways the variable engagement in VCO projects. Our analysis also suggests that the design of private regulations can be fine-tuned to better capture synergies between local concerns and transnational climate action.

Opportunities for Agricultural Producers to Participate in Compliance and Voluntary Carbon Markets

The agricultural sector’s potential for carbon offset generation is widely recognized, but few offset protocols in North American compliance or voluntary markets have successfully generated large volumes of offset credits. Here we use the Rice Cultivation Projects Compliance Offset Protocol—which has generated no offsets since its adoption by the California Air Resources Board in 2015—as a case study to examine barriers to agricultural offset generation. These barriers, which include small projects; low emissions reduction potential; complex emissions quantification; complex, non-standardized data management; and high verification costs, apply to many unproductive agricultural offset protocols and present an opportunity for additional policy action. By examining other protocols in North America’s compliance and voluntary offset markets, we identify design elements that can overcome these barriers and facilitate offset generation. These elements include standardized, technology-aided data management; streamlined emissions quantification methods such as emissions factors or N-balance; and project bundling.

CDM PROJECTS IN BRAZIL: MARKET OPPORTUNITY FOR COMPANIES AND NEW DESIGNATED OPERATIONAL ENTITIES

Brazil actively participates in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) without having any kind of mandatory requirement. The objective of this study is to map the activities of CDM projects approved by interministerial Commission on Global Climate Change (CIMGC, for its acronym in Portuguese) and to identify new opportunities for CDM validation and verification bodies in Brazil. This paper was done by gathering information on CDM projects approved in Brazil and listed in the portal of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI, by its acronym in Portuguese). This research resulted in identifying a decrease in the registration of new CDM projects in Brazil. Furthermore, landfill projects in the waste sector has been identified to have the highest potential to be exploited in Brazil. This study also shows an opportunity to enhance the participation within voluntary carbon markets in Brazil.