Characteristics of forest carbon credit transactions in the voluntary carbon market

The voluntary carbon market allows participants to go beyond regulatory carbon offsetting. Recent developments have improved the transparency and credibility of voluntary carbon trading, and forest carbon credit transactions constitute more than half of trade volume. Its workings, however, have not been sufficiently explored in the literature. This study analyses the characteristics of forest carbon credit transactions in the voluntary carbon market using frequency analysis and logistic regression analysis. The results reveal that the co-benefits of forest carbon projects are an important factor influencing carbon credit transactions. From the higher transaction ratio of credits from CCB Standards-labelled projects and projects using co-benefit-oriented standards, it can be inferred that credits with potential for co-benefits (e.g. fostered corporate social responsibility, social cohesion of local communities and voluntary leadership, and positive environmental impacts) are preferred to those focusing exclusively on emission reduction in the voluntary carbon market. The findings of this study suggest that developing co-benefits is important for strengthening the market competitiveness of forest carbon credits in the voluntary carbon market. Additionally, unlike the compliance carbon market, in the voluntary carbon market stringent carbon standards do not always guarantee credit transaction performance.

POLICY RELEVANCE

After UNFCCC COP-21, the global society agreed to acknowledge various forms of international carbon crediting mechanisms, and noted the significance of greenhouse gas emissions reduction for sustainable development and environmental integrity through the Paris Agreement. Moreover, the agreement encouraged both REDD+ activities in developing countries and supports from developed countries. Additionally, co-benefits of forest carbon projects are important for credit transaction in the global voluntary carbon market. Under the new climate regime, co-benefits of forest carbon projects are expected to gain attention in the carbon market. To promote the social, economic, and environmental co-benefits of forest carbon projects, the introduction of an objective co-benefit assessment and certification system should be reviewed at the national level.     

Challenges to the development of carbon markets in China

China has introduced several pilot emission trading schemes to build the basis for a national scheme. The potential scale of this initiative raises prospects for a regional carbon trading network as a way to further engage other major Asian economies. However, the Chinese carbon markets rest upon a unique political-economic context and institutional environment that are likely to limit their development and viability. This article offers an overview of such structural economic and political constraints. Four main challenges are identified, namely, inadequate domestic demand, limited financial involvement, incomplete regulatory infrastructure, and excessive government intervention. The first two challenges concern economic dimensions and may be partially addressed by the incentives created by the newly introduced emission trading schemes. The other two are more deeply entrenched in the dominant political system and governing practice. They require fundamental changes to the ways in which the state and the market interact. The success of China's carbon market reform depends crucially on the ability of the ongoing efforts to transform the distorted state–market relationship.

Policy relevance

The burgeoning carbon markets offer opportunities for emissions mitigation at lower costs and enable circulation of a new form of capital, i.e. carbon credits, across borders. China accounts for a gigantic share of global GHG emissions and has the potential to significantly scale up these opportunities. There are clear implications for market developers and participants worldwide, including climate policy makers who attempt to link their emission trading schemes to other schemes, firms who seek to take advantage of the inexpensive carbon offsets generated in developing countries, international financial institutions who endeavour to establish their business in an emerging major carbon market, etc. This article can inform their decisions by identifying key issues that may undermine their ability to achieve these goals. Policy makers and stakeholders will benefit from this analysis, which shows how the Chinese carbon markets operate in ways that may be different from their experience elsewhere.     

Compliance of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in the first commitment period

This article provides an ex post analysis of the compliance of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol during the first commitment period (2008–2012) based on the final data for national GHG emissions and exchanges in carbon units that became available at the end of 2015. On the domestic level, among the 36 countries that fully participated in the Kyoto Protocol, only nine countries emitted higher levels of GHGs than committed and therefore had to resort to flexibility mechanisms. On the international level – i.e. after the use of flexibility mechanisms – all Annex B Parties are in compliance. Countries implemented different compliance strategies: purchasing carbon units abroad, stimulating the domestic use of carbon credits by the private sector and incentivizing domestic emission reductions through climate policies.

Overall, the countries party to the Protocol surpassed their aggregate commitment by an average 2.4 GtCO₂e yr^–1. Of the possible explanations for this overachievement, ‘hot-air’ was estimated at 2.2 GtCO₂e yr^–1, while accounting rules for land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) further removed 0.4 GtCO₂e yr^–1 from the net result excluding LULUCF. The hypothetical participation of the US and Canada would have reduced this overachievement by a net 1 GtCO₂e yr^–1. None of these factors – some of which may be deemed illegitimate – would therefore on its own have led to global non-compliance, even without use of the 0.3 GtCO₂e of annual emissions reductions generated by the Clean Development Mechanism. The impact of domestic policies and ‘carbon leakage’ – neither of which is quantitatively assessed here – should not be neglected either.

Policy relevance

Given the ongoing evolution of the international climate regime and the adoption of the Paris Agreement in December 2015, we believe that there is a need to evaluate the results of the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. To our knowledge there has been no overarching quantitative ex post assessment of the Kyoto Protocol based on the final emissions data for 2008–2012, which became available in late 2015. This article attempts to fill this gap, focusing on the domestic and international compliance of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in the first commitment period.     

Assessing the ambition of post-2020 climate targets: a comprehensive framework

One of the most fundamental questions surrounding the new Paris Agreement is whether countries’ proposals to reduce GHG emissions after 2020 are equally ambitious, considering differences in circumstances between countries. We review a variety of approaches to assess the ambition of the GHG emission reduction proposals by countries. The approaches are applied illustratively to the mitigation part of the post-2020 climate proposals (nationally determined contributions, or NDCs) by China, the EU, and the US. The analysis reveals several clear trends, even though the results differ per individual assessment approach. We recommend that such a comprehensive ambition assessment framework, employing a large variety of approaches, is used in the future to capture a wide spectrum of perspectives on ambition.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Assessing the ambition of the national climate proposals is particularly important as the Paris Agreement asks for regular reviews of national contributions, keeping in mind that countries raise their ambition over time. Such an assessment will be an important part of the regular global stocktake that will take place every five years, starting with a ‘light’ version in 2018. However, comprehensive methods to assess the proposals are lacking. This article provides such a comprehensive assessment framework.     

Challenges in developing effective policy for soil carbon sequestration: perspectives on additionality,leakage, and permanence

If carbon sequestration is to be a cost-effective substitute for reducing emissions then it must occur under a framework that ensures that the sequestration is additional to what would otherwise have occurred, the carbon is stored permanently, and any leakage is properly accounted for. We discuss significant challenges in meeting these requirements, including some not previously recognized. Although we focus on sequestration in soil, many of the issues covered are applicable to all types of sequestration. The common-practice method for determining additionality achieves its intention of reducing transaction costs in the short term but not in the medium to long term. Its design results in the least costly, additional abatement-measures being excluded from policy support and fails to address how, in the case of sequestration, revisions to the additionality of sequestering practices should apply not just to the future, but in theory, also retrospectively. Permanence is sometimes approximated as 100 years of sequestration. Re-release of sequestered carbon after this will not only reverse the sequestration, but may raise atmospheric carbon to higher levels than they would have been if the sequestration had never occurred. Leakage associated with sequestration practices can accumulate over time to exceed the total level of sequestration; nonetheless, adoption of such practices can be attractive to landholders, even when they are required to pay for this leakage at contemporary prices.

Policy relevance

Globally, much has been written and claimed about the ability to offset emissions with sequestration. The Australian Government plans to use sequestration to source much of the abatement required to reach its emissions targets. Designing effective policy for sequestration will be challenging politically, and will involve substantial transaction costs. Compromises in policy design intended to make sequestration attractive and reduce transaction costs can render it highly inefficient as a policy.     

Controlling GHG emissions from the transportation sector through an ETS: institutional arrangements in Shenzhen,China

Many different approaches are needed to achieve reductions in GHG emissions from the transportation sector. Carbon emissions trading schemes (ETSs) are widely used in industry and are effective in reducing the overall social cost of emissions abatement. This article reports the development of a downstream ETS for the transportation sector and its application in Shenzhen, China. The ETS was devised as a mandatory cap-and-trade scheme and, as a first step, was applied to public transportation. An integrated cap was set on the total emissions from buses and taxis: an absolute cap for existing vehicles and a relative increment for new entrants. Allowances were allocated by grandfathering or benchmarking and a ‘reverse mechanism’ was established to encourage the transformation of urban transportation to a low-carbon system. Online fuel consumption monitoring was used to quantify the emissions from vehicles, and the operators were required to surrender enough allowances or credits to account for their verified annual emissions. The mechanisms for allowance trading and carbon offsets provided sufficient flexibility to make emissions abatement and the use of new-energy vehicles and environmentally friendly travel within Shenzhen's urban transportation system economically attractive.

Policy relevance

The transportation sector is becoming a major contributor to the growth in China's GHG emissions. Achieving large reductions in GHG emissions from the transportation sector is a great challenge and requires both technology and policy innovation. The tradable carbon permit is a popular concept in mitigating climate change, but the introduction of a cap-and-trade ETS into the transportation sector is a relatively innovative concept. Shenzhen has launched the first cap-and-trade ETS in a developing country and is currently exploring ways to mitigate carbon emissions by a downstream cap-and-trade ETS for the transportation sector. This article considers the main institutional arrangements and regulatory framework of Shenzhen's transportation carbon ETS. It not only refreshes the theoretical analysis and practical application of downstream cap-and-trade carbon emissions trading in urban transportation, but also provides developing countries with a cost-effective instrument to mitigate their rapid growth in traffic carbon emissions during urbanization.     

How to operationalize accounting under Article 6 market mechanisms of the Paris Agreement

The role of market mechanisms was far from certain in the lead up to the 2015 Paris Climate Conference. The use of ‘constructive ambiguity’ led to Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, with Article 6.2 specifying a mechanism with limited international oversight, and Article 6.4 establishing a ‘Sustainable Development Mechanism’ (SDM) subject to detailed rules. Clear operationalization of these mechanisms remains a challenge, especially regarding the critical accounting issue that could not be resolved at the 2018 Katowice Climate Conference (COP24) – how to apply corresponding adjustments, especially regarding sectors not covered by targets under nationally-determined contributions (NDCs). By using fictitious examples, we explain two possible approaches to using Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) under Article 6.2 for achieving NDCs: a ‘target-based’ one where the acquiring Party adds the ITMO amount to the target level of its NDC; and a ‘tally-based’ one where the acquiring Party removes the ITMO amount from the final tally of its NDC. We discuss how these approaches influence the way to make corresponding adjustments and to avoid ‘double counting’. The first one leads to ‘target/budget-based accounting’, the second one to ‘emission-based accounting’. For mitigation outside the scope of the host Party's NDC, we propose using a tally-based interpretation of ITMO use, as opposed to the target-based variety used in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, and stress the need for additionality testing. This interpretation allows for mandatory corresponding adjustments for all ITMO usage, while the host Party NDC level remains unchanged. A buffer registry is created for corresponding non-NDC adjustments of the selling party.

Key policy insights

• Under the Paris Agreement, transfers of emissions units between two countries through the Article 6 mechanisms need a corresponding adjustment on both sides to prevent double counting.

• Corresponding adjustments can be applied either to emissions targets under NDCs or measured emissions levels.

• The transfer of emissions reduction credits generated outside an NDC should lead to a corresponding adjustment of a buffer registry of the selling country, but not its emissions level/NDC target. Such credits should only be generated if additionality of the reductions is shown.

     

Four intermediate goals: a methodology for evaluation of climate mitigation policy packages

This study aimed to evaluate climate mitigation policy packages in various countries’ nationally determined contributions by introducing four intermediate policy goals: decarbonizing energy, improving energy efficiency, reducing demand for energy services, and enhancing carbon sinks and reducing emissions of non-CO₂ gases. The methodology was examined by using data of China, Germany, Japan, the UK, and the US. Climate mitigation policies introduced between 1990 and 2015 in the five countries were categorized into four intermediate policy goals. Six indicators were introduced to measure actual outcomes, each representing one of the four intermediate policy goals. A comparison between the policy categorizations and the indicator outputs led to the conclusion that the number of policies implemented partially reflects the countries’ efforts to achieve specific policy goals, even though the stringency of each policy was not taken into account. This comparison was also useful in identifying key policies that were effective in achieving policy goals, even if there was a relatively small number of policies. The methodology was useful in generating policy recommendations to fulfil all the four intermediate goals in a balanced manner.

POLICY RELEVANCE

The Paris Agreement, adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in December 2015, calls for all countries to prepare, communicate, and maintain successive nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and pursue domestic mitigation measures with the aim of achieving the objectives of such contributions (Article 4.2). Under this new regime, methodologies to assess policy implementation have become increasingly important, especially for the post-2020 period. The methodology developed in this study is simple enough for any country to use and was effective in grasping the overall characteristics of the climate mitigation policy package in each country or region studied. The study recommends that the UNFCCC create a rule requesting countries to submit estimates of population, GDP, total energy demand, share of renewables, and other relevant factors for the target year when they submit their successive intended NDCs.     

Convergence of per capita carbon dioxide emissions: implications and meta-analysis

There is a rich empirical literature testing whether per capita carbon dioxide emissions tend to converge over time and across countries. This article provides a meta-analysis of the results from this research, and discusses how carbon emissions convergence may be understood in, for instance, the presence of international knowledge spillovers and policy convergence. The results display evidence of either divergence or persistent gaps at the global level, but convergence of per capita carbon dioxide emissions between richer industrialized countries. However, the results appear sensitive to the choice of data sample and choice of convergence concept, e.g. stochastic convergence versus β-convergence. Moreover, peer-reviewed studies have a higher likelihood of reporting convergence in carbon dioxide emissions compared to non-refereed work.

POLICY RELEVANCE

The empirical basis for an egalitarian rule of equal emissions per capita in the design of global climate agreements is not solid; this supports the need to move beyond single allocation rules, and increase knowledge about the impacts of combined scenarios. However, even in the context of the 2015 Paris Agreement with its emphasis on voluntary contributions and ‘national circumstances’, different equity-based principles could serve as useful points of reference for how the remaining carbon budget should be allocated.     

What if negative emission technologies fail at scale? Implications of the Paris Agreement for big emitting nations

A cumulative emissions approach is increasingly used to inform mitigation policy. However, there are different interpretations of what ‘2°C’ implies. Here it is argued that cost-optimization models, commonly used to inform policy, typically underplay the urgency of 2°C mitigation. The alignment within many scenarios of optimistic assumptions on negative emissions technologies (NETs), with implausibly early peak emission dates and incremental short-term mitigation, delivers outcomes commensurate with 2°C commitments. In contrast, considering equity and socio-technical barriers to change, suggests a more challenging short-term agenda. To understand these different interpretations, short-term CO₂ trends of the largest CO₂ emitters, are assessed in relation to a constrained CO₂ budget, coupled with a ‘what if’ assumption that negative emissions technologies fail at scale. The outcomes raise profound questions around high-level framings of mitigation policy. The article concludes that applying even weak equity criteria, challenges the feasibility of maintaining a 50% chance of avoiding 2°C without urgent mitigation efforts in the short-term. This highlights a need for greater engagement with: (1) the equity dimension of the Paris Agreement, (2) the sensitivity of constrained carbon budgets to short-term trends and (3) the climate risks for society posed by an almost ubiquitous inclusion of NETs within 2°C scenarios.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Since the Paris meeting, there is increased awareness that most policy ‘solutions’ commensurate with 2°C include widespread deployment of negative emissions technologies (NETs). Yet much less is understood about that option’s feasibility, compared with near-term efforts to curb energy demand. Moreover, the many different ways in which key information is synthesized for policy makers, clouds the ability of policy makers to make informed decisions. This article presents an alternative approach to consider what the Paris Agreement implies, if NETs are unable to deliver more carbon sinks than sources. It illustrates the scale of the climate challenge for policy makers, particularly if the Agreement’s aim to address ‘equity’ is accounted for. Here it is argued that much more attention needs to be paid to what CO₂ reductions can be achieved in the short-term, rather than taking a risk that could render the Paris Agreement’s policy goals unachievable.     

The Korean emissions trading scheme: business perspectives on the early years of operations

Korea’s domestic emissions trading scheme commenced in January 2015. It targeted mainly industrial and power sectors, and compelled companies to transform how they manage energy efficiency and mitigate GHGs. This study sets out to explore how Korean companies evaluated their allocation position and engaged in emissions trading in the first compliance period, and to identify their views on trading barriers and policy expectations at the start of emissions trading. Questionnaire surveys and on-site interviews targeting Korean companies under the Korean emissions trading scheme were conducted at the start of operations (February to March 2015) and after the first compliance year (May 2016), respectively. Actual operation results are observed and compared with the survey findings. This study extrapolates implications for policy and presents suggestions for the government and the target companies in terms of how to improve the current emissions trading scheme in order to further stimulate emissions trading.

POLICY RELEVANCE

This study attempts to bridge the gap between companies and government policy in operating the domestic emission trading scheme in Korea. Empirical results, based on analysis of company-level data, reveal how businesses perceive K-ETS and how this relates to the operating results, which saw only limited trading of surplus emissions taking place in the early phase. Key barriers to active trading identified in the study include supply–demand imbalance, policy uncertainty and lack of preparedness of companies over carbon pricing. These barriers could be addressed by improved transparency of allowance allocation methods, possibly restricting carry-over of surplus allowances, ending policy uncertainty and providing more information to companies that can support companies’ policy understanding of the carbon pricing based on the market mechanism. Targeted companies should proactively participate in emissions trading in the early phase, in order to learn from it and prepare for the future introduction of auctioning.     

Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement and the costs of delayed action

Current country-level commitments under the Paris Agreement fall short of putting the world on a required trajectory to stay below a 2°C temperature increase compared to pre-industrial levels by the end of the century. Therefore, the timing of increased ambition is hugely important and as such this paper analyses the impact of both the short and long-term goals of the Paris Agreement on global emissions and economic growth. Using the hybrid TIAM-UCL-MSA model we consider the achievement of a 2°C target against a baseline of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) while also considering the timing of increased ambition of the NDCs by 2030 and the impacts of cost reductions of key low-carbon technologies. We find that the rate of emissions reduction ambition required between 2030 and 2050 is almost double when the NDCs are achieved but not ratcheted up until 2030, and leads to lower levels of economic growth throughout the rest of the century. However, if action is taken immediately and is accompanied by increasingly rapid low-carbon technology cost reductions, then there is almost no difference in GDP compared to the path suggested by the current NDC commitments.

Key policy insights

• Delaying the additional action needed to achieve the 2°C target until 2030 is shown to require twice the rate of emissions reductions between 2030 and 2050.

• Total cumulative GDP over the century is lower when additional action is delayed to 2030 and therefore has an overall negative impact on the economy, even without including climate change damages.

• Increased ratcheting of the NDC commitments should therefore be undertaken sooner rather than later, starting in conjunction with the 2023 Global Stocktake.

• Early action combined with cost reductions in key renewable energy technologies can reduce GDP losses to minimal levels (<1%).

• A 2°C future with technological advancements is clearly possible for a similar cost as a 3.3°C world without these advances, but with lower damages and losses from climate change.

     

The nexus between nationally determined contributions and technology needs assessments: a global analysis

The role of technology in combatting climate change through mitigation and adaptation to its inevitable impacts has been acknowledged and highlighted by the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In the developing world, this has received particular attention through the technology needs assessment (TNA) process. As Parties put forward their national pledges to combat climate change, the scarcity of resources makes it important to assess (i) whether national processes designed to tackle climate change are working together and (ii) whether existing national processes should be terminated with the initiation of new ones. This study presents an assessment of the existing TNA process and its linkages to the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. The conclusions stem from an assessment of the TNAs completed to date, as well as 71 NDCs from developing countries at various stages of the TNA process. The analyses show that further developing the TNAs could play a vital role in filling gaps in the existing NDCs, specifically those relating to identifying appropriate technologies, their required enabling framework conditions and preparing implementation plans for their transfer and diffusion.

Key policy insights

• The full potential of the TNAs has still to be rolled out in many countries.

• Developing countries can maximize the potential of their TNAs by further developing them to explicitly analyse what is needed to implement existing NDCs, including by better aligning their focus, scope and up-to-dateness with the priority sectors included in the NDCs.

• Requests of developing countries for international assistance, through technology transfer, will be better guided by the completion of the TNA process.

• Policies for strengthening the NDCs will benefit from the results of completed, ongoing and future TNA processes.

     

Aligning emissions trading and feed-in tariffs in China

In 2013, China launched its domestic pilot emissions trading scheme (ETS) as a cost-effective strategy to reduce CO₂ emissions. Theoretically, the ETS can interact with the feed-in tariffs (FITs) applied to renewable energies (REN). This article presents a simple method to demonstrate how FITs can be adjusted based on the evolution of ETS carbon prices in order to provide a cost-effective climate policy package in China. First, by using provincial data and wind and solar power as examples, it calculates the implicit carbon prices that FITs generate in different Chinese provinces and finds that they are much higher than current carbon prices in the pilot ETS. This shows the necessity of using both instruments to guarantee current level incentives to develop REN for climate change purposes, at least in the short and medium terms. Second, by keeping the annual total carbon price level stable (the sum of the implicit FIT carbon price and the ETS carbon price), and taking into account the cost evolution of REN development, this article demonstrates, for the 2018–2020 period, that FIT should decrease at an annual rate of 3.04–4.63% (for wind) and 7.84–8.87% (for solar) based on different growth rates for progressive national ETS carbon prices.

Policy relevance

There are a number of studies and debates on the interactions between climate policies in Europe in particular, ETS and subsidies for REN. The key issue is that a climate policy package should be cost-efficient and the implementation of one policy should not jeopardise the performance of another. For a country like China, a considerable scale effect on climate target achievement and total cost savings could be produced by the careful design of the climate policy package. FIT and ETS, which are cost-efficient policies if implemented separately, will very probably constitute a major climate policy package in the future in China, which is aiming to limit the use of command-and-control policies. So far, there is some debate on how to reduce FIT for wind power in China due to development cost changes. But discussions are lacking on the linkage between FIT and ETS. This paper fills this gap.     

China’s national carbon emissions trading scheme: lessons from the pilot emission trading schemes,academic literature,and known policy details

Upon completion, China’s national emissions trading scheme (C-ETS) will be the largest carbon market in the world. Recent research has evaluated China’s seven pilot ETSs launched from 2013 on, and academic literature on design aspects of the C-ETS abounds. Yet little is known about the specific details of the upcoming C-ETS. This article combines currently understood details of China’s national carbon market with lessons learned in the pilot schemes as well as from the academic literature. Our review follows the taxonomy of Emissions Trading in Practice: A Handbook on Design and Implementation (Partnership for Market Readiness & International Carbon Action Partnership. (2016). Retrieved from www.worldbank.org): The 10 categories are: scope, cap, distribution of allowances, use of offsets, temporal flexibility, price predictability, compliance and oversight, stakeholder engagement and capacity building, linking, implementation and improvements.

Key policy insights

• Accurate emissions data is paramount for both design and implementation, and its availability dictates the scope of the C-ETS.

• The stakeholder consultative process is critical for effective design, and China is able to build on its extensive experience through the pilot ETSs.

• Current policies and positions on intensity targets and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) credits constrain the market design of the C-ETS.

• Most critical is the nature of the cap. The currently discussed rate-based cap with ex post adjustment is risky. Instead, an absolute, mass-based emissions cap coupled with the conditional use of permits would allow China to maintain flexibility in the carbon market while ensuring a limit on CO₂ emissions.

     

Learning from CDM SD tool experience for Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement (PA) emphasizes the intrinsic relationship between climate change and sustainable development (SD) and welcomes the 2030 agenda for the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Yet, there is a lack of assessment approaches to ensure that climate and development goals are achieved in an integrated fashion and trade-offs avoided. Article 6.4 of the PA introduces a new Sustainable Mitigation Mechanism (SMM) with the dual aim to contribute to the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and foster SD. The Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has a similar objective and in 2014, the CDM SD tool was launched by the Executive Board of the CDM to highlight the SD benefits of CDM activities. This article analyses the usefulness of the CDM SD tool for stakeholders and compares the SD tool’s SD reporting requirements against other flexible mechanisms and multilateral standards to provide recommendations for improvement. A key conclusion is that the Paris Agreement’s SMM has a stronger political mandate than the CDM to measure that SD impacts are ‘real, measurable and long-term’. Recommendations for an improved CDM SD tool are a relevant starting point to develop rules, modalities, and procedures for SD assessment in Article 6.4 as well as for other cooperative mitigation approaches.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Research findings are relevant for developing the rulebook of modalities and procedures for Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, which introduces a new mechanism for mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and sustainable development. Lessons learnt from the CDM SD tool and recommendations for enhanced SD assessment are discussed in context of Article 6 cooperative approaches, and make a timely contribution to inform negotiations on the rulebook agreed by the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement.     

Indigenous community benefits from a de-centralized approach to REDD+ in Brazil

Successful efforts of indigenous groups to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+) will likely vary with how the initiatives are designed and implemented. Whether REDD+ initiatives are carried out by national governments or decentralized to sub-national or project-level institutions with a nested approach could be of great consequence. I describe the Suruí Forest Carbon Project in Amazonian Brazil, one of the first REDD+ pilot projects implemented with indigenous people in the world. I emphasize (1) how enfranchisement of community members in the policy-planning process, fund management, and carbon baseline establishment increased project reliability and equity, and (2) how the project's quality would have likely been diminished if implemented under a centralized REDD+ scheme.

Policy relevance

This article explores a decentralized REDD+ intervention established in an indigenous land in Brazil. It expands the theoretical discussions on REDD+ governance and highlights how centralized REDD+ programmes are likely to be less effective than project-level interventions assisted by NGOs in terms of social benefits and community engagement. Additionally, the case study described can serve as reference for the design of critical social and technical components of REDD+.     

Using carbon finance to support climate policy objectives in high mountain ecosystems

Carbon markets and climate finance payments are being used to incentivize the mitigation of CO₂ arising from anthropogenic land-use change in forests, marine ecosystems, and lowland grasslands. However, no such consideration has been given to how these ‘carbon finance incentives’ might be applied to mountain grasslands and shrublands, ecosystems that contain a substantial amount of carbon. These incentives amount to more than US$350 billion per annum and could potentially support underfunded natural resource management (NRM) activities, which are urgently needed to address numerous stressors impacting these important ecosystems. In the mountain context, NRM activities could include adaptive grazing management, sustainable cropping, ecosystem preservation, ecosystem restoration, and engineered soil conservation measures. This article investigates the stressors, challenges, and priorities related to the NRM of carbon stocks in mountain grasslands and shrublands; why carbon markets and climate finance have not yet been utilized in this context; and, what is required to position mountain-based NRM activities as eligible for carbon finance incentives. Using surveys and interviews triangulated with a systematic literature review, the study found that carbon finance incentives are not well understood, both amongst mountain-focused experts and in the literature. The study also found the required technical methodologies, policy frameworks, and data to be largely undeveloped. This article proposes a top-down conceptual policy framework that can be used to develop key ‘enabling factors’ with the view of extending the eligibility of carbon markets and climate finance to NRM activities undertaken in mountain grasslands and shrublands in the same way that has been afforded to other ecosystems.

Policy relevance

This is the first study to explicitly highlight the important role that the mountain grasslands and shrublands might play in international climate policy, and how carbon finance mechanisms might support better NRM in these areas. It is also the first to investigate why these incentives have not been adopted thus far. The article concludes by proposing a novel top-down ‘carbon incentive enabling’ framework that could be driven by governments and mountain development focused organizations so as to capture some of the opportunities offered by carbon-based incentives, and help meet international climate policy objectives.     

Governance of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS): accounting,rewarding, and the Paris agreement

Studies show that the ‘well below 2°C’ target from the Paris Agreement will be hard to meet without large negative emissions from mid-century onwards, which means removing CO₂ from the atmosphere and storing the carbon dioxide in biomass, soil, suitable geological formations, deep ocean sediments, or chemically bound to certain minerals. Biomass energy combined with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) is the negative emission technology (NET) given most attention in a number of integrated assessment model studies and in the latest IPCC reports. However, less attention has been given to governance aspects of NETs. This study aims to identify pragmatic ways forward for BECCS, through synthesizing the literature relevant to accounting and rewarding BECCS, and its relation to the Paris Agreement. BECCS is divided into its two elements: biomass and CCS. Calculating net negative emissions requires accounting for sustainability and resource use related to biomass energy production, processing and use, and interactions with the global carbon cycle. Accounting for the CCS element of BECCS foremost relates to the carbon dioxide capture rate and safe underground storage. Rewarding BECCS as a NET depends on the efficiency of biomass production, transport and processing for energy use, global carbon cycle feedbacks, and safe storage of carbon dioxide, which together determine net carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere. Sustainable biomass production is essential, especially with regard to trade-offs with competing land use. Negative emissions have an added value compared to avoided emissions, which should be reflected in the price of negative emission ‘credits’, but must be discounted due to global carbon cycle feedbacks. BECCS development will depend on linkages to carbon trading mechanisms and biomass trading.

Key policy insights

• A standardized framework for sustainable biomass should be adopted.

• Countries should agree on a standardized framework for accounting and rewarding BECCS and other negative emission technologies.

• Early government support is indispensable to enable BECCS development, scale-up and business engagement.

• BECCS projects should be designed to maximize learning across various applications and across other NETs.

• BECCS development should be aligned with modalities of the Paris Agreement and market mechanisms.

     

When less is more: limits to international transfers under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement

International carbon markets can be an important tool in achieving countries’ mitigation targets under the Paris Agreement, but they are subject to a number of environmental integrity risks. An important risk is that some countries have mitigation targets that correspond to higher levels of emissions than independent projections of their likely emissions. If such ‘hot air’ can be transferred to other countries, it could increase aggregated emissions and create a perverse incentive for countries not to enhance the ambition of future mitigation targets. Limits to international transfers of mitigation outcomes have been proposed to address this risk. This article proposes a typology for such limits, explores key design options, and tests different types of limits in the context of 15 countries. Our analysis indicates that limits to international transfers could, if designed appropriately, prevent most of the hot air contained in current mitigation targets from being transferred, but also involve trade-offs between different policy objectives. Given the risks from international transfer of hot air and the uncertainty over whether other approaches will be effective in ensuring environmental integrity, we recommend that countries take a cautious approach and pursue a portfolio of approaches to ensure environmental integrity, in which case limits could provide for additional safeguards.

Key policy insights

• Limits to international transfers involve trade-offs between different policy objectives, in particular reducing the risk that countries transfer hot air and enabling participation in carbon markets.

• Under ‘relative’ limits a country may transfer mitigation outcomes to the extent that its actual emissions are below the limit. Relative limits derived from historical emissions data have significant limitations, and none of the tested approaches was found to be effective for all countries. Relative limits based on emission projections could be a more valid approach, although they are also technically and politically challenging.

• Under ‘absolute’ limits a country could only issue, transfer or acquire a certain amount of mitigation outcomes. Absolute limits set at sufficiently low levels could prevent countries from transferring large amounts of hot air, but are bluntly applicable to all countries, whether or not they have hot air.