Search
Close this search box.

Global carbon market negotiations are running out of (over)time

Photo by Markus Spiske temporausch.com from Pexels

The talks on future global carbon markets are already in overtime after countries failed to agree on a global deal last December in Poland. Now even this extra time is quickly running out. Less than two months before the crunch time talks at the next UN climate summit, the number of unresolved issues appears to be as high as ever.

This week, countries meet in Costa Rica to prepare the upcoming UN climate summit, the “COP25”. This is a crucial opportunity to seek common ground on four key unresolved issues linked to the Paris Agreement market provisions, the “Article 6”.

Only new projects after 2020

The transition of old carbon credits from the Kyoto Protocol mechanisms is among the thorniest topics. 

Several countries, in particular those with a huge number of old Kyoto credits still for sale (among which are Brazil, India and China), are keen to see these credits recognised under the Paris Agreement in order to continue cashing in on the old system. 

But this would be cheating the planet, as most of these credits do not represent new, additional emission reductions, and their sale is not necessary for projects to continue reducing emissions.

Count it only once

Another issue where countries cannot find agreement is the need to have strong rules in place to ensure that emission reductions are not counted towards multiple climate efforts. 

There is increasing support for applying “corresponding adjustments” whereby a country will not count emission reductions which have been sold to another country.  But many difficult technical issues remain open, such as how to account for market transfers for countries with single year targets (a target set for a specific year, e.g. 2030, instead of a trajectory which sets an emission reduction goal for each year in this trajectory).

No future for offsetting

At the heart of the discussion is also the question of how to go beyond the zero-sum logic which has underlined (and undermined!) the Kyoto protocol system, whereby emission reductions in developing countries were used to justify emissions in developed ones. 

This is no longer acceptable under the Paris Agreement and in the long term, it will eventually be impossible for any system to operate under this logic.  This is because countries’ self-established targets – the NDCs – must represent the most ambitious level of emission reductions possible, and be economy-wide, leaving no room for any “extra abatement” to be sold to another country. 

In the short term, concrete steps can already be taken to transition towards a world in which emissions are truly reduced and not merely shifted. 

First, a partial cancellation rate should be applied, in order to ensure that a portion of the emission reductions achieved under Article 6 is never used to justify pollution elsewhere.

While partial cancellation of credits is necessary, it is not sufficient to achieve environmental integrity. To truly reduce emissions, the projects implemented under Article 6 will also have to respect strict criteria and methodologies, including when setting baselines. 

A key principle should be that any project or activity can under no circumstances lead to an increase in emissions between or within NDC periods. 

Sustainable development must be at the heart of climate action

Last but not least, markets cannot continue on the path they have followed in the past when it comes to social, environmental, and human rights impacts.  

Lack of social and environmental safeguards under the Kyoto Protocol’s carbon markets has led to several projects not only damaging the environment but sometimes infringing on human rights. This is of course unacceptable. Any climate policy should work to protect and promote human rights. 

At a minimum, this requires clear rules for the consultation of local stakeholders and a grievance mechanism established under an independent body. 

Finally, future market mechanisms should not only “avoid harm”, but they should actively contribute towards the sustainable development goals, and require that activities benefit local communities.

Author

Related posts

Going for green: Is the Paris Olympics winning the race against the climate clock?

Aware of the impact of the games on the climate and of record temperatures on the games, organisers of the Paris games have pledged to break records when it comes to reducing the impact of this mega event on the planet. ‘Going for Green’, a Carbon Market Watch and éclaircies report assessing the credibility of these plans reveals that if completely implemented, only 30% of the expected carbon footprint is covered by a robust climate strategy.

Skyscrapers

2030 climate targets of over 50 top corporations significantly off track to keep within 1.5°C limit

At a time when global carbon emissions need to be almost halved by 2030, 51 major corporations’ climate commitments amount only to reducing their median carbon footprint by as little as 30%, reveals the 2024 Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor. Tighter regulations from governments are needed to raise the bar, both for companies which are taking insufficient action, and those who are not doing anything at all.

Lost in Documentation

Navigating the maze of project documentation

A new report by Carbon Market Watch has raised concerns over a lack of transparency and accountability within the unregulated voluntary carbon market caused by the unavailability of important project documents from the four biggest carbon crediting standards.

Join our mailing list

Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.