Showing all results

Policy Submissions
19 Jun 2017

Submission to European Commission on modernising and simplifying the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)

The current governance and decision-making process of the CAP is a main barrier preventing the current policy from delivering on its objectives.  Representing almost 40% of the EU budget, the CAP has to be aligned with the EU’s environmental, climate and development objectives.

Briefings
19 Apr 2017

CLARA Briefing – Climate Action in the Land Sector: Treading carefully

This briefing, published by the Climate, Land, Ambition and Rights Alliance – CLARA –, has been endorsed by Carbon Market Watch. Executive Summary Climate action must be urgently scaled up to limit global warming. Action in the land sector is critical and necessary for achieving the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting planetary warming to 1.5°…

Policy Submissions
4 Nov 2016

Recommendations for SBSTA Item 11(a) on Land use, land-use change and forestry under Article 3, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Kyoto Protocol and under the clean development mechanism

Carbon Market Watch welcomes the opportunity to provide input to the SBSTA discussions[1] on land use, land-use change and forestry under Article 3, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Kyoto Protocol and under the Clean Development Mechanism.

Briefings
8 Jul 2016

Joint Policy Brief: Why LULUCF cannot ensure that bioenergy reduces emissions

As part of work to produce a climate and energy package for 2030, the European Commission is currently reviewing the sustainability of all uses and sources of bioenergy for the period after 2020.1 The European Commission will also propose a new policy on how to include the land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector in the EU’s…

Briefings
16 Feb 2016

Rooting out the problem: preventing LULUCF from undermining the EU’s 2030 target

The European Commission is expected to publish legislation on how to include the land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector into the EU’s 2030 climate framework in the summer of 2016. Three options presented by the Commission on how to do this suggest various levels of integration with other sectors, from keeping LULUCF in a separate pillar, combining the sector with methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N20) agriculture emissions, or adding the sector into the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD).

Policy Submissions
28 Jan 2016

Submission on Concept note: Exploration of methodological options for developing ‘agriculture CDM’

Carbon Market Watch welcomes the opportunity to provide input on the concept note exploring new methodological options for developing ‘agriculture CDM’. The submission addresses issues of scope as some methodologies considered, particularly for soil carbon sequestration activities, are not eligible under the CDM. Additionally, technical comments addressed MRV obstacles for biochar, sequestration and avoided emissions projects that should preclude them from consideration under the CDM.

Briefings
22 Dec 2015

Paris outcomes: Carbon Market Watch Analysis of COP 21

From 30 November to 12 December 2015, Parties to the UNFCCC met in Paris to negotiate a new global climate treaty.

The Paris Agreement was a remarkable outcome, especially after the failures of Copenhagen. Almost all involved, including Carbon Market Watch, seemed surprised at how positive the outcome was. However, expectations had been carefully managed in the preceding years, so that aspirations of environmentalists to have a treaty that reflected the scientific reality by dividing up the remaining global carbon budget, had been downplayed into unreality.

Briefings
30 Nov 2015

Report: Using nature to pardon environmental pollution – Risks of agriculture sequestration carbon offsets

Agriculture supports the livelihoods of around a half of the world’s population, but is at the same time a notable source of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) driving climate change. As of one the options to tackle emissions in the sector, governments have been discussing to include additional agricultural activities into the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the United Nations Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC) since 2011. Whether agricultural activities should be eligible for carbon offsetting programmes is not only topical within discussions in the UNFCCC but also within certain regional cap-and-trade schemes and discussions to establish a market based mechanism for international aviation emissions, expected to be adopted in October 2016 under the auspices of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

Briefings
30 Nov 2015

Policy Brief: Fossil and biological carbon: a tonne is not a tonne

Whether biological carbon credit should be traded in carbon markets is topical, with discussions ongoing in the UNFCCC, ICAO and the California Cap-and-Trade system. To date, compliance markets have rejected the eligibility of biological carbon offsets. They are right to do so. Fossil and biological carbon operate on different parts of the carbon cycle, and on very different timescales. Fossil carbon is permanent; biological carbon is potentially and frequently subject to rapid fluxes, whether natural or manmade. For these reasons, offset credits from REDD+, afforestation and reforestation or other biological systems should not be treated as fungible with fossil carbon, but should instead be addressed through other, appropriate, policy measures.

Policy Submissions
17 Jun 2015

Carbon Market Watch response to the EU consultation on addressing greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and LULUCF in the context of the 2030 EU climate and energy framework

1. In your view, which of the multiple objectives of agriculture, forestry and other land use will gain most in relative importance by 2030?

It will be critical to ensure the long-term stability of carbon pools for carbon storage, biodiversity protection and ecosystem preservation in the future. Currently the emissions from land use represent a quarter of all human emissions and it is hence vital that the land use sector also contributes to tackling climate change.
The use of biomass is limited due to finite land availability and therefore the use of biomass should follow the cascading hierarchy and only as a last resort be used for lower-quality applications where other viable alternatives exist, which is the case with power generation.
Finally, it should be recognised that food security and sustainable farming should go hand in hand. Actions that support this include no-till farming, silvopastoral practises and demand-side measures to limit excess consumption.