Despite the best efforts of activists and some climate negotiators, the agreement reached on Article 6 carbon markets at COP29 in Baku risks facilitating cowboy carbon markets at a time when the world needs a sheriff. Governments approved a concerning package of carbon market rules that could end up undermining our efforts to rein in …
Read more “COP29: Complex Article 6 rules pave way to unruly carbon markets”
The apparent progress made on Article 6 carbon markets during week 1 of the COP29 climate conference conceal many problematic fundamental and technical issues that remain unresolved.
In light of the Article 6.4 negotiations at COP29 in Baku, and the possibility for the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA) to give further guidance on the development of the Article 6.4 carbon crediting mechanism, Carbon Market Watch has prepared recommendations on CMA’s further guidance to the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body.
Article 6 is a key priority of Azerbaijan’s COP29 presidency, putting high pressure on countries to come to an agreement at the upcoming climate summit. At the same time, the role that Article 6 carbon markets play in the wider context of achieving our Paris Agreement goals hinges on the quality of the agreement. This …
Read more “Article 6 carbon markets at COP29: Carbon Market Watch’s recommendations”
Article 6 of the Paris Agreement sets out the principles for carbon markets. At COP29, governments must fix all the outstanding issues so as to ensure that Article 6 advances, rather than sets back, the climate agenda. This detailed guide explains what is at stake.
The Article 6.4 Supervisory Body aims to adopt the sustainable development (SD) tool at its next meeting in September/October. This tool is the main instrument to safeguard environmental, ecological and human rights, including the rights of Indigenous People.
A new report finds that despite improvements, serious shortcomings persist in the grievance mechanisms of the standards. These shortcomings limit the access to recourse for those adversely affected by carbon market projects.
As the line increasingly blurs between UN REDD+ and Article 6.2 carbon markets, this briefing sets the record straight. This comparison demonstrates that these two systems do not serve the same purpose and do not have comparable quality requirements. Urgent finance is needed for forest conservation, but Article 6.2 carbon markets are not the way.
This submission outlines Carbon Market Watch’s recommendations to the Supervisory Body. We recognise that a lot of work has gone into this new version of the draft. Nevertheless, a tool for environmental and social safeguards cannot be accepted when it is merely going in the right direction: it must be a tool that delivers truly robust safeguards.
This submission outlines Carbon Market Watch’s recommendations to the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body, as well as a comparison of the Independent Redress Mechanism of the Green Climate Fund with the current draft appeal and grievance processes.
Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.
