Abstract
This paper explores the different ways of managing carbon in organisational settings. It uses a sequential mixed methods approach – literature review, discussions with sustainability thought leaders, and online survey and interviews with company sustainability leaders – to consider and critique the use of the carbon management hierarchy (CMH) by selected corporate bodies in the UK. The derived empirical evidence base enables a triangulated view of current performance and potential improvements. Currently, carbon management models are flawed, being vague in relation to the operational reductions required prior to offsetting and making no mention of Science Based Targets nor the role corporations could play in wider sustainability initiatives. An amended CMH is proposed incorporating wider sustainability initiatives, varying forms of offsets, the inclusion of accounting frameworks and an annual review mechanism to ensure progress towards carbon neutrality. If such a model were to be widely used, it would provide more rapid carbon emissions reductions and mitigation efforts, greater certainty in the authenticity of carbon offsets, wider sustainability impacts and a faster trajectory towards carbon neutrality.
Reference17 articles.
1. BEIS “2017 UK greenhouse Gas Emissions, Provisional figures”, Statistical Release: National Statistics, (2018), available at: Reference Source.
2. Beyond CO2lonialism: the potential for fair trade certification to embrace voluntary carbon offsets;International Journal Sustainable Society,2010
3. The Ethics of Carbon Neutrality: A critical examination of voluntary carbon offset providers;J Bus Ethics,2011
4. Downie, C. “Carbon Offsets: Saviour or cop-out?”, The Australia Institute: Research Paper No. 48, (2007), available at: Reference Source.
5. Does the Gold Standard label hold its promise in delivering higher Sustainable Development benefits? A multi-criteria comparison of CDM projects;Energy Policy,2011