Author:
Espejo Andres B.,Becerra-Leal Maria Catalina,Aguilar-Amuchastegui Naikoa
Abstract
Reducing deforestation and forest degradation presents a climate-change mitigation opportunity that is critical to meeting the Paris Agreement goals, and to achieving reductions in the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) provides developing countries with results-based financial incentives for reducing deforestation and forest degradation through either non-market payments (payments without generation of carbon credits), or market-based mechanisms (carbon credits). REDD credits have been recently accepted to be used in offsetting programs (e.g., CORSIA) and are being considered under Article 6. However, various publications have questioned whether carbon credits from REDD should be accepted under market-based mechanisms, and have identified issues regarding their environmental integrity and their ability to offset emissions from other sectors. In recent years, REDD implementation has moved from the project level to the national or subnational (jurisdictional) level, and is addressing some of the concerns that have been raised for project-level interventions regarding the robustness of baselines and leakage, for example. In this paper we compare the environmental integrity of credits from REDD programs with that from on-grid renewable energy projects by examining aspects related to permanence, additionality, baselines, uncertainty, and leakage. We show that the environmental integrity of emission reductions sourced from REDD programs has unique strengths, and that those sourced from renewable energy projects have weaknesses of their own. Probably due to a lack of understanding of the respective weaknesses and strengths of these two sources of credits, the emission reductions from REDD programs have been historically questioned and subjected to a level of scrutiny that has not been made with emission reductions from other sectors, such as renewable energy projects. Recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of emission reductions from both types should help decision makers and carbon standards recognize the high quality of emission reductions from REDD programs, and rationalize the current requirements or restrictions imposed.
Reference52 articles.
1. Global Warming of 1.5 °C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Changewww.environmentalgraphiti.org
2. Greenhouse gas emissions from tropical forest degradation: an underestimated source
3. The role of science in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD)
4. Report of the Conference of the Parties on Its Twenty-First Session, Held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015. Addendum. Part Two: Action Taken by the Conference of the Parties at its Twenty-First Session. | UNFCCChttps://unfccc.int/documents/9098
5. Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA)https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/CORSIA/Documents/TAB/TAB 2020/ICAO_Doc_CORSIA_Eligible_Emissions_Units_August_2020.pdf
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献