Climate Moralities Offset: A Case of Formative Voluntary Carbon Markets.

IF 2.7 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Tomi Lehtimäki, Kamilla Karhunmaa, Tapio Reinekoski, Arttu Manninen, Mikko J Virtanen
{"title":"Climate Moralities Offset: A Case of Formative Voluntary Carbon Markets.","authors":"Tomi Lehtimäki, Kamilla Karhunmaa, Tapio Reinekoski, Arttu Manninen, Mikko J Virtanen","doi":"10.1111/1468-4446.70000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article contributes to sociological scholarship on climate change by examining the development of the voluntary carbon offset market in Finland. While intended to address the collective challenge of climate change, voluntary carbon offsetting has faced criticism for commodifying emissions and shifting responsibility to specific actors. Enabled by voluntary carbon markets, emissions and climate impacts are attributed to companies and individuals, reflecting the idea that each entity possesses its 'own' emissions that they can choose to offset. However, this attribution does not happen on its own. The present study thus examines how the collective problem of acting on climate change is coordinated through particular moral engagements. We focus on the socio-legal formatting of the voluntary carbon offset market in the context of Finland, a Nordic welfare state. We trace the trajectory of Compensate, a key Finnish offset provider whose activities sparked public controversy and led to criminal charges for violating the country's Money Collection Act as well as a legislative reform aimed at formalising voluntary offsets. The controversy centred on the nature of voluntary offsets and whether to consider them to be generally beneficial climate actions or self-interested activities. Based on the theory of the sociology of engagements, our analysis shows how actors engage in moral and political coordination in order to foster and sustain engagements with climate change. More broadly, our case demonstrates that producing and facilitating engagement with climate change through a voluntary market is not merely a matter of implementing effective instruments and arrangements-leading ultimately to the individualisation of climate action-but a result of complex moral and socio-legal formations. We conclude that the formatting of particularised climate engagements is a collectively produced process that necessitates an analysis of the shared moral coordination involved.</p>","PeriodicalId":51368,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Sociology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.70000","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article contributes to sociological scholarship on climate change by examining the development of the voluntary carbon offset market in Finland. While intended to address the collective challenge of climate change, voluntary carbon offsetting has faced criticism for commodifying emissions and shifting responsibility to specific actors. Enabled by voluntary carbon markets, emissions and climate impacts are attributed to companies and individuals, reflecting the idea that each entity possesses its 'own' emissions that they can choose to offset. However, this attribution does not happen on its own. The present study thus examines how the collective problem of acting on climate change is coordinated through particular moral engagements. We focus on the socio-legal formatting of the voluntary carbon offset market in the context of Finland, a Nordic welfare state. We trace the trajectory of Compensate, a key Finnish offset provider whose activities sparked public controversy and led to criminal charges for violating the country's Money Collection Act as well as a legislative reform aimed at formalising voluntary offsets. The controversy centred on the nature of voluntary offsets and whether to consider them to be generally beneficial climate actions or self-interested activities. Based on the theory of the sociology of engagements, our analysis shows how actors engage in moral and political coordination in order to foster and sustain engagements with climate change. More broadly, our case demonstrates that producing and facilitating engagement with climate change through a voluntary market is not merely a matter of implementing effective instruments and arrangements-leading ultimately to the individualisation of climate action-but a result of complex moral and socio-legal formations. We conclude that the formatting of particularised climate engagements is a collectively produced process that necessitates an analysis of the shared moral coordination involved.

气候道德抵消:一个形成性自愿碳市场的案例。
本文通过考察芬兰自愿碳抵消市场的发展,为气候变化的社会学研究做出了贡献。尽管自愿碳抵消旨在应对气候变化的集体挑战,但它因将排放商品化和将责任转移给特定行为者而受到批评。在自愿碳市场的推动下,排放和气候影响被归因于公司和个人,这反映了每个实体都拥有自己可以选择抵消的“自己”排放的理念。然而,这种归因并不会自行发生。因此,本研究考察了如何通过特定的道德约定来协调应对气候变化的集体问题。我们关注芬兰这个北欧福利国家背景下自愿碳抵消市场的社会法律形式。我们追踪了芬兰主要的补偿供应商——补偿公司的发展轨迹,该公司的活动引发了公众的争议,并因违反该国的《资金收集法》而受到刑事指控,并导致了旨在将自愿补偿正规化的立法改革。争议集中在自愿补偿的性质以及是否将其视为总体上有益的气候行动还是自利活动。基于参与社会学理论,我们的分析显示了参与者如何参与道德和政治协调,以促进和维持与气候变化的参与。更广泛地说,我们的案例表明,通过自愿市场产生和促进对气候变化的参与,不仅仅是实施有效的工具和安排——最终导致气候行动的个性化——的问题,而是复杂的道德和社会法律形成的结果。我们的结论是,特定气候协议的格式是一个集体产生的过程,需要对所涉及的共同道德协调进行分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: British Journal of Sociology is published on behalf of the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) is unique in the United Kingdom in its concentration on teaching and research across the full range of the social, political and economic sciences. Founded in 1895 by Beatrice and Sidney Webb, the LSE is one of the largest colleges within the University of London and has an outstanding reputation for academic excellence nationally and internationally. Mission Statement: • To be a leading sociology journal in terms of academic substance, scholarly reputation , with relevance to and impact on the social and democratic questions of our times • To publish papers demonstrating the highest standards of scholarship in sociology from authors worldwide; • To carry papers from across the full range of sociological research and knowledge • To lead debate on key methodological and theoretical questions and controversies in contemporary sociology, for example through the annual lecture special issue • To highlight new areas of sociological research, new developments in sociological theory, and new methodological innovations, for example through timely special sections and special issues • To react quickly to major publishing and/or world events by producing special issues and/or sections • To publish the best work from scholars in new and emerging regions where sociology is developing • To encourage new and aspiring sociologists to submit papers to the journal, and to spotlight their work through the early career prize • To engage with the sociological community – academics as well as students – in the UK and abroad, through social media, and a journal blog.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信