The Paradox and Fallacy of Global Carbon Credits: A Theoretical Framework for Strengthening Climate Change Mitigation Strategies

Ben Chester Cheong
{"title":"The Paradox and Fallacy of Global Carbon Credits: A Theoretical Framework for Strengthening Climate Change Mitigation Strategies","authors":"Ben Chester Cheong","doi":"10.1007/s44177-025-00084-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Carbon credit systems have emerged as a key policy tool in global efforts to mitigate climate change. Under these market-based schemes, entities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions below a specified cap are issued tradable credits that can be sold to entities exceeding their emissions allowances. In theory, this creates financial incentives for emissions reductions and allows reductions to occur where they are most cost-effective. However, this Policy Analysis argues that the increasing reliance on global carbon markets as a climate solution is deeply problematic and paradoxical. Drawing on interdisciplinary perspectives from environmental economics, law, ethics, and political ecology, I explore the problem through a theoretical framework elucidating the inherent limitations and fallacies underpinning carbon credit approaches. I contend that carbon markets (1) fail to produce real, verifiable emissions reductions; (2) exacerbate global inequities and undermine climate justice; (3) distort climate policy by emphasising cost-effectiveness over ecological necessity; and (4) delay the structural economic changes needed to achieve deep decarbonisation. My analysis is supported by a narrative review of the literature, case studies, and empirical evidence. This Policy Analysis concludes by proposing alternative climate mitigation approaches that could help transcend the paradoxes of global carbon credits, including accelerating fossil fuel phaseouts, scaling up public investment in low-carbon infrastructure, advancing climate justice principles, and rethinking carbon accounting frameworks. <b>Article Highlights</b></p><ul>\n <li>\n <p>Carbon credit systems have emerged as a key policy tool for mitigating climate change, but their effectiveness and equity are increasingly being questioned.</p>\n </li>\n <li>\n <p>This Policy Analysis explores the problem through a theoretical framework that elucidates four major paradoxes and limitations of carbon markets.</p>\n </li>\n <li>\n <p>The analysis draws on interdisciplinary perspectives and is supported by a narrative review of the literature, case studies, and empirical evidence.</p>\n </li>\n <li>\n <p>The Policy Analysis proposes alternative climate mitigation approaches that could help transcend the paradoxes of global carbon credits.</p>\n </li>\n <li>\n <p>Developing effective and equitable climate change mitigation policies in the coming decades will require moving beyond the limitations of carbon markets.</p>\n </li>\n </ul><h3>Graphical Abstract</h3>\n<div><figure><div><div><picture><source><img></source></picture></div></div></figure></div></div>","PeriodicalId":100099,"journal":{"name":"Anthropocene Science","volume":"4 1-2","pages":"72 - 83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44177-025-00084-0.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropocene Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44177-025-00084-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Carbon credit systems have emerged as a key policy tool in global efforts to mitigate climate change. Under these market-based schemes, entities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions below a specified cap are issued tradable credits that can be sold to entities exceeding their emissions allowances. In theory, this creates financial incentives for emissions reductions and allows reductions to occur where they are most cost-effective. However, this Policy Analysis argues that the increasing reliance on global carbon markets as a climate solution is deeply problematic and paradoxical. Drawing on interdisciplinary perspectives from environmental economics, law, ethics, and political ecology, I explore the problem through a theoretical framework elucidating the inherent limitations and fallacies underpinning carbon credit approaches. I contend that carbon markets (1) fail to produce real, verifiable emissions reductions; (2) exacerbate global inequities and undermine climate justice; (3) distort climate policy by emphasising cost-effectiveness over ecological necessity; and (4) delay the structural economic changes needed to achieve deep decarbonisation. My analysis is supported by a narrative review of the literature, case studies, and empirical evidence. This Policy Analysis concludes by proposing alternative climate mitigation approaches that could help transcend the paradoxes of global carbon credits, including accelerating fossil fuel phaseouts, scaling up public investment in low-carbon infrastructure, advancing climate justice principles, and rethinking carbon accounting frameworks. Article Highlights

  • Carbon credit systems have emerged as a key policy tool for mitigating climate change, but their effectiveness and equity are increasingly being questioned.

  • This Policy Analysis explores the problem through a theoretical framework that elucidates four major paradoxes and limitations of carbon markets.

  • The analysis draws on interdisciplinary perspectives and is supported by a narrative review of the literature, case studies, and empirical evidence.

  • The Policy Analysis proposes alternative climate mitigation approaches that could help transcend the paradoxes of global carbon credits.

  • Developing effective and equitable climate change mitigation policies in the coming decades will require moving beyond the limitations of carbon markets.

Graphical Abstract

全球碳信用的悖论与谬误:加强气候变化减缓战略的理论框架
碳信用体系已成为全球减缓气候变化努力中的一项关键政策工具。在这些以市场为基础的计划下,将温室气体排放量减少到特定上限以下的实体将获得可交易的信用额度,这些信用额度可以出售给超过排放限额的实体。理论上,这为减排创造了财政激励,并允许在最具成本效益的地方进行减排。然而,本《政策分析》认为,日益依赖全球碳市场作为气候解决方案存在严重的问题和矛盾。从环境经济学、法学、伦理学和政治生态学的跨学科视角出发,我通过一个理论框架来探讨这个问题,阐明了支撑碳信用方法的内在局限性和谬误。我认为,碳市场(1)无法产生真正的、可验证的减排;(2)加剧全球不平等,破坏气候正义;(3)通过强调成本效益而非生态必要性来扭曲气候政策;(4)推迟实现深度脱碳所需的结构性经济变革。我的分析得到了对文献、案例研究和经验证据的叙述性回顾的支持。本政策分析最后提出了有助于克服全球碳信用额度悖论的替代气候减缓方法,包括加速化石燃料淘汰、扩大低碳基础设施的公共投资、推进气候正义原则以及重新思考碳核算框架。碳信用体系已成为缓解气候变化的关键政策工具,但其有效性和公平性正日益受到质疑。本政策分析通过一个理论框架来探讨这个问题,该框架阐明了碳市场的四个主要悖论和局限性。该分析借鉴了跨学科的观点,并得到了文献、案例研究和经验证据的叙述性回顾的支持。《政策分析》提出了其他缓解气候变化的方法,有助于克服全球碳信用额度的悖论。在未来几十年制定有效和公平的减缓气候变化政策将需要超越碳市场的限制。图形抽象
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信