What makes an operational farm soil carbon code? Insights from a global comparison of existing soil carbon codes using a structured analytical framework

IF 2.8 4区环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Carbon Management Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17583004.2022.2135459

H. Black, M. S. Reed, H. Kendall, R. Parkhurst, N. Cannon, P. Chapman, Matthew Orman, J. Phelps, Hannah Rudman, Sarah Whalley, J. Yeluripati, G. Ziv

{"title":"What makes an operational farm soil carbon code? Insights from a global comparison of existing soil carbon codes using a structured analytical framework","authors":"H. Black, M. S. Reed, H. Kendall, R. Parkhurst, N. Cannon, P. Chapman, Matthew Orman, J. Phelps, Hannah Rudman, Sarah Whalley, J. Yeluripati, G. Ziv","doi":"10.1080/17583004.2022.2135459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Soils have the potential to sequester and store significant amounts of carbon, contributing towards climate change mitigation. Soil carbon markets are emerging to pay farmers for management changes that absorb atmospheric carbon, governed by codes that ensure eligibility, additionality and permanence whilst protecting against leakage and reversals. This paper presents the first global comparative analysis of farmland soil carbon codes, providing new insights into the range of approaches governing this global marketplace. To do this, the paper developed an analytical framework for the systematic comparison of codes which was used to identify commonalities and differences in approaches, methods, administration, commercialisation and operations for 12 publicly available codes from around the world. Codes used a range of mechanisms to manage additionality, uncertainty and risks, baselines, measurement, reporting and verification, auditing, resale of carbon units, bundling and stacking, stakeholder engagement and market integrity. The paper concludes by discussing existing approaches and codes that could be adapted for use in the UK and evaluates the need for an over-arching standard for soil carbon codes in the UK and internationally, to which existing codes and other schemes already generating soil carbon credits could be assessed and benchmarked. Graphical Abstract","PeriodicalId":48941,"journal":{"name":"Carbon Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Carbon Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2022.2135459","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Abstract

Abstract Soils have the potential to sequester and store significant amounts of carbon, contributing towards climate change mitigation. Soil carbon markets are emerging to pay farmers for management changes that absorb atmospheric carbon, governed by codes that ensure eligibility, additionality and permanence whilst protecting against leakage and reversals. This paper presents the first global comparative analysis of farmland soil carbon codes, providing new insights into the range of approaches governing this global marketplace. To do this, the paper developed an analytical framework for the systematic comparison of codes which was used to identify commonalities and differences in approaches, methods, administration, commercialisation and operations for 12 publicly available codes from around the world. Codes used a range of mechanisms to manage additionality, uncertainty and risks, baselines, measurement, reporting and verification, auditing, resale of carbon units, bundling and stacking, stakeholder engagement and market integrity. The paper concludes by discussing existing approaches and codes that could be adapted for use in the UK and evaluates the need for an over-arching standard for soil carbon codes in the UK and internationally, to which existing codes and other schemes already generating soil carbon credits could be assessed and benchmarked. Graphical Abstract

查看原文本刊更多论文

是什么使农场土壤碳代码可操作?使用结构化分析框架对现有土壤碳代码进行全球比较的见解

土壤具有封存和储存大量碳的潜力，有助于减缓气候变化。土壤碳市场正在兴起，向农民支付吸收大气碳的管理变革的费用，这些变革由确保合格性、附加性和持久性的法规管理，同时防止泄漏和逆转。本文首次对全球农田土壤碳代码进行了比较分析，为管理这一全球市场的方法范围提供了新的见解。为此，本文开发了一个分析框架，用于系统比较代码，用于识别来自世界各地的12个公开代码在方法、方法、管理、商业化和操作方面的共同点和差异。规范使用了一系列机制来管理附加性、不确定性和风险、基线、测量、报告和核查、审计、碳单位转售、捆绑和堆叠、利益相关者参与和市场诚信。论文最后讨论了现有的方法和代码，这些方法和代码可以适用于英国，并评估了在英国和国际上对土壤碳代码的总体标准的需求，现有的代码和其他已经产生土壤碳信用的计划可以被评估和基准。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

Carbon Management ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-

CiteScore

5.80

自引率

3.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Carbon Management is a scholarly peer-reviewed forum for insights from the diverse array of disciplines that enhance our understanding of carbon dioxide and other GHG interactions – from biology, ecology, chemistry and engineering to law, policy, economics and sociology. The core aim of Carbon Management is it to examine the options and mechanisms for mitigating the causes and impacts of climate change, which includes mechanisms for reducing emissions and enhancing the removal of GHGs from the atmosphere, as well as metrics used to measure performance of options and mechanisms resulting from international treaties, domestic policies, local regulations, environmental markets, technologies, industrial efforts and consumer choices. One key aim of the journal is to catalyse intellectual debate in an inclusive and scientific manner on the practical work of policy implementation related to the long-term effort of managing our global GHG emissions and impacts. Decisions made in the near future will have profound impacts on the global climate and biosphere. Carbon Management delivers research findings in an accessible format to inform decisions in the fields of research, education, management and environmental policy.

文献相关原料

公司名称	产品信息	采购帮参考价格