{"title":"碳市场的关键问题以及生物多样性保护和融资的经验教训","authors":"Jorge H. García, Lina M. Moros","doi":"10.1016/j.cosust.2025.101586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Voluntary carbon markets remain a controversial instrument for financing biodiversity conservation. From the perspective of credit-selling countries — especially in the Global South — carbon offsets represent both risks and hopes for aligning climate mitigation with biodiversity protection and much-needed financing of local development. Drawing on recent empirical evidence, we review the biodiversity, additionality, implementation, and equity challenges that have undermined the credibility and impact of carbon crediting, using cases from tropical forest regions. We argue that offset markets may still play a transitional role if embedded in strong regulatory frameworks, with transparent benefit-sharing and robust quality criteria. We call for a reframing of carbon markets not as ends in themselves but as transitional tools within a broader, justice-oriented biodiversity financing agenda. Our proposal to improve carbon markets combines top-down components — State-led biodiversity zoning and jurisdictional approaches — with a bottom-up approach that encourages a broader social engagement.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":294,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","volume":"77 ","pages":"Article 101586"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Key issues in carbon markets and lessons for biodiversity conservation and financing\",\"authors\":\"Jorge H. García, Lina M. Moros\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cosust.2025.101586\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Voluntary carbon markets remain a controversial instrument for financing biodiversity conservation. From the perspective of credit-selling countries — especially in the Global South — carbon offsets represent both risks and hopes for aligning climate mitigation with biodiversity protection and much-needed financing of local development. Drawing on recent empirical evidence, we review the biodiversity, additionality, implementation, and equity challenges that have undermined the credibility and impact of carbon crediting, using cases from tropical forest regions. We argue that offset markets may still play a transitional role if embedded in strong regulatory frameworks, with transparent benefit-sharing and robust quality criteria. We call for a reframing of carbon markets not as ends in themselves but as transitional tools within a broader, justice-oriented biodiversity financing agenda. Our proposal to improve carbon markets combines top-down components — State-led biodiversity zoning and jurisdictional approaches — with a bottom-up approach that encourages a broader social engagement.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability\",\"volume\":\"77 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101586\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187734352500079X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187734352500079X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Key issues in carbon markets and lessons for biodiversity conservation and financing
Voluntary carbon markets remain a controversial instrument for financing biodiversity conservation. From the perspective of credit-selling countries — especially in the Global South — carbon offsets represent both risks and hopes for aligning climate mitigation with biodiversity protection and much-needed financing of local development. Drawing on recent empirical evidence, we review the biodiversity, additionality, implementation, and equity challenges that have undermined the credibility and impact of carbon crediting, using cases from tropical forest regions. We argue that offset markets may still play a transitional role if embedded in strong regulatory frameworks, with transparent benefit-sharing and robust quality criteria. We call for a reframing of carbon markets not as ends in themselves but as transitional tools within a broader, justice-oriented biodiversity financing agenda. Our proposal to improve carbon markets combines top-down components — State-led biodiversity zoning and jurisdictional approaches — with a bottom-up approach that encourages a broader social engagement.
期刊介绍:
"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (COSUST)" is a distinguished journal within Elsevier's esteemed scientific publishing portfolio, known for its dedication to high-quality, reproducible research. Launched in 2010, COSUST is a part of the Current Opinion and Research (CO+RE) suite, which is recognized for its editorial excellence and global impact. The journal specializes in peer-reviewed, concise, and timely short reviews that provide a synthesis of recent literature, emerging topics, innovations, and perspectives in the field of environmental sustainability.