The Hidden Disequities of Carbon Trading: Carbon Emissions, Air Toxics, and Environmental Justice

Lejano, Raul P.; Kan, Wing Shan; Chau, Ching Chit

doi:10.3389/fenvs.2020.593014

Cited by 14 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(15 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Carbon is not the only environmental externality generated by industrial emissions; pollution created by such activity cannot be resolved purely through market mechanisms, nor can such mechanisms address the effects on local communities at the site of emissions. There are also other pollutants for which there are no marketdriven solutions, and even when the idea of environmental justice is brought into discussions, poverty, race, and location can still determine whether businesses or communities pay the price (Lejano et al 2020;Banzhaf et al 2019). Carbon projects can result in the dispossession or disconnection of Indigenous and traditional communities from their lands, particularly if there is no recognized land tenure based on private property.…”

Section: Social and Environmental Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

COP26 and a Framework for Future Global Agreements on Carbon Market Integrity

Cadman¹,

Hales²

2022

The International Journal of Social Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The international political economy is developing carbon markets based on decisions made in Glasgow in 2021 at COP26. The development of such markets is problematic. An examination of the history of the agreements made at the climate change conferences indicates issues that remain pertinent today. These include the ability of markets to provide the necessary reductions in fossil fuel emissions at a scale large enough to combat climate change; the integrity of current systems for the accounting of carbon; possible negative impacts on natural capital generally and biodiversity in particular arising from such mechanisms; the inherent risks associated with trying to simultaneously deliver other (co-)benefits; and clarity over the extent to which the rights will be safeguarded. While there is an urgency in ensuring that mechanisms will deliver the emissions reductions required, the risks of carbon market failure remain due to the insufficiency of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the lack of transparency of carbon markets. Integrity systems based on sound principles for governing the integrity of carbon offsets and other mechanisms to reduce emissions are required. Unless standards are adopted, the likelihood of combatting climate change effectively, in the context of the danger of greenwashing and the ongoing pandemic, remains uncertain.

show abstract

Section: Social and Environmental Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

COP26 and a Framework for Future Global Agreements on Carbon Market Integrity

Cadman¹,

Hales²

2022

The International Journal of Social Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In regions with a higher level of green energy supply, the government should refer to the evolution path of s 12 precise governance to accelerate the elimination of backward coal power production capacity and build a safe, green, and efficient energy system. It is worth noting that inter-regional carbon transfer may result in "efficiency losses" exceeding "efficiency gains" (Jiang et al, 2015;Lejano et al, 2020), so the government's regional carbon emission reduction policy needs to comprehensively evaluate its negative benefits before specific implementation.…”

Section: Conflict Equilibrium State Analysis Of Ternary Conflict In C...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Research on Decarbonization Pathway of China’s Coal-Fired Power Industry From the Perspective of Conflict Mediation

Fang

2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The transition to a low-carbon energy system is imminent under the constraints of carbon-peaking and carbon-neutral targets. Undoubtedly, coal-related carbon emissions over the past decades have had profound negative impacts on human life and the global climate. However, the main position of coal in the energy system determines that pure coal reduction strategy will inevitably lead to a systemic energy crisis. To this end, we explore the conflict formation mechanism among coal enterprises, downstream coal-fired power plants, and government in the process of strategic energy decarbonization transformation from the perspective of industrial chain, and analyze the feasible conflict states and their NASH, GMR, SMR, and SEQ equilibrium characteristics by constructing a ternary GMCR model. It is found that there are two feasible conflict states s10 and s12 that simultaneously satisfy the conditions of the above four types of equilibria. In this context, the evolution paths of s10 and s12 are further analyzed and conflict mediation strategies are proposed accordingly. Meanwhile, the decarbonization transition of the energy system needs to consider both the stage characteristics and regional differences of energy reform, as well as the important role of green low-carbon technological innovation as a grip for the decarbonization transition of energy.

show abstract

“…The American Forest Foundation and The Nature Conservancy are currently piloting a program in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia that facilitate smaller landowners receiving carbon payments (Family Forest Carbon Program, 2021). However, relying on forests to produce carbon offsets to mitigate climate change has also been criticized for not meeting actual mitigation goals, permitting the continuation of environmental injustices at the sources of emission, and prioritizing the ecosystem service of carbon sequestration to the detriment of other values associated with forests that are not monetized (Lindenmayer et al, 2012;Lejano et al, 2020;vonHedemann et al, 2020).…”

Section: Implications For Practice Policy and Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

U.S. Family Forest Owners' Forest Management for Climate Adaptation: Perspectives From Extension and Outreach Specialists

vonHedemann

Schultz

2021

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the United States (US), family forest owners, a group that includes individuals, families, trusts, and estates, are the largest single landowner category, owning approximately one-third of the nation's forests. These landowners' individualized decision-making on forest management has a profound impact on US forest cover and function at both local and regional scales. We sought to understand perceptions among family forest specialists of: climate impacts and adaptation options across different forested US regions; how family forest owners are taking climate adaptation into consideration in their forest management, if at all; and major barriers to more active management for adaptation among family forest owners. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 48 forest experts across the US who work with family forest owners, including extension specialists, state forestry agency employees, and consulting foresters who focus on family forest engagement. Our interviewees shared details on how both climate change impacts and forest management for climate adaptation vary across the US, and they perceived a lack of active forest management by family forest owners. They explained that western forest landowners confronting the imminent threat of catastrophic wildfires are more likely to see a need for active forest management. By contrast, in the east, where most forestland is privately owned, interviewees said that landowners see relatively fewer climate impacts on their forests and less need for forest management to respond to climate change. Perceived barriers to more active family forest management for climate adaptation include the lack of more robust markets for a wide range of forest products, a higher capacity forestry workforce, education and assistance in planning forest management, and addressing the issue of increased parcelization of family forest lands. We situate these perceptions in conversations on the role of boundary organizations in climate adaptation, how individual adaptation occurs, and how governing methods frame adaptation possibilities.

show abstract

The Hidden Disequities of Carbon Trading: Carbon Emissions, Air Toxics, and Environmental Justice

Cited by 14 publications

References 18 publications

COP26 and a Framework for Future Global Agreements on Carbon Market Integrity

COP26 and a Framework for Future Global Agreements on Carbon Market Integrity

Research on Decarbonization Pathway of China’s Coal-Fired Power Industry From the Perspective of Conflict Mediation

U.S. Family Forest Owners' Forest Management for Climate Adaptation: Perspectives From Extension and Outreach Specialists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About