Forest carbon offsetting has long been controversial. Its advocates see it as a way of compensating for residual emissions as the global north transitions to a low-carbon economy while also channelling much needed finance for forests. Its critics warn it is a form of greenwashing that serves to delay urgent climate action in the global north, reduces forests to only their carbon value, and that huge uncertainties in the way that carbon is measured can lead to the production of ‘hot air’ credits and even fraud.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
In recent years, interest in forest carbon markets has been revived by ‘net-zero’ commitments, corporate ‘carbon neutral’ claims and the finalisation of Article 6 of the Paris Climate Accord establishing the rules of an international carbon trading system. Backed up by ambitious claims about the climate mitigation potential of REDD+ and other so-called nature-based solutions, demand for land in tropical forests is now surging to serve this burgeoning market, including from oil and logging companies looking to offset their emissions. With this has come renewed concerns about the value of such schemes as well as the impacts on the human rights and food security of local communities.\u00a0<\/p>\n\t