Disclaimer: Essay written on December 2024
Abstract
This paper explores the legal and regulatory frameworks governing carbon offsets in the European Union (EU) and non-EU countries. The primary research question investigates the impact of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) on carbon offsets, including the use and integration of non-EU carbon offsets within the EU market. The study highlights the stringent requirements of the CSRD, emphasizing transparency, verification, and compliance to maintain the integrity of carbon offsets. Through a comparative analysis, the paper examines the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and contrasts it with voluntary carbon markets (VCM), which rely on corporate social responsibility and market incentives. Explored as an example, Brazil’s carbon offset initiatives, particularly through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the Amazon Fund, are analysed to understand the challenges of integrating these offsets into the EU market. The findings suggest that while the CSRD sets high standards for carbon offset practices, successful integration of non-EU offsets requires substantial investment in verification infrastructure and regulatory cooperation. The study concludes with recommendations for enhancing global cooperation and suggests areas for future research to address gaps in the current understanding of global carbon markets, considering the global challenge of addressing the urgent issue of climate change.
Keywords
Carbon Offsets, Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), European Union (EU) Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), Voluntary Carbon Markets (VCM)
Introduction
Following the global effort to combat climate change, carbon offsetting has emerged as a critical mechanism for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This paper examines the legal and regulatory frameworks of carbon offsets in the European Union (EU) and non-EU countries, with the primary research question being to investigate the impact of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)[1] on carbon offsets, with a bigger focus on voluntary carbon markets (VCM). This question further includes analysing the feasibility of integration of non-EU carbon offsets within the EU market, addressing the challenges and opportunities in harmonizing international efforts to mitigate climate change.
The significance of studying the CSRD in the context of carbon offsets lies in understanding how regulatory frameworks promote sustainable practices and ensure the integrity of carbon offsets. The directive, recently established by the EU, aims to enhance and standardize sustainability reporting by companies, including detailed disclosures on carbon offsetting activities, as it imposes rigorous standards for verification and credibility, essential for maintaining trust in the global carbon market.
This paper begins by delineating a background on carbon markets, delving into the differences between regulatory and voluntary carbon markets, and highlighting their principles, mechanisms, and challenges faced. We shall look into the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)[2] by explaining its contrasts with voluntary initiatives driven by corporate social responsibility and market incentives. An overview of the CSRD discusses its legal background and provisions related to carbon offsetting, emphasizing the necessity for high-quality, credible carbon offsets.
Shifting the focus to non-EU carbon offsets, we take as an example Brazil’s carbon offset projects and regulatory frameworks, considering its participation in the global carbon offset market. To illustrate this point, we will investigate the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)[3] and initiatives like the Amazon Fund,[4] which are relevant to compare with the EU modus operandi, understanding the challenges of integrating non-EU offsets into the EU market. While Brazil’s regulatory framework under the CDM offers a robust verification system, integrating these standards with the EU’s stringent CSRD requirements presents challenges, particularly in terms of third-party verification and compliance.
The political implications of carbon offsetting are also explored, highlighting the role of international negotiations and cooperation between the EU and non-EU countries. The paper sheds light on political tensions and challenges associated with ensuring the integrity and effectiveness of offset mechanisms, recurring to case studies of successful offset projects to illustrate the potential benefits and complexities of international cooperation in carbon offsetting. This discussion under the context of climate change follows the urgency to address global mitigation efforts, essential to fight the climate crisis.
Carbon Markets
Carbon offsetting is a mechanism designed to compensate for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions produced by human activities, primarily through investing in projects that reduce or sequester an equivalent amount of CO2 elsewhere.[5] Some examples of projects include reforestation, renewable energy installations, and energy efficiency improvements. The concept is rooted in the principle of mitigating the impact of GHG emissions by balancing out emissions produced with equivalent reductions or removals of emissions in other areas, and this process originates the carbon credits.[6]
Carbon markets stage the trade of carbon credits, being divided into two different sections: regulatory and voluntary. For the purpose of this paper, we shall focus more on the voluntary market, but let us take a look into what differentiates them.
Regulatory carbon markets are structured frameworks established by governments or international bodies to control and reduce GHG emissions. These markets operate primarily through cap-and-trade systems, compliance mechanisms, and regulatory oversight, and they collectively aim to incentivize emissions reductions while maintaining economic flexibility.
Firstly, a cap-and-trade system, the cornerstone of regulatory carbon markets, sets a limit on the total amount of GHG emissions allowed for covered entities, such as industrial plants and power stations.[7] Entities must hold sufficient allowances to cover their emissions, promoting reductions. Over time, the cap is reduced to ensure a gradual decrease in overall emissions, driving companies to innovate and reduce their carbon footprint to avoid penalties.[8]
In order to ensure adherence to cap-and-trade regulations, compliance mechanisms work on monitoring and reporting, which requires entities to accurately track and report emissions using automated systems and third-party audits – independent verification ensures data accuracy and prevents fraud.[9] Another adherence enforcement mechanism is imposing penalties for non-compliance, such as fines and future offset requirements; further, regulatory oversight is crucial for maintaining market integrity. Regulatory bodies engage with stakeholders to align the market with broader environmental and economic policies.
On the other hand, VCMs are platforms where businesses, organizations, and individuals purchase carbon offsets to mitigate their GHG emissions. Unlike regulatory markets, participation is driven by corporate social responsibility (CSR) and market incentives rather than legal mandates.[10] These markets focus mainly on private sector and non-profit initiatives, and examples include reforestation, which absorbs CO2 and provides habitat restoration and biodiversity benefits; renewable energy projects, such as wind, solar, and hydroelectric power, which displace fossil fuels and reduce GHG emissions; and energy efficiency improvements in buildings, industries, and transportation, which significantly lower carbon emissions.
CSR programs involve voluntary company actions to improve societal and environmental well-being, including reducing GHG emissions and investing in offset projects. These initiatives can enhance a company’s image, their consumer perceptions, [11] meet stakeholder expectations,[12] and contribute to global sustainability goals.
When it comes to the analysis of differences between the carbon markets, the challenges they face vary between the two types. Ensuring market integrity is crucial for both, but voluntary markets face greater challenges due to the lack of mandatory oversight.[13] Reputable certification standards like the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS)[14] and the Gold Standard[15] help ensure credibility by establishing rigorous criteria for project validation and verification. Thus, verification processes differ, since regulatory markets require stringent verification by third-party auditors to ensure the accuracy of reported emissions and reductions, maintaining market credibility and compliance, whereas in voluntary markets verification is conducted by independent certification bodies, with projects needing to meet specific standards and undergo periodic reviews to maintain certification, ensuring the environmental integrity of the projects.
Other concerns that differ between the markets are related to the concept of additionality, which implies that a carbon offset project must result in emission reductions or removals that would not have occurred without the project’s implementation.[16] In other words, the project must provide environmental benefits that are “additional” to what would have happened in a business-as-usual scenario. In regulatory markets, emission reductions are mandated by law, and the cap ensures overall emissions decrease over time. In voluntary markets, ensuring additionality is crucial to confirm that offset projects result in real, measurable, and additional emissions reductions, a requirement that demands rigorous assessment.
Based on our observations so far, we can conclude that VCMs are primarily driven by CSR principles. In this sense, we now delve into the 2022 publication of the EU directive that regulates this field, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive.
The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)
Following the EU’s efforts towards CSR,[17] as its name indicates, the CSRD is a regulatory framework established by the European Union to enhance and standardize sustainability reporting by companies. By aiming to enhance the transparency and comparability of sustainability information disclosed by companies, the directive requires detailed reporting on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors, and explicitly supports the transition to a sustainable economy by integrating climate-related disclosures.[18] Recognizing the global nature of climate change, the CSRD emphasizes the need for consistent and comprehensive reporting standards that facilitate international cooperation and comparability, acknowledging non-EU efforts and contributions.[19]
Relevant CSRD Provisions:
- On Reporting Standards:
- Disclosure Requirements: Companies are required to disclose detailed information on their sustainability impacts, including GHG emissions and the use of carbon offsets. These disclosures must adhere to specified reporting frameworks and standards to ensure accuracy and comparability. (whereas 21, 30)
- Non-EU Offsets: Although not explicitly mentioned in the CSRD, the need for high-quality carbon offsets necessitates that offsets from non-EU countries meet equivalent verification and environmental integrity standards. (whereas 19)
- On Verification:
- Third-Party Verification: The CSRD mandates that sustainability information, including data on carbon offsets, be verified by an accredited third party. This ensures the reliability of the reported data and enhances stakeholder confidence. (whereas 10 and 63)
- Verification Processes: The CSRD requires that Member States ensure the quality of assurance of sustainability reporting carried out by independent assurance services providers. These providers must meet requirements equivalent to those for statutory auditors, including training, continuing education, quality assurance systems, and professional ethics. (whereas 60)
- Alignment with International Standards: Verification processes must align with international best practices and standards, such as those set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) or the Gold Standard. This includes verification of offsets originating from non-EU countries to maintain consistency and credibility. (whereas 54 and article 29b)
- On Carbon Offsets
- Disclosure Requirements for Carbon Offsets: The CSRD mandates that undertakings disclose the extent to which they use carbon offsets and the source of those offsets. This includes specifying the level and scope of GHG emissions and removals attributed to the undertaking. (whereas 47)
- Progressive Approach to Assurance: The CSRD adopts a progressive approach to enhancing assurance levels for sustainability information. Initially, it requires a limited assurance engagement, where the auditor expresses an opinion on compliance with Union sustainability reporting standards. By 2028, this will transition to a reasonable assurance engagement, following the adoption of assurance standards for reasonable assurance of sustainability reporting. (whereas 81)
Offsets regulation in EU and non-EU countries
The EU has a robust framework for carbon offsets, primarily governed by the EU ETS, the cornerstone of the EU’s climate policy that operates on a cap-and-trade principle,[20] and various regulations ensuring the integrity and transparency of these offsets.[21]
The CSRD mandates extensive sustainability reporting for companies operating within the EU,[22] but its provisions regarding the use of carbon offsets from outside the EU are complex and nuanced insofar as not explicitly elaborated. While the directive does not prohibit the use of carbon offsets from non-EU countries, it imposes rigorous standards for the verification and credibility of these offsets. This means that any carbon offsets used, regardless of their origin, must meet high standards of transparency, reliability, and additionality.[23] The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG)[24] is developing specific standards for sustainability reporting,[25] which are likely to ensure that any offsets, including those from non-EU countries, are subject to stringent verification processes to confirm their validity and effectiveness.
Many non-EU countries regulate carbon offset projects through a combination of national laws, international agreements, and voluntary standards; these frameworks aim to ensure the environmental integrity of offset projects, verify emission reductions, and provide transparency to stakeholders.
One example of a non-EU actor that has been a prominent player in the global carbon offset market is Brazil, primarily through its participation in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)[26] under the Kyoto Protocol. Brazil’s VCM is gaining momentum as a critical component of global climate action. The market, both domestically and internationally, is projected to grow significantly, with global valuations ranging between $20 billion and $40 billion in 2024, reflecting its increasing relevance in achieving sustainability goals.[27]
The country leverages its natural resources and biodiversity to develop offset projects, including reforestation, renewable energy, and methane capture initiatives. One notable program is the Amazon Fund,[28] which finances projects aimed at preventing deforestation and promoting sustainable forest management. Established in 2008, the fund has received contributions from countries like Norway and Germany and serves as a model for international cooperation on climate mitigation.
Brazil’s regulatory framework for carbon offsets includes stringent requirements for project approval, monitoring, and verification. The National Institute for Space Research (INPE)[29] monitors deforestation and land-use changes, providing reliable data to support offset projects. The Brazilian Ministry of the Environment oversees the registration and certification of offset projects, ensuring compliance with national and international standards, such as having a national REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) strategy.[30] The Brazil Voluntary Carbon Market (BRVCM) initiative emphasizes transparency and scalability, aiming to establish the country as a leader in high-quality carbon credits while supporting sustainable development.[31] However, despite its potential, the Brazil’s VCM also faces challenges related to robust verification and additionality requirements.[32] The Amazon Fund, for example, requires independent audits, but enforcement and consistency are constant issues.[33]
These frameworks can sometimes lack the stringent verification processes found in the EU, gaps that highlight the need for greater regulatory alignment and investment in verification infrastructure, illustrating the several challenges involved on the integration of non-EU offsets into the EU market. Therefore, mutual recognition agreements and international cooperation can help bridge these regulatory gaps; establishing collaborative frameworks between EU regulatory bodies and non-EU offset projects and supporting the development of necessary infrastructure in other countries, can facilitate compliance with EU standards. Additionally, it is essential to ensure transparency and reliable reporting, with regular monitoring and public disclosure. The credibility of non-EU offsets can impact their acceptance in the EU market, making it crucial for these offsets to meet EU standards for market confidence, if the goal is to successfully integrate the European market. This scenario leads us to question the implication of such dynamics under the realm of international relations.
Discussion
Carbon offsetting has significant political implications, acting as a tool for achieving climate goals set out in international agreements, such as the Paris Agreement,[34] by enabling countries and companies to meet emission reduction targets cost-effectively. Politically, carbon offsetting arguably fosters cooperation between developed and developing nations, directing financial flows toward sustainability projects in less affluent regions.
However, carbon offsetting is controversial. Critics point out the reverse side of the practice, which can act as a “license to pollute”, allowing companies and countries to avoid making substantial changes to their emission-intensive activities.[35] There are also concerns about the integrity and effectiveness of offset projects, particularly in developing countries where regulatory oversight may be weaker, which can lead to political tensions regarding the credibility and fairness of offset mechanisms.
International frameworks rooted in international negotiations, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)[36] and the Paris Agreement, play a crucial role in the cooperation on climate action, including carbon offsetting. While the UNFCCC establishes the principles and processes for global efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate impacts, the Paris Agreement strengthens these efforts by setting binding commitments for countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. Article 6 of the Paris Agreement[37] addresses mechanisms for carbon trading and offsetting, promoting international cooperation to achieve emissions reduction targets, introducing concepts such as Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) and Sustainable Development Mechanism (SDM) to ensure transparency, environmental integrity, and support for sustainable development. Other international frameworks and initiatives, such as the Kyoto Protocol’s CDM and the REDD+ program,[38] also facilitate carbon offset projects and promote global climate action.
Shedding light on bilateral and multilateral agreements between the EU and non-EU countries demonstrates that the EU has been proactive in establishing means to support carbon offsetting and broader climate objectives, and also expanding its influence. These agreements often include provisions for technology transfer, capacity building, and financial assistance to help partner countries develop and implement offset projects.
Some examples to illustrate the collaboration include the EU-China Climate Agreement,[39] which focuses on cooperation in carbon neutrality efforts, technology exchange, and policy alignment to support the transition to low-carbon economies. Similarly, and following this paper’s discussion, the EU-Brazil Strategic Partnership[40] includes initiatives to develop renewable energy projects and protect biodiversity, contributing to carbon offset efforts. The EU also engages in multilateral initiatives such as the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA),[41] under the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),[42] which aims to stabilize CO2 emissions from international aviation through market-based measures, including carbon offsetting. Moreover, the EU has funded numerous renewable energy projects in African countries,[43] such as solar and wind power installations, which generate carbon credits while providing sustainable energy solutions. The EU and India have cooperated on various climate initiatives[44] and projects that contribute to carbon sequestration and generate offsets.
Despite recent efforts, achieving global policy coordination on carbon offsetting still presents several challenges. Strengthening international frameworks like the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement in setting rigorous standards and ensuring compliance can improve the integrity and effectiveness of carbon offsetting. It is crucial to, so ensure transparency and accountability in offset projects, as weak governance and lack of robust monitoring can undermine the credibility of offsets.[45] Developing effective market mechanisms for trading carbon offsets that are fair and inclusive remains a significant challenge, even more so when attempting to ensure these mechanisms do not disproportionately benefit wealthier nations or companies, critical for equity.
Providing support to developing countries to build their capacity for implementing and monitoring offset projects – including financial assistance, technical expertise, and institutional support – could be a positive strategy, useful to foment the international market, broadening the offers available. However, countries have differing priorities and economic circumstances, leading to differences in climate policies and commitment levels. Balancing these interests to achieve coherent and effective global action is a complex exercise, especially considering the varying standards and regulations for carbon offset projects, which lead to challenges in ensuring the integrity and comparability of offsets across borders. Therefore, harmonized standards and guidelines for carbon offset projects can help ensure consistency and comparability across different regions, not leaving aside the differences between the Global North and the Global South, being cautious not to repeat (neo)colonialist power dynamics. Enhancing transparency in reporting and verifying offset projects through independent audits and public disclosure can build trust and credibility in the system as a whole. Moreover, ensuring that all stakeholders, including local communities, are involved in the design and implementation of offset projects can enhance their social and environmental benefits.
Final remarks
The integration of non-EU carbon offsets within the EU market, as governed by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), poses both significant opportunities and challenges. The CSRD’s stringent requirements for transparency, verification, and compliance are essential to maintain the integrity of carbon offset practices, ensuring that they contribute effectively to global carbon reduction efforts. As we have seen, this directive sets a high standard for sustainability reporting, demanding detailed disclosures on carbon offset activities and mandating third-party verification to ensure the reliability and accuracy of reported data.
The comparative analysis of regulatory carbon markets – represented, for example by the EU ETS – and voluntary carbon markets highlights the fundamental differences in their operational frameworks. The EU ETS, with its cap-and-trade system and rigorous compliance mechanisms, offers a robust model for regulating carbon emissions. In contrast, VCMs, driven by corporate social responsibility and market incentives, present a more flexible but less regulated approach. The study underscores the importance of high-quality, credible carbon offsets, emphasizing the need for stringent verification processes to ensure environmental integrity, especially considering the interaction and integration of different markets around the world.
Taking as an example Brazil’s carbon offset initiatives, particularly through the CDM and the Amazon Fund, we can illustrate the potential and challenges of integrating non-EU offsets into the EU market. While Brazil’s projects leverage significant natural resources and biodiversity, the integration process would require a verification infrastructure that is closely aligned with EU standards. The study suggests that successful integration necessitates substantial investment in verification infrastructure and regulatory cooperation to bridge the regulatory gaps between EU and non-EU frameworks.
Turning to the political implications of carbon offsetting, we have seen that they are multifaceted, involving international negotiations and cooperation. The CSRD and similar regulatory frameworks play a crucial role in setting a solid base to promote global collaboration and ensuring the credibility of carbon offset mechanisms, as they could follow similar standards, adapting to the countries’ specific needs and particularities. Enhancing global cooperation through mutual recognition agreements, supporting the development of necessary infrastructure in non-EU countries, and ensuring consistent and transparent reporting standards are some tendencies that should be followed. In conclusion, the various tendencies regarding carbon offsetting around the world reflect the growing need for enhanced focus on climate mitigation strategies, keeping in mind the subject’s urgency.
Bibliography
Amazon Fund, ‘What is the Amazon Fund?’ (Amazon Fund) https://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/amazon-fund/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Amazon Fund official website https://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/library/amazon-fund/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Barcelos Vargas D et. al. ‘Mercado de Carbono Voluntário no Brasil na Realidade e na Prática’ (FGV EESP, 2022) https://eesp.fgv.br/sites/eesp.fgv.br/files/ocbio_mercado_de_carbono_1.pdf accessed 20 November 2024
Boyd E, ‘Governing the Clean Development Mechanism: Global Rhetoric Versus Local Realities in Carbon Sequestration Projects’ (2009) 41(10) Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 2380 https://doi.org/10.1068/a41341 accessed 29 July 2024.
Brazil Voluntary Carbon Market, ‘About Us’ (BRVCM) https://www.brvcm.org/ accessed 20 November 2024.
Carbon Offset Guide, ‘Independent Crediting Programs’ https://offsetguide.org/understanding-carbon-offsets/carbon-offset-programs/voluntary-offset-programs/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Crabbendam N, ‘Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) Explained’ (Carbon Trust, 15 December 2022) https://www.carbontrust.com/news-and-insights/insights/corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-csrd-explained accessed 29 July 2024.
D’Ambrogio E, ‘EU-India: Cooperation on Climate’ (European Parliamentary Research Service, November 2020) https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/659348/EPRS_BRI(2020)659348_EN.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
Dawes A, ‘What’s Plaguing Voluntary Carbon Markets?’ (CSIS, 2 February 2024) https://www.csis.org/analysis/whats-plaguing-voluntary-carbon-markets accessed 29 July 2024.
Dee Laurence, ‘The Concept Of Additionality In The Voluntary Carbon Market, Explained’ (Forbes, 21 April 2022) https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesnonprofitcouncil/2021/10/01/the-concept-of-additionality-in-the-voluntary-carbon-market-explained/ accessed 6 November 2024
Delegation of the European Union to Brazil, ‘The European Union and Brazil – International Cooperation’ (Delegation of the European Union to Brazil, 2 August 2021) https://www.eeas.europa.eu/brazil/european-union-and-brazil-international-cooperation_en?s=191 accessed 29 July 2024.
Deloitte, ‘#DeloitteESGNow — Frequently Asked Questions About the E.U. Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive’ (Deloitte) https://dart.deloitte.com/USDART/home/publications/deloitte/heads-up/2023/csrd-corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-faqs accessed 29 July 2024.
Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting [2022] OJ L322/15.
Durand R, Paugam L, Stolowy H, ‘Do Investors Actually Value Sustainability Indices? Replication, Development, and New Evidence on CSR Visibility’ (2019) Strategic Management Journal https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3035 accessed 29 July 2024.
European Commission, ‘Africa-Europe Green Energy’ (European Commission) https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway/africa-europe-green-energy_en accessed 29 July 2024.
European Commission, ‘Corporate Sustainability Reporting – What is the EU Doing and Why’ (European Commission) https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-financial-markets/company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/corporate-sustainability-reporting_en accessed 29 July 2024.
European Commission, ‘Emissions Cap and Allowances’ (European Commission) https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/emissions-cap-and-allowances_en accessed 29 July 2024.
European Commission, ‘Ensuring the Integrity of the European Carbon Market’ (European Commission) https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/ensuring-integrity-european-carbon-market_en accessed 29 July 2024.
European Commission, ‘EU and China Agree to Further Cooperation on Circular Economy’ (European Commission, 24 April 2024) https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-and-china-agree-greater-circular-economy-cooperation-2024-04-25_en accessed 29 July 2024.
European Commission, ‘EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)’ (European Commission) https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets_en accessed 29 July 2024.
European Commission, ‘The European Union at ICAO’ (European Commission) https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-modes/air/international-aviation/european-union-icao_en accessed 29 July 2024.
European Council, ‘Council Adopts Decision on Offsetting Requirements for Air Transport Emissions (CORSIA)’ (European Council, 19 December 2022) https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2022/12/19/council-adopts-decision-on-offsetting-requirements-for-air-transport-emissions-corsia/ accessed 29 July 2024.
European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), ‘Europe’s Voice in Corporate Reporting’ (EFRAG) https://www.efrag.org/en accessed 29 July 2024.
Environmental Defense Fund, ‘How Cap and Trade Works’ (Environmental Defense Fund, 22 January 2020) https://www.edf.org/climate/how-cap-and-trade-works accessed 29 July 2024.
Fabíola Ortiz, ‘Ten Years on, Amazon Fund Receives Applause, Criticism, Faces New Tests’ (Mongabay, 21 December 2018) https://news.mongabay.com/2018/12/ten-years-on-amazon-fund-receives-applause-criticism-faces-new-tests/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Frank S, ‘Does Carbon Offsetting Do More Harm than Good?’ (Carbon Market Watch, 6 July 2023) https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2023/07/06/does-carbon-offsetting-do-more-harm-than-good/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Gold Standard https://www.goldstandard.org/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Gould S, ‘Understanding the Voluntary Carbon Markets’ (IFAC, 1 December 2023) https://www.ifac.org/knowledge-gateway/discussion/understanding-voluntary-carbon-markets accessed 29 July 2024.
Groza MD, Pronschinske MR, Walker M, ‘Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR’ (2011) 102 J Bus Ethics 639 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0834-9 accessed 29 July 2024.
INPE, ‘Desmatamento’ (INPE news) http://www.inpe.br/noticias/?pag=2&chave=desmatamento accessed 29 July 2024.
Livia Garcia, ‘O que esperar do mercado voluntário de carbono a partir de 2024’ (Arara Seed, 20 April 2024) https://blog.araraseed.com.br/mercado-voluntario-de-carbono-2024/#:~:text=O%20mercado%20volunt%C3%A1rio%20de%20carbono%2C%20tanto%20no%20Brasil%20quanto%20globalmente,bilh%C3%B5es%20e%20US%24%2040%20bilh%C3%B5es accessed 20 November 2024
Ministry of the Environment, Secretariat for Climate Change and Environmental Quality Department of Policies to Fight Deforestation, ‘National Strategy for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, and the Role of Conservation of Forest Carbon Stocks, Sustainable Management of Forests and Enhancement of Forest Carbon Stocks’ (Brasília, 2016) http://redd.mma.gov.br/images/publicacoes/enredd_english_web.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
Norton Rose Fulbright, ‘The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and its Impact on EU and non-EU Companies’ (Norton Rose Fulbright, February 2023) https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/356c2fbd/the-corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-and-its-impact-on-eu-and-non-eu-companies#section3 accessed 29 July 2024.
Pomeroy R, ‘Carbon Offsets – How Do They Work, and Who Sets the Rules?’ (World Economic Forum, 2 September 2022).
United Nations Development Programme, ‘What Are Carbon Markets and Why Are They Important?’ (UNDP, 18 May 2022) https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/what-are-carbon-markets-and-why-are-they-important accessed 29 July 2024.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘The Clean Development Mechanism, Defined in Article 12 of Kyoto Protocol’ (UNFCCC) https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-kyoto-protocol/mechanisms-under-the-kyoto-protocol/the-clean-development-mechanism accessed 29 July 2024.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘Overview of Article 6’ (UNFCCC) https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Webinar%20I_Overview%20of%20Art.6%20of%20the%20PA.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘Paris Agreement’ (UNFCCC, 29 November 2018) https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/parisagreement_publication.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘REDD+’ (UNFCCC) https://redd.unfccc.int/ accessed 29 July 2024.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘UNFCCC’ (UNFCCC) https://unfccc.int/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Verified Carbon Standard (VERRA) https://verra.org/programs/verified-carbon-standard/ accessed 29 July 2024.
van Doorn L, ‘What the CSRD Means for Carbon Credit Portfolios’ (CEEZER, 17 October 2023) https://www.ceezer.earth/insights/what-the-csrd-means-for-carbon-credit-portfolios accessed 29 July 2024.
Société Générale, ‘The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) at a Glance’ (Société Générale, June 2024) https://www.securities-services.societegenerale.com/en/insights/views/news/corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-csrd/ accessed 29 July 2024.
Footnotes
[1] Please note this is the reference for all the “CSRD” mentions throughout this article: Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting [2022] OJ L322/15.
[2] European Commission, ‘EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)’ (European Commission) https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets_en accessed 29 July 2024.
[3] The Clean Development Mechanism, defined in Article 12 of Kyoto Protocol. UNFCCC https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-kyoto-protocol/mechanisms-under-the-kyoto-protocol/the-clean-development-mechanism
[4] Amazon Fund official website https://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/library/amazon-fund/
[5] Robin Pomeroy, ‘Carbon Offsets – How Do They Work, and Who Sets the Rules?’ (World Economic Forum, 2 September 2022).
[6] United Nations Development Programme, ‘What Are Carbon Markets and Why Are They Important?’ (UNDP, 18 May 2022) https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/what-are-carbon-markets-and-why-are-they-important accessed 29 July 2024.
[7] Environmental Defense Fund, ‘How Cap and Trade Works’ (Environmental Defense Fund, 22 January 2020) https://www.edf.org/climate/how-cap-and-trade-works accessed 29 July 2024.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Carbon Offset Guide, ‘Independent Crediting Programs’ https://offsetguide.org/understanding-carbon-offsets/carbon-offset-programs/voluntary-offset-programs/ accessed 29 July 2024.
[10] Stathis Gould, ‘Understanding the Voluntary Carbon Markets’ (IFAC, 1 December 2023) https://www.ifac.org/knowledge-gateway/discussion/understanding-voluntary-carbon-markets accessed 29 July 2024.
[11] Mark D. Groza, Mya R. Pronschinske and Matthew Walker, ‘Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR’ (2011) 102 J Bus Ethics 639, 639–652 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0834-9 accessed 29 July 2024.
[12] Rodolphe Durand, Luc Paugam, Hervé Stolowy, ‘Do Investors Actually Value Sustainability Indices? Replication, Development, and New Evidence on CSR Visibility’ (2019) Strategic Management Journal https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3035 accessed 29 July 2024.
[13]Allegra Dawes, ‘What’s Plaguing Voluntary Carbon Markets?’ (CSIS, 2 February 2024) https://www.csis.org/analysis/whats-plaguing-voluntary-carbon-markets accessed 29 July 2024.
[14] Verified Carbon Standard (VERRA) https://verra.org/programs/verified-carbon-standard/ accessed 29 July 2024
[15] Gold Standard https://www.goldstandard.org/ accessed 29 July 2024
[16] Dee Laurence, ‘The Concept Of Additionality In The Voluntary Carbon Market, Explained’ (Forbes, 21 April 2022) https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesnonprofitcouncil/2021/10/01/the-concept-of-additionality-in-the-voluntary-carbon-market-explained/ accessed 6 November 2024
[17] European Commission, ‘Corporate Sustainability Reporting – What is the EU Doing and Why’ (European Commission) https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-financial-markets/company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/corporate-sustainability-reporting_en accessed 29 July 2024.
[18] Norton Rose Fulbright, ‘The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and its Impact on EU and non-EU Companies’ (Norton Rose Fulbright, February 2023) https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/356c2fbd/the-corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-and-its-impact-on-eu-and-non-eu-companies#section3 accessed 29 July 2024.
[19] Lucas van Doorn, ‘What the CSRD Means for Carbon Credit Portfolios’ (CEEZER, 17 October 2023) https://www.ceezer.earth/insights/what-the-csrd-means-for-carbon-credit-portfolios accessed 29 July 2024.
[20] European Commission, ‘Emissions Cap and Allowances’ (European Commission) https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/emissions-cap-and-allowances_en accessed 29 July 2024.
[21] European Commission, ‘Ensuring the Integrity of the European Carbon Market’ (European Commission) https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/ensuring-integrity-european-carbon-market_en accessed 29 July 2024.
[22] Societe Generale. THE CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING DIRECTIVE (CSRD) AT A GLANCE
[23] Noor Crabbendam, ‘Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) Explained’ (Carbon Trust, 15 December 2022) https://www.carbontrust.com/news-and-insights/insights/corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-csrd-explained accessed 29 July 2024.https://www.carbontrust.com/news-and-insights/insights/corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-csrd-explained
[24] European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), ‘Europe’s Voice in Corporate Reporting’ (EFRAG) https://www.efrag.org/en accessed 29 July 2024.
[25] Deloitte, ‘#DeloitteESGNow — Frequently Asked Questions About the E.U. Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive’ (Deloitte) https://dart.deloitte.com/USDART/home/publications/deloitte/heads-up/2023/csrd-corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-faqs accessed 29 July 2024.
[26] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘The Clean Development Mechanism, Defined in Article 12 of Kyoto Protocol’ (UNFCCC) https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-kyoto-protocol/mechanisms-under-the-kyoto-protocol/the-clean-development-mechanism accessed 29 July 2024.
[27] Livia Garcia, ‘O que esperar do mercado voluntário de carbono a partir de 2024’ (Arara Seed, 20 April 2024) https://blog.araraseed.com.br/mercado-voluntario-de-carbono-2024/#:~:text=O%20mercado%20volunt%C3%A1rio%20de%20carbono%2C%20tanto%20no%20Brasil%20quanto%20globalmente,bilh%C3%B5es%20e%20US%24%2040%20bilh%C3%B5es accessed 20 November 2024
[28] Amazon Fund, ‘What is the Amazon Fund?’ (Amazon Fund) https://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/amazon-fund/ accessed 29 July 2024.
[29] INPE, ‘Desmatamento’ (INPE news) http://www.inpe.br/noticias/?pag=2&chave=desmatamento accessed 29 July 2024.
[30] Ministry of the Environment, Secretariat for Climate Change and Environmental Quality Department of Policies to Fight Deforestation, ‘National Strategy for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, and the Role of Conservation of Forest Carbon Stocks, Sustainable Management of Forests and Enhancement of Forest Carbon Stocks’ (Brasília, 2016) http://redd.mma.gov.br/images/publicacoes/enredd_english_web.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
[31] Brazil Voluntary Carbon Market, ‘About Us’ (BRVCM) https://www.brvcm.org/ accessed 20 November 2024.
[32] Barcelos Vargas D et. al. ‘Mercado de Carbono Voluntário no Brasil na Realidade e na Prática’ (FGV EESP, 2022) https://eesp.fgv.br/sites/eesp.fgv.br/files/ocbio_mercado_de_carbono_1.pdf accessed 20 November 2024
[33] Fabíola Ortiz, ‘Ten Years on, Amazon Fund Receives Applause, Criticism, Faces New Tests’ (Mongabay, 21 December 2018) https://news.mongabay.com/2018/12/ten-years-on-amazon-fund-receives-applause-criticism-faces-new-tests/ accessed 29 July 2024.
[34] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘Paris Agreement’ (UNFCCC, 29 November 2018) https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/parisagreement_publication.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
[35] Sabine Frank, ‘Does Carbon Offsetting Do More Harm than Good?’ (Carbon Market Watch, 6 July 2023) https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2023/07/06/does-carbon-offsetting-do-more-harm-than-good/ accessed 29 July 2024.
[36] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘UNFCCC’ (UNFCCC) https://unfccc.int/ accessed 29 July 2024.
[37] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘Overview of Article 6’ (UNFCCC) https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Webinar%20I_Overview%20of%20Art.6%20of%20the%20PA.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
[38] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ‘REDD+’ (UNFCCC) https://redd.unfccc.int/ accessed 29 July 2024.
[39] European Commission, ‘EU and China Agree to Further Cooperation on Circular Economy’ (European Commission, 24 April 2024) https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-and-china-agree-greater-circular-economy-cooperation-2024-04-25_en accessed 29 July 2024.
[40] Delegation of the European Union to Brazil, ‘The European Union and Brazil – International Cooperation’ (Delegation of the European Union to Brazil, 2 August 2021) https://www.eeas.europa.eu/brazil/european-union-and-brazil-international-cooperation_en?s=191 accessed 29 July 2024.
[41] European Council, ‘Council Adopts Decision on Offsetting Requirements for Air Transport Emissions (CORSIA)’ (European Council, 19 December 2022) https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2022/12/19/council-adopts-decision-on-offsetting-requirements-for-air-transport-emissions-corsia/ accessed 29 July 2024.
[42] European Commission, ‘The European Union at ICAO’ (European Commission) https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-modes/air/international-aviation/european-union-icao_en accessed 29 July 2024.
[43] European Commission, ‘Africa-Europe Green Energy’ (European Commission) https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway/africa-europe-green-energy_en accessed 29 July 2024.
[44] Enrico D’Ambrogio, ‘EU-India: Cooperation on Climate’ (European Parliamentary Research Service, November 2020) https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/659348/EPRS_BRI(2020)659348_EN.pdf accessed 29 July 2024.
[45] Emily Boyd, ‘Governing the Clean Development Mechanism: Global Rhetoric Versus Local Realities in Carbon Sequestration Projects’ (2009) 41(10) Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 2380, 2380–2395 https://doi.org/10.1068/a41341 accessed 29 July 2024.
