Figure - uploaded by Larissa Stiem-Bhatia
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This paper highlights approaches for smallholder engagement, identifies key barriers to participation and outlines options to enhance farmers' agency in the context of land-based carbon payment schemes.
Context in source publication
Similar publications
Influenza virus has presented a considerable healthcare challenge during the past years, particularly in vulnerable groups with compromised immune systems. Therapeutics and vaccination have always been in research annals since the spread of influenza. Efforts have been going on to develop an antiviral therapeutic approach that could assist in bette...
Citations
... Малий бізнес і сільське господарство в контексті вуглецевих платежів проаналізовано в публікаціях через участь малих фермерів у схемах карбонових платежів, що є важливим аспектом для забезпечення участі широких верств населення в програмах фінансування карбонових ініціатив [10]. Дослідження агропромислових ініціатив у США свідчать про роль сільського господарства в США як «вуглецевого поглинача», зокрема через заохочення фермерів до використання вуглецевих стимулі [11]. ...
The article analyzes existing approaches to the justification of financial incentives in the context of greenhouse gas emission reduction. Various types of financial mechanisms are examined, including tax benefits, subsidies, investment programs, and marketbased instruments (carbon credits, carbon taxes). It is determined that the use of scenario analysis allows for predicting how changes in economic policy may impact emission levels, which, in turn, helps develop more precise decarbonization strategies for different economic sectors. Several models that take into account various economic and environmental factors have been selected. Various financial incentives that can influence business motivation to implement low-carbon technologies have been assessed. It has been determined whether these incentives can ensure a long-term effect in reducing emissions. Several scenarios have been developed, considering variations in political and economic conditions. It has been established that the justification of such scenarios allows not only for the assessment of short-term benefits but also for predicting potential negative consequences or economic risks that may arise due to excessive burdens on businesses or consumers. It has been proven that the development of the carbon credit market is a crucial tool for achieving climate goals and stimulating economic growth through environmental transformation. It has been analyzed that emission control plays a key role in combating climate change by reducing greenhouse gases and toxic substances. The study reveals that the main directions of environmental improvement include reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving air quality, supporting the circular economy, and ensuring economic efficiency. It has been established that key elements of waste management include prevention, sorting and recycling, as well as safe disposal. It has been proven that a comprehensive approach to these processes helps minimize environmental risks and promotes sustainable development. It has also been determined that the use of innovative technologies and the implementation of modern policies are crucial factors for sustainable waste management and emission reduction, contributing to risk minimization and long-term sustainability.
... However, not all project impacts are positive (see section 6.1.1). Similarly, in a review of ten agriculture and forestry-based carbon offset projects across Africa and South America, Tamba et al. (2021) state even though carbon payments were low, the primary motivation for local farmers to participate in carbon mitigation activities was non-monetary benefits, such as improved farm productivity, access to extension services, and the diversification of income sources through establishment of tree nurseries. ...
... Even though many agriculture and forestry-based carbon offset projects aim to encourage smallholders to become offset producers, several barriers hinder their participation (table 14). Foremost among them is insecure land tenure (Tamba et al. 2021). Payments in carbon offset projects depend on verifiable and measurable emission reduction activities on plots with clear ownership. ...
... Certification bodies such as Plan Vivo help participating farmers get land tenure for at least twenty years when enrolling in carbon offset projects to address this constraint. Others recognize customary land rights or even help landless farmers obtain land titles from the local governments (Tamba et al. 2021). ...
Status of Voluntary Markets in Agriculture based Carbon Offsets
... Carbon credits have been applied in carbon markets; these markets are categorized as voluntary or compliant. The voluntary carbon market includes businesses and individuals who voluntarily seek to offset their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to accomplish business or personal sustainability goals or enhance their brand image without any legal obligations (Tamba et al., 2021). Conversely, the compliance market serves regulated entities that have been mandated to reduce GHG emissions under regulations like the California Cap-and-Trade program in the United States (US) or the European Union's (EU) Emission Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) (Wongpiyabovorn et al., 2021). ...
... Hybrid payments combine aspects of resultand action-based payment schemes, offering farmers low-risk, upfront, and guaranteed payments for implementing specific farm management actions, with additional compensation based on actual measured mitigation results (McDonald et al., 2021). For example, the TIST program in Kenya provides farmers with upfront payments of US$0.018 per tree to offset planting costs during the contract period and further pays them carbon credits generated per household according to the sequestration measured at the end of the contract period Salas Castelo, 2017;Tamba et al., 2021). Similarly, private initiatives such as Indigo Ag and Nori provide upfront payments when farmers join, with subsequent payouts based on actual outcomes. ...
... In addition, for result-based payments, it is often necessary to involve a certifying body to ensure the validity of credits as buying or selling carbon credits in a marketplace requires each credit to be equivalent and uniform in all terms, regardless of the source of the credit (Cruz et al., 2020). Several verifying bodies currently operate such as Verra, 5 Plan Vivo, 6 Scientific Certification Systems Global, 7 and Gold Standard 8 (Tamba et al., 2021). Verra's Verified Carbon Standard is the most commonly used standard for voluntary offset projects (Gren and Aklilu, 2016). ...
Despite increasing interest, a lack of comprehensive knowledge regarding the efficient design and implementation of carbon farming schemes remains. These schemes must efficiently achieve higher carbon sequestration, incentivize farmers, and increase farmers' participation in global carbon markets. Our study systematically reviews, describes, and maps available evidence related to carbon farming contracts to assess different incentive mechanisms for carbon farming. We conduct a systematic mapping review of articles extracted from various databases employing the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence method. We shortlist 52 articles and analyze about 40 global case studies, identifying three main incentive mechanisms of carbon farming contracts, namely, result-based, action-based, and hybrid payments. We examine how these incentive mechanisms are designed, in addition to associated payment types, monitoring approaches, and barriers to implementation. Result-based payments include stringent monitoring and can be implemented through auctions, carbon credits, product labels or certificates. Action-based payments are found to be simpler, with lower monitoring requirements for farmers and can be paid upfront or after contract implementation. Hybrid payments combine both techniques, offering low-risk and guaranteed payments for farmers and definite environmental mitigation impacts. Result-based and hybrid payments motivate farmers to innovate to meet environmental objectives while also connecting them to carbon markets. The major challenges to developing a successful carbon farming project include lack of permanence, non-additionality, and the absence of stringent monitoring, reporting, and verification standards, all of which affect farmers' incentives. This study determines that carbon farming contract design and efficiency can be improved by analyzing the lessons learned from previous experiences. By examining and improving the attributes that define different incentive mechanisms, farmers can be better motivated to enroll in carbon farming schemes and benefit from increased access to carbon markets to potentially transform agriculture into a viable tool for climate action.
... Many authors, however, argue that carbon payments are so far too low and that it is the presence of agricultural and non-agricultural co-benefits that could induce farmers to adopt new practices and supply carbon (Graff-Zivin & Lipper, 2008;Lee et al., 2016;Lipper et al., 2010;Tamba et al., 2021). Graff-Zivin and Lipper (2008) base their argument on the per hectare carbon sequestration potential in agriculture (0.15-0.8 t C), prevailing market prices per CO2 equivalent ($3.7 in the Chicago Climate Exchange in 2007) and estimates on the monitoring costs of carbon sequestration per hectare ($5-8 based on US projects) to demonstrate the profitability challenge. ...
... Trees for Global Benefits (TGB) Uganda and Emiti Nibwo Bulora (ENB) in Tanzania agreed to pay farmers 30% of the anticipated carbon revenue (Lee et al., 2016). Some projects do not make payments to farmers and revenues are fully utilized to cover the project-related costs (Tamba et al., 2021). This demonstrates that alongside increasing carbon prices, there is a need to reduce transaction costs to allow and/or increase payments to participating farmers. ...
... While a lack of tenure security may discourage farmers from investing in new practices, tenure security also affects the ability of farmers to participate in carbon payment schemes (Tamba et al., 2021;Wollenberg et al., 2021). Tenure clarity and security are important pre-conditions (Abdulai et al., 2011), and a lack thereof may make farmers ineligible for participation (Wunder, 2013). ...
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) highlights the importance of reaching net-zero CO2 emissions globally by 2050. Unlocking the potential of natural climate solutions in the strive for net-zero emissions is increasingly gaining attention. A large potential may arise from the adoption of agricultural practices that increase carbon sequestration in soils and plants and reduce or avoid greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in agricultural production, referred to as carbon farming. In practice,
existing markets fail to internalize environmental externalities, creating a mismatch between individual costs and societal benefits of carbon farming. One solution to bridge this gap are payments linked to the implementation of carbon farming practices. To support the development of well-functioning agricultural carbon markets, supporting research is crucial. We assessed the opportunities and challenges for involving smallholder farmers in emerging agricultural carbon markets. We placed a specific emphasis on summarizing the state of knowledge in four areas: i) agricultural markets as a funding institution for carbon farming, ii) the role of payments for carbon sequestration in incentivizing the adoption of carbon farming practices, iii) the scaling of smallholder farmers’ opportunities in
carbon farming by capitalizing on farming groups, and iv) the cost-effective monitoring, reporting and verification of changes in carbon stocks. Further research that supports the accurate and cost-effective monitoring of carbon sequestration, reduction and avoidance of GHG emissions as well as implementation research that focuses on the institutional arrangements required to tap potentials for carbon credits to promote sustainable production methods in Africa will be needed.
Soils are the largest terrestrial reservoir of organic carbon, yet they are easily degraded. Consistent and accurate monitoring of changes in soil organic carbon stocks and net greenhouse gas emissions, reporting, and their verification is key to facilitate investment in sustainable land use practices that maintain or increase soil organic carbon stocks, as well as to incorporate soil organic carbon sequestration in national greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. Building up on an initial review of monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) schemes with a focus on croplands, grasslands, and forestlands we develop a framework for a modular, scalable MRV system. We then provide an inventory and classification of selected MRV methodologies and subsequently “score” them against a list of key characteristics. It appears that the main challenge in developing a unified MRV system concerns the monitoring component. Finally, we present a conceptual workflow that shows how a prototype for an operational, modular multi-ecosystem MRV tool could be systematically built.
This paper aims to contribute to emerging debates on soil carbon sequestration by investigating the conditions required to deliver multiple benefits for smallholder farmers. We argue that there are many parallels with, and opportunities to learn from, the long-standing REDD+ mechanism. Our analysis draws on a literature review of scientific articles and reports assessing the past ten years of REDD+ implementation. With a focus on local land users, we address issues of local governance such as land tenure,
legitimacy and participation, local support organisations, social inclusion, and non-carbon benefits.
