Skip to Content

Carbon Trading

FERN’s aim is to move the climate debate beyond carbon trading and to support communities faced with carbon offset projects.


FERN’s analysis:
The European Commission has described climate change as “one of the greatest environmental, social and economic threats facing the planet”. FERN believes that to attempt to combat such a threat with a market mechanism designed to allow emissions in one place to continue on the back of a claimed reduction in another place is foolish. Reductions need to happen everywhere, particularly in industrialised countries. And they need to happen now. We should not be spending time, money and effort putting in place the infrastructure for a new global carbon trading scheme at the expense of investment in genuine emission reductions and establishing low carbon energy and transport infrastructures. 

 

What FERN is doing: In 2004, FERN co-founded the Durban Group for Climate Justice a group of organisations that believe climate policy needs to move beyond carbon trading and focus on ending fossil fuel dependency. We document how carbon trading delays action to end fossil fuel dependence and thus acts as a distraction from the urgent need to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions, especially in industraliased countries. FERN also supports organisations documenting and exposing the impact of carbon offset projects on local communities.

 

To learn more about this campaign: see www.sinkswatch.org 

FERN submission to UK Parliament

FERN submission to the UK Select Committee on Environment, spelling out FERN's vision on forest, climate, rights and carbon trading

DocumentSize
application/msword iconOPEN76.5 KB

Cutting corners; how the FCPF is failing forests and peoples

A FERN-FPP report analysing nine different country proposals (R-PINs) to get money from the World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF). The report concludes that both the process and the proposals adopted do not respect the Bank's own guidelines. The report also includes an annex which details the World Bank funded REDD process.

DocumentsSize
application/pdf iconOPEN in English1.3 MB
application/pdf iconOUVRIR en français1.56 MB
application/pdf iconABRIR en espanol818.92 KB

Trading carbon

In the drive to tackle climate change, carbon trading has become the policy instrument of choice among governments. It is also a central element of the UNFCCC’s Kyoto Protocol. National or regional carbon trading schemes are now operational in Europe, the USA, New Zealand and elsewhere.


Yet carbon trading remains highly controversial. Some see it as a dangerous distraction and a false solution to the problem of climate change. Unfortunately the subject is characterised by jargon, abstract concepts, mathematical formulae and technical detail, making it hard for most people to understand its implications and assess its merits or otherwise. This guide attempts to unravel some of this complexity.

DocumentSize
application/pdf iconOPEN1.84 MB

Forestwatch Issue 145 and Copenhagen Special

  • EU Member States reject prohibition of the sale of illegal timber
  • NGOs reject Ecolabel for copying and graphic paper
  • Will Europe follow America’s ECAs in reducing GHGs
  • Integrated Product Policy and Beyond
  • Member States’ support binding biomass criteria
  • Copenhagen Update (Available in French and Spanish)
DocumentsSize
application/pdf iconFW 145 Jan 2010.pdf184.82 KB
application/pdf iconCopenhagen update.pdf124.79 KB
application/pdf iconCopenhagen update in French.pdf189.37 KB
application/pdf iconCopenhagen update in Spanish.pdf132.46 KB

Why Congo Basin countries stand to lose out from a market based REDD

This briefing paper unravels the implications of setting a historical baseline with a correction factor for low deforestation countries. It also explains why carbon markets are unlikely to raise the anticipated funds for forest protection, due to the unsuitability of applying these policy mechanisms to forests, and why any funds raised are unlikely to reach Central Africa or other regions with low deforestation rates and weak governance. Wider institutional and policy reforms, which are crucial to tackling deforestation effectively, would be better addressed by a funding mechanism which does not involve the trading of carbon. 

DocumentSize
application/pdf iconcongo basin countries lose out.pdf266.55 KB

Forestwatch Issue 144 and update from Barcelona

  • Climate, energy and environment change
  • A binding forest agreement?
  • Biomass: binding sustainability criteria needed
  • FERN.org relaunched
  • First US illegal timber investigation
  • EU ratifies Ghana VPA
  • Palm oil funding frozen
  • Update from UNFCCC Barcelona meeting
DocumentsSize
application/pdf iconFW 144 December 2009213.17 KB
application/pdf iconBarcelona update118.32 KB

Forestwatch Issue 143 November 2009

  • EU Council reaches a troubling conclusion
  • Flawed bioenergy policies will fail EU forests
  • CAR VPA negotiations calendar ambitious
  • CDM to open doors to large scale plantations
DocumentSize
application/pdf iconFW 143 Nov 2009.pdf212.16 KB

Forestwatch issue 141

  • Obstacles on the road to sustainable bioenergy criteria
  • Climate haggling... to be continued
  • UK timber procurement: Help shape criteria
  • The Saami Council applauds breakthrough
DocumentSize
application/pdf iconOPEN179.99 KB

Forestwatch issue 140

  • Ilisu dam: teetering at the edge
  • Liberia’s dubious timber concessions
  • UK Environmental Audit Committee heeded
  • EU aid: must do better
DocumentsSize
application/pdf iconFW 140.pdf176.55 KB
application/pdf iconBonn II meeting update.pdf131.11 KB