Skip to main content

“You can’t value what you can’t measure”: a critical look at forest carbon accounting

Abstract

This article takes on the political and contested nature of forest carbon accounting via three “points of engagement” that articulate forest carbon initiatives as representations of tradable carbon. The three points of engagement—(1) baseline determinations, (2) the calculation of additionality, and (3) the role of uncertainty—are used to show how processes framed as technical are often spaces where uneven social and political interests are manipulated or obscured and contribute to varying environmental and conservation outcomes. The article begins by reviewing how carbon counting emerges in critical social science literature on forest carbon projects. Next, it explains carbon accounting broadly, the specifics of forest carbon accounting and why forests are popular spaces for financialized carbon sequestration. It concludes by arguing that carbon accounting is an uneven technical and political process that makes multiples forms of carbon legible on financial markets but does little to physically address atmospheric carbon concentrations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Aguilar-Støen M (2017) Better safe than sorry? Indigenous peoples, carbon cowboys and the governance of REDD in the Amazon. Forum for Development Studies 44(1):91–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039410.2016.1276098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson CM, Field CB, Mach KJ (2017) Forest offsets partner climate-change mitigation with conservation. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, n/a-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1515

  3. Aukland L, Costa PM, Brown S (2003) A conceptual framework and its application for addressing leakage: the case of avoided deforestation. Clim Pol 3(2):123–136. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2003.0316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bachram H (2004) Climate fraud and carbon colonialism: the new trade in greenhouse gases. Capital Nat Social 15(4):5–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Berndes G, Abt B, Asikainen A, Cowie A, Dale V, Egnell G, Lindner M, Marelli L, Paré D, Pingoud K (2016) Forest biomass, carbon neutrality and climate change mitigation. From Science to Policy 3:3–27

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bigger P, Robertson M (2017) Value is simple. Valuation is complex. Capital Nat Social 28(1):68–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bond P, Erion G (2009) South African carbon trading: a counterproductive climate change strategy. Recolonising Africa on the Power Grid, Electric Capitalism, p 338e358

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bracking S (2015) The Anti-Politics of Climate Finance: The Creation and Performativity of the Green Climate Fund. Antipode 47(2):281–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12123

  9. Bumpus AG, Liverman DM (2008) Accumulation by decarbonization and the governance of carbon offsets. Econ Geogr 84(2):127–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bumpus, Adam G., Diana M. Liverman, and Heather Lovell. 2010. The rise of voluntary carbon offset standards: self-regulation, legitimacy and multi-scalar governance. SSRN scholarly paper ID 1680054. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1680054

  11. Callon M (1984) Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. Sociol Rev 32(1_suppl):196–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Callon M (2009) Civilizing markets: carbon trading between in vitro and in vivo experiments. Acc Organ Soc 34(3–4):535–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cames, M., Harthan, R.O., Füssler, J., Lazarus, M., Lee, C.M., Erickson, P. and Spalding-Fecher, R., 2016. How additional is the clean development mechanism. Analysis of the application of current tools and proposed alternatives.

  14. Cavanagh CJ, Vedeld PO, Trædal LT (2015) Securitizing REDD+? Problematizing the emerging illegal timber trade and forest carbon interface in East Africa. Geoforum 60(March):72–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.01.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chatterjee R (2009) The Road to REDD. Environmental Science & Technology 43(3):557–560

  16. Chomba S, Kariuki J, Lund JF, Sinclair F (2016) Roots of inequity: how the implementation of REDD+ reinforces past injustices. Land Use Policy 50(January):202–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.09.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chomitz KM, Kumari K (1998) The domestic benefits of tropical forests: a critical review. World Bank Res Obs 13(1):13–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Clarke AE, Fujimura JH (2014) The right tools for the job: at work in twentieth-century life sciences. Princeton University Press

  19. Collins, S., and E. Larry. 2008. “Caring for Our Natural Assets: An Ecosystem Services Perspective.” Caring for Our Natural Assets: An Ecosystem Services Perspective., no. No.PNW-GTR-733: 1–11.

  20. Cooper, Mark H. 2015. Measure for measure? Commensuration, commodification, and metrology in emissions markets and beyond In . https://doi.org/10.1068/a130275p

  21. D’Alisa G, Kallis G (2016) A political ecology of maladaptation: insights from a Gramscian theory of the state. Glob Environ Chang 38(May):230–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Dempsey, Jessica, and Daniel Chiu Suarez. 2016. Arrested development? The promises and paradoxes of ‘Selling nature to save it.’ Annals of the American Association of Geographers 106 (3): 653–671. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2016.1140018

  23. Diaz, David. 2010. Moving beyond the buffer Pool. Forest Trends (blog) November 30, 2010. https://www.forest-trends.org/ecosystem_marketplace/moving-beyond-the-buffer-pool/

  24. Dwyer MB, Ingalls ML, Baird IG (2016) The Security Exception: Development and Militarization in Laos’s Protected Areas. Geoforum 69(February):207–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.11.002

  25. Galik CS, Jackson RB (2009) Risks to forest carbon offset projects in a changing climate. For Ecol Manag 257(11):2209–2216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.03.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. GHGMI (2017) https://ghginstitute.org/2012/01/25/how-do-you-explain-additionality/. Accessed 9 Sept 2017.

  27. Gifford, Lauren. 2018. See the carbon through the trees: market-based climate change Mitigati. Geography Graduate Theses & Dissertations. https://scholar.colorado.edu/geog_gradetds/122/

  28. Gillenwater, Michael. 2012. How do you explain additionality? Greenhouse gas management institute. GHG and Carbon Accounting, Auditing, Management & Training | Greenhouse Gas Management Institute (blog) January 25, 2012. http://ghginstitute.org/2012/01/25/how-do-you-explain-additionality/

  29. Greenhouse Gas Protocol (2019) https://ghgprotocol.org/. Accessed 4 Aug 2019.

  30. Gren I-M, Aklilu AZ (2016) Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: a review of the literature. Forest Policy Econ 70(September):128–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Gunnoe A, Gellert PK (2011) Financialization, Shareholder Value, and the Transformation of Timberland Ownership in the US. Critical Sociology 37(3):265–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920510378764

  32. Gupta A, Lövbrand E, Turnhout E, Vijge MJ (2012) In pursuit of carbon accountability: the politics of REDD+ measuring, reporting and verification systems. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 4(6):726–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hamrick, Kelley. 2017. Unlocking Potential: State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2017. https://www.cbd.int/financial/2017docs/carbonmarket2017.pdf.

  34. Karsenty A (2008) The architecture of proposed REDD schemes after Bali: facing critical choices. Int For Rev 10(3):443–457. https://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.10.3.443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Karsenty A, Vogel A, Castell F (2014) ‘Carbon rights’, REDD+ and payments for environmental services. Environmental Science & Policy, Climate change and deforestation: the evolution of an intersecting policy domain 35(January):20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.08.013.

  36. Kay K (2017) Rural rentierism and the financial enclosure of Maine’s open lands tradition. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 107(6):1407–1423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Klinsky S (2013) Bottom-up policy lessons emerging from the western climate initiative’s development challenges. Clim Pol 13(2):143–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lane R, Newell P (2016) The political economy of carbon markets. In: Van de Graaf T, Sovacool BK, Ghosh A, Kern F, Klare MT (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the International Political Economy of Energy. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, pp 247–267. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55631-8_10.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. Latta, Gregory S., Darius M. Adams, Kathleen P. Bell, and Jeffrey D. Kline. 2016. Evaluating land-use and private forest management responses to a potential forest carbon offset sales program in Western Oregon (USA). Forest Policy Econ 65 (April): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.01.004.

  40. Lave R (2012) Bridging political ecology and STS: a field analysis of the Rosgen Wars. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 102(2):366–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lave, Rebecca.. 2015. The future of environmental expertise. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 105 (2): 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2014.988099.

  42. Li TM (2007) The will to improve: governmentality, development, and the practice of politics. Duke University Press

  43. Lohmann, Larry. 2005. Marketing and making carbon dumps: commodification, calculation and counterfactuals in climate change mitigation. Sci Cult 14 (3): 203–235.

  44. Lohmann, Larry. 2008. Carbon trading, climate justice and the production of ignorance: ten examples. Development 51 (3): 359–365.

  45. Lohmann, Larry, Richard Sandor, and Charlotte Streck. 2008. Chronicle of a disaster foretold REDD-with-carbon-trading.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Lövbrand, Eva, and Johannes Stripple. 2011. Making climate change governable: accounting for carbon as sinks, credits and personal budgets. Critical Policy Studies 5 (2): 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2011.576531.

  47. Lovell H (2013) Measuring forest carbon. Governing the climate: New approaches to rationality, power and politics, pp.175–196

  48. Lovell, Heather. 2014. Climate change, markets and standards: the case of financial accounting. Econ Soc 43 (2): 260–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2013.812830.

  49. Lovell, Heather, and Diana Liverman. 2010. Understanding carbon offset technologies. New Political Economy 15 (2): 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563460903548699.

  50. Lovell, Heather, and Donald MacKenzie. 2011. Accounting for carbon: the role of accounting professional organisations in governing climate change. Antipode 43 (3): 704–730.

  51. Lovell, Heather, Harriet Bulkeley, and Diana Liverman. 2009. Carbon offsetting: sustaining consumption? Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 41 (10): 2357–2379. https://doi.org/10.1068/a40345.

  52. Macintosh A (2013) Coastal climate hazards and urban planning: how planning responses can lead to maladaptation. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 18(7):1035–1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-012-9406-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. MacKenzie, Donald. 2009. Making things the same: gases, emission rights and the politics of carbon markets. Acc Organ Soc 34 (3–4): 440–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2008.02.004.

  54. Maine Tree Foundation (2015) Who owns Maine's forests? http://www.mainetreefoundation.org/forestfacts/Who%20Owns%20Maine's%20Forest.htm (last accessed 1 August 2019 2017).

  55. Mitchell, Timothy. 2002. Rule of experts: Egypt, techno-politics, modernity. Univ of California Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=z0JOAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR8&dq=timothy+mitchell&ots=gaEuLnhVwi&sig=vUbS-HxlBoa19xe6Z73mTZNaoeM.

  56. Nielsen TD (2014) The Role of Discourses in Governing Forests to Combat Climate Change. International Environmental Agreements:Politics, Law and Economics 14(3):265–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-013-9223-4

  57. Osborne TM (2011) Carbon Forestry and Agrarian Change: Access and Land Control in a Mexican Rainforest. Journal of Peasant Studies 38(4):859–883

  58. Paladino S, Fiske SJ (2016) The carbon fix: forest carbon, social justice, and environmental governance. Taylor & Francis

  59. Phelps J, Webb EL, Agrawal A (2010) Land use. Does REDD+ threaten to recentralize forest governance? Science (New York, NY) 328(5976):312–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Purdon M (2015) Opening the black box of carbon finance ‘additionality’: the political economy of carbon finance effectiveness across Tanzania, Uganda, and Moldova. World Dev 74(October):462–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Robertson, Morgan M. 2004. The neoliberalization of ecosystem services: wetland mitigation banking and problems in environmental governance. Geoforum, Themed issue on Neoliberal nature and the nature of neoliberalism, 35 (3): 361–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2003.06.002.

  62. Scott DF, Seyller C, Desbureaux S, Ongolo S, Karsenty A, Simonet G, Faure J, Brimont L (2016) The ‘virtual economy’ of REDD projects: does private certification of REDD projects ensure their environmental integrity?1. Int For Rev 18(2):261–263. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554816818966273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Searle EB, Chen HYH (2017) Tree size thresholds produce biased estimates of forest biomass dynamics. For Ecol Manag 400(September):468–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.06.042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Simon GL (2014) If you can’t stand the heat, get into the kitchen: obligatory passage points and mutually supported impediments at the climate–development interface. Area 46(3):268–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Sparrow, Jeff. 2019. Environmentalists missed something the corporates grasped: ‘put a price on carbon’ accepted the commodification of the environment | Jeff Sparrow. The Guardian, January 22, 2019, sec. Opinion. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/22/george-orwell-said-the-worlds-bureaucrats-couldnt-take-spring-from-us-but-they-are.

  66. Springate-Baginski, Oliver, and Eva Wollenberg. 2010. REDD, forest governance and rural livelihoods: the emerging agenda. CIFOR.

  67. Stephan, Benjamin, and Richard Lane. 2014. The politics of carbon markets. Routledge.

  68. Thompson DW, Hansen EN (2012) Institutional pressures and an evolving forest carbon market. Bus Strateg Environ 21(6):351–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. van der Gaast W, Sikkema R, Vohrer M (2018) The contribution of forest carbon credit projects to addressing the climate change challenge. Clim Pol 18(1):42–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1242056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Verra - Who we are. (2019) Verra. Accessed August 1, 2019. https://verra.org/about-verra/who-we-are/. Accessed 1 Aug 2019

  71. Wade D, Moseley C (2011) Foresters’ perceptions of family forest owner willingness to participate in forest carbon markets. North J Appl For 28(4):199–203. https://doi.org/10.1093/njaf/28.4.199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Wainwright J (2011) Decolonizing development: colonial power and the Maya, vol 36. John Wiley & Sons

  73. Walters, Reece, and Peter Martin. 2013. Crime and the commodification of carbon. In Emerging Issues in Green Criminology: Exploring Power, Justice and Harm, edited by Reece Walters, Diane Solomon Westerhuis, and Tanya Wyatt, 93–107. Critical Criminological Perspectives. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137273994_6.

  74. Wang Y, Corson C (2015) The making of a ‘charismatic’ carbon credit: clean cookstoves and ‘uncooperative’ women in Western Kenya. Environ Plan A 47(10):2064–2079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Whitington, Jerome. 2016. Carbon as a metric of the human. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review 39 (1): 46–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12130.

  76. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, and World Resources Institute eds. 2005. The greenhouse gas protocol: the GHG protocol for project accounting. Geneva, Switzerland: Washington, DC: World Business Council for Sustainable Development; World Resources Institute.

  77. Zimring, Carl A., and William L. Rathje. 2012. Encyclopedia of consumption and waste: the social science of garbage. SAGE.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lauren Gifford.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of a Special Issue, “Climate Finance Justice: International Perspectives on Climate Policy, Social Justice, and Capital,” edited by Lauren Gifford and Chris Knudson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gifford, L. “You can’t value what you can’t measure”: a critical look at forest carbon accounting. Climatic Change 161, 291–306 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02653-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Forest carbon offsets
  • Carbon markets
  • Carbon accounting
  • Climate change
  • Climate finance