Kirschbaum, M. U. F. Temporary carbon sequestration cannot prevent climate change. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 11, 1151–1164 (2006).
Herzog, H., Caldeira, K. & Reilly, J. An issue of permanence: assessing the effectiveness of temporary carbon storage. Clim. Change 59, 293–310 (2003).
van Kooten, G. C. Biological carbon sequestration and carbon trading re-visited. Clim. Change 95, 449–463 (2009).
Moura Costa, P. & Wilson, C. An equivalence factor between CO avoided emissions and sequestration—description andapplication in forestry. Mitigation Adaptation Strat. Glob. Change 5, 51–60 (2000).
Brandão, M., Kirschbaum, M. U. F., Cowie, A. L. & Hjuler, S. V. Quantifying the climate change effects of bioenergy systems: comparison of 15 impact assessment methods. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 11, 727–743 (2019).
Bednar, J. et al. Operationalizing the net-negative carbon economy. Nature 596, 377–383 (2021).
IPCC Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC: Summary for Policymakers (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).
Groom, B., Palmer, C. & Sileci, L. Carbon emissions reductions from Indonesia’s moratorium on forest concessions are cost-effective yet contribute little to Paris pledges. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2102613119 (2022).
Badgley, G. et al. Systematic over-crediting in California’s forest carbon offsets program. Glob. Change Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15943 (2021).
Calel, R., Colmer, J., Dechezlepretre, A. & Glachant, M. Do carbon offsets offset carbon? CESifo working paper 9368 (2021).
West, T. A. P., Borner, J., Sills, E. O. & Kontoleon, A. Overstated carbon emission reductions from voluntary REDD+ projects in the Brazilian Amazon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 24188–24194 (2020).
Jayachandran, S. et al. Cash for carbon: a randomized trial of payments for ecosystem services to reduce deforestation. Science 357, 267–273 (2017).
Cherubini, F., Peters, G. P., Berntsen, T., Stroman, A. H. & Hertwich, E. CO2 emissions from biomass combustion for bioenergy: atmospheric decay and contribution to global warming. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 3, 413–426 (2011).
Kendall, A. Time-adjusted global warming potentials for LCA and carbon footprints. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 17, 1042–1049 (2012).
Joos, F. et al. Carbon dioxide and climate impulse response functions for the computation of greenhouse gas metrics: a multi-model analysis. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 13, 2793–2825 (2013).
Geoffroy, O. et al. Transient climate response in a two-layer energy-balance model. Part I: Analytical solution and parameter calibration using CMIP5 AOGCM experiments. J. Clim. 26, 1841–1857 (2013).
Watson, R. T. et al. Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000).
Energy Transitions Commission. Mind the Gap: How Carbon Dioxide Removals Must Complement Deep Decarbonisation to Keep 1.5 °C Alive (Energy Transitions Commission, 2022).
Dietz, S. & Venmans, F. The endowment effect, discounting and the environment. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 97, 67–91 (2019).
Zickfeld, K., MacDougall, A. H. & Matthews, H. D. On the proportionality between global temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions during periods of net negative CO2 emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 11 (2016).
Howard, P. H. & Sterner, T. Few and not so far between: a meta-analysis of climate damage estimates. Environ. Resour. Econ. 68, 197–225 (2017).
Burke, M., Hsiang, S. M. & Miguel, E. Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature 527, 235–239 (2015).
Korhonen, R., Pingoud, K., Savolainen, I. & Matthews, R. The role of carbon sequestration and the tonne-year approach in fulfilling the objective of climate convention. Environ. Sci. Policy 5, 429–441 (2002).
Poorter, L. et al. Multidimensional tropical forest recovery. Science 374, 1370–1376 (2021).
Fearnside, P. M., Lashof, D. & Moura-Costa, P. Accounting for time in mitigating global warming through land-use change and forestry. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 5, 239–270 (2000).
Aldy, J. E., Kotchen, M. J., Stavins, R. N. & Stock, J. H. Keep climate policy focused on the social cost of carbon. Science 373, 850–852 (2021).
Nordhaus, W. D. Revisiting the social cost of carbon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 1518–1523 (2017).
Riahi, K. et al. The shared socioeconomic pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 153–168 (2017).
Golosov, M., Hassler, J., Krusell, P. & Tsyvinski, A. Optimal taxes on fossil fuel in general equilibrium. Econometrica 82, 41–88 (2014).
Traeger, C. Ace—Analytic Climate Economy (CESIFO, 2021).
Badgley, G. et al. California’s forest carbon offsets buffer pool is severely undercapitalized. Front. For. Glob. Change 5, 1–28 (2022).
Buffer Guidelines (FCPF, 2020).
Meschi, P.-X. & Metais, E. Too big to learn: the effects of major acquisition failures on subsequent acquisition divestment. Br. J. Manag. 26, 408–423 (2015).
Bekaert, G., Harvey, C. R., Lundblad, C. T. & Siegel, S. Political risk and international valuation. J. Corp. Finance 37, 1–23 (2016).
Simonet, G. et al. REDD+ Projects in 2014: an Overview Based on a New Database and Typology (Information and Debate Series 32.2.1, Les Cahiers de la Chaire Economie du Climat Information, Paris-Dauphine University, 2015).
Guizar-Coutino, A., Jones, J. P., Balmford, A., Carmenta, R. & Coomes, D. A. A global evaluation of the effectiveness of voluntary REDD+ projects at reducing deforestation and degradation in the moist tropics. Conserv. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13970 (2022).
Cames, M. et al. How Additional Is the Clean Development Mechanism? Analysis of the Application of Current Tools and Proposed Alternatives (DG Clima, 2016).
More News
China’s Chang’e-6 launches successfully — what happens next?
African wild dogs with pleading eyes sparks rethink of dog evolution
Author Correction: Stepwise activation of a metabotropic glutamate receptor – Nature