HAS end of 2022, according to the Science Based Targets Initiative [une certification internationale portée par un partenariat comptant en son sein le Fonds mondial pour la nature (WWF), le pacte mondial des Nations unies et le trust caritatif Carbon Disclosure Project]companies that have set or committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions already represented more than a third of the global economy in terms of market capitalization.
While it is undeniable that priority must be given to reducing the carbon footprint of its direct and indirect activities, a company with an ambitious climate strategy is also encouraged, in addition, to urgently take measures to mitigate carbon emissions. greenhouse gases outside its value chain. For these companies, it is a question of adopting a strategy of quality climate contributions.
To do this, one possibility is to support projects protecting or restoring carbon sinks. Indeed, as the International Union for Conservation of Nature points out, 30% of the climate mitigation needs necessary to achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement [2015] can be ensured by nature-based solutions. The Science Based Targets Initiative recently opened a public consultation to clarify its position on this topic due to its growing importance.
Negative effects of compensation
Within organizations, it was common to offset a ton of emissions by purchasing a ton of carbon credits. However, this approach is being questioned due to its recently highlighted negative effects.
The artificial maximization of carbon credits generated by certain projects to reduce emissions due to deforestation and forest degradation has harmed the reputation of these projects, although they can participate in North-South solidarity and their positive impacts on biodiversity or local populations are recognized in many cases.
Furthermore, although a carbon credit represents one tonne of CO equivalent2 avoided or sequestered, there cannot be a strict equality between a tonne actually emitted and a carbon credit which is based on a counterfactual scenario, namely what would have happened in the absence of the project.
The latter having been implemented, it is by definition impossible to determine with absolute certainty what would have happened otherwise. A level of confidence can nevertheless be attributed to it and, in the face of controversies, a strict selection of projects to support takes on its full meaning.
You have 45% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.