Assessment of forestry and land use carbon projects’ effectiveness in the voluntary market
自主的市場における森林・土地利用炭素プロジェクトの有効性評価 (AI 翻訳)
Tajudeen O. Amusa, Romano Timofeiczyk, Alexandre Behling
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は、自主的炭素市場（VCM）における森林・土地利用（FLU）プロジェクトの実効性を、4つの主要な認証基準（Verra、Gold Standard、ACR、CAR）に基づく732プロジェクトのデータを用いて評価した。記述統計、クラスター分析、ベータ回帰モデルにより、プロジェクトの年齢と退役クレジット量が有効性を高める一方、発行クレジット量やGold Standard認証、REDD+プロジェクトは有効性を低下させることを示した。全体として、VCMのFLUプロジェクトは中程度の有効性を示し、改善の余地がある。
English
This study evaluates the effectiveness of 732 forestry and land use (FLU) carbon projects in the voluntary carbon market (VCM) under four major standards (Verra, Gold Standard, ACR, CAR). Using descriptive statistics, cluster analysis, and beta regression, it finds that project age and retired credits enhance effectiveness, while issued credits, Gold Standard certification, and REDD+ projects reduce it. Overall, FLU projects show moderate effectiveness, indicating room for improvement.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本では、カーボン・クレジット市場（J-Credit）やGXリーグ等の動きがあり、自主的市場の質保証は重要。本研究成果は、日本の森林由来クレジットの有効性評価や、信頼性向上のための制度設計に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
Globally, the voluntary carbon market faces scrutiny over integrity and effectiveness. This empirical assessment of FLU projects provides evidence for improving standards and informs discussions on Article 6 and high-integrity carbon markets, relevant to ISSB and other disclosure frameworks that reference carbon credits.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides empirical evidence on drivers of FLU project effectiveness, useful for carbon market research.
🏢実務担当者:Highlights factors like project age and credit retirement that can enhance credibility and value of carbon credits.
🏛政策担当者:Informs policy on VCM integrity and potential regulation of carbon credit quality.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Forestry and Land Use (FLU) carbon projects are important nature-based solutions to climate change within the Voluntary Carbon Market (VCM). However, large-scale empirical assessments of their real-world effectiveness remain limited. This study assessed the effectiveness of 732 FLU projects certified under four major voluntary carbon market standards: Verra (Verified Carbon Standard, VCS), Gold Standard, American Carbon Registry (ACR), and Climate Action Reserve (CAR). Project-level data were sourced from the harmonized Berkeley Carbon Registry Database. After data transformation, descriptive statistics, cluster analysis, and beta regression modeling were applied to identify structural and contextual drivers of effectiveness. Results showed wide variability in effectiveness by registry, project type, and region. Cluster analysis identified three effectiveness typologies, with the majority (94.4%) categorized as average-scale and moderately effective. The beta regression model (pseudo R² = 0.16) indicated that project age (β = +0.48, p < 0.001) and credits retired (β = +0.59, p < 0.001) significantly enhanced effectiveness, while credits issued (β = −0.57, p < 0.001), Gold Standard (β = −1.31, p = 0.004), and REDD+ projects (β = −0.44, p = 0.036) reduced it. An extended model (pseudo R² = 0.18) revealed positive age interactions for Improved Forest Management (β = +0.43) and Avoided Grassland Conversion (β = +0.90). Predicted effectiveness was highest for A/R (0.53) and lowest for REDD+ (0.43). These findings indicate that FLU projects operating within the VCM generally exhibit moderate levels of effectiveness, with project age and the volume of carbon credits retired being the most significant determinants.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.5380/rf.v56i1.101301first seen 2026-08-13 05:07:34
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。