Carbon Credit Fraud and the Absence of Legal Enforcement Mechanisms: A Gap Analysis in Developing Nations

炭素クレジット詐欺と法的執行メカニズムの欠如：途上国におけるギャップ分析 (AI 翻訳)

Setyo Luthfi Okta, Vera

International Journal of Humanities Law and Politics📚 査読済 / ジャーナル2026-07-02#炭素会計経営インパクト: 調達リスク対象セクター: cross_sector

DOI: 10.46336/ijhlp.v4i2.339

原典: https://doi.org/10.46336/ijhlp.v4i2.339

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

本研究は、インドネシア、ブラジル、ケニアにおける炭素クレジット詐欺の法的執行ギャップを分析し、LEDフレームワークとMRSフレームワークを提案。6つの共通規制ギャップを特定し、ポストCOP29の規制環境への示唆を与える。

English

This study analyzes legal enforcement gaps enabling carbon credit fraud in Indonesia, Brazil, and Kenya. Using the Legal Enforcement Deficit (LED) Framework, it identifies six common regulatory gaps and proposes a Minimum Regulatory Standard (MRS) Framework for the post-COP29 era.

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

日本は炭素クレジット市場（J-Credit等）の拡大を進めており、国内外のクレジット品質保証と法執行の連携が重要。本論文が指摘する定義の曖昧さや登録の断片化問題は、日本の制度設計にも示唆を与える。

In the global GX context

As voluntary carbon markets grow globally, this paper's LED and MRS frameworks offer a systematic approach for regulators to prevent fraud—relevant for TCFD, ISSB, and future carbon market integrity initiatives.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:Use the LED Framework as a comparative tool for analyzing carbon credit governance across jurisdictions.

🏢実務担当者:Be aware of the six regulatory gaps when sourcing carbon credits to mitigate fraud risk.

🏛政策担当者:Adopt the MRS pillars to strengthen enforcement and align with post-COP29 standards.

📄 Abstract（原文）

The rapid expansion of voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) has increased the economic significance of carbon credits, particularly in developing nations that host the majority of REDD+ and nature-based carbon projects. However, recent fraud cases, including the CQC Impact Investors prosecution in the United States and Brazil’s Operation Greenwashing, have exposed significant weaknesses in carbon market governance and enforcement. This study examines the legal enforcement gaps that enable carbon credit fraud in Indonesia, Brazil, and Kenya. Employing a qualitative comparative legal research design with a normative-empirical approach, the study analyzes domestic legislation, international climate instruments, enforcement records, and documented fraud cases from 2020–2025. The research introduces the Legal Enforcement Deficit (LED) Framework to assess legislative coverage, enforcement capacity, detection mechanisms, and deterrence effectiveness. The findings identify six common regulatory gaps: definitional ambiguity, verification capture, registry fragmentation, prosecutorial asymmetry, inadequate cross-border enforcement, and insufficient community rights protection. In response, the study proposes a Minimum Regulatory Standard (MRS) Framework consisting of six regulatory pillars designed to strengthen accountability, transparency, and enforcement. The research contributes to environmental law and climate governance by providing a comparative framework for addressing carbon credit fraud in the post-COP29 regulatory environment.

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

openalex https://doi.org/10.46336/ijhlp.v4i2.339first seen 2026-07-05 05:08:00

🔔 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。