The double-edged sword of carbon offsets: Can it cut in favor of health and energy equity?

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Contributes to the literature on carbon offset effectiveness and equity, proposing a novel domestic offset model with co-benefits.

🏢実務担当者:Offers a blueprint for companies and NGOs to develop offset projects that generate both carbon reductions and measurable social benefits, potentially enhancing CSR and stakeholder relations.

🏛政策担当者:Suggests a policy pathway for governments to leverage voluntary carbon markets to address domestic inequalities while meeting emission reduction targets.

Skepticism of carbon offsetting as a climate action strategy is rooted in many concerns, its tendency to exacerbate global economic and environmental inequalities key among them. Plantation forestry, conservation forestry, and other offset projects located in the Global South are meant to compensate for continued emissions by countries and companies in the Global North. Yet many such projects are prone to underdelivering on carbon reductions while burdening host communities with negative economic, environmental and health consequences. This can be the case even when carbon offsetting is originally intended as a source of sustainable development and poverty relief. We propose a somewhat different approach to mobilizing carbon offsetting and the voluntary carbon market as instruments in equitable net-zero transitions: We show how carbon offset credits generated by projects located in developed countries like the US can be strategically mobilized as tools for alleviating persistent energy, environmental, and health inequalities within these countries. Specifically, we introduce 3 types of US-based projects with the potential to reduce carbon emissions through interventions designed for meeting critical energy, nutrition, and health needs of marginalized groups: 1) Emission reductions through energy efficiency upgrades for low-income households; 2) Emission reductions through improved nutrition for low income individuals and populations; and 3) Emission reductions through improvements in the care and wellbeing of asthma patients. We also discuss how selling the emission-reduction-based offsets generated by such projects on the voluntary carbon market can create a source of financing for the health- and equity-promoting interventions behind the projects.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2026.104798first seen 2026-06-17 05:15:51 · last seen 2026-06-17 07:13:29