インド農業におけるカーボンファーミングとカーボン市場：緩和ポテンシャル、検証制約、小規模農家包摂に関する批判的ナラティブレビュー

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

🔬研究者:農業土壌炭素のMRVプロトコル間非等価性と小規模農家包摂の実証的ギャップを整理した研究課題のロードマップとして有用。

🏢実務担当者:農業サプライチェーンでオフセット調達やScope 3削減を検討する企業は、クレジットの同等性・追加性リスクと小規模農家からの調達設計の難しさを踏まえるべき。

🏛政策担当者:インドの国内クレジット制度設計は、標準化された独立検証アーキテクチャと機会費用に基づく支払い設計を優先すべきという政策的含意を提供する。

Carbon farming has moved rapidly from an agronomic proposition to a market instrument in India, where a domestic carbon credit trading scheme has been established and agriculture has been designated an offset sector alongside a growing population of project-based initiatives. Institutional development has outpaced the evidence required to support it. This critical narrative review examines whether the biophysical, methodological and institutional foundations of carbon farming are strong enough to sustain credit-based climate mitigation in Indian cropping systems. Literature published between 2004 and 2026 was identified through searching of open scholarly indexes, institutional repositories and citation-based retrieval, and was appraised for methodological adequacy, alignment between claims and evidence, and relevance to smallholder-dominated agriculture. Four conclusions emerge. The agronomic evidence for soil organic carbon accrual under conservation agriculture, agroforestry, nutrient management and amendment-based pathways is directionally consistent but modest in magnitude, regionally heterogeneous, and frequently accompanied by yield responses that differ by agro-ecological zone. Measurement, reporting and verification remains the binding constraint, because crediting protocols differ so substantially in their treatment of baseline stocks, modelling assumptions and sampling design that credits issued under different protocols are not equivalent units. The accounting principles on which credit integrity depends, namely additionality, permanence and the avoidance of double claiming, are particularly fragile where holdings are small, tenure is insecure and the practices being credited are partially pre-existing. The distributional record of early Indian projects indicates systematic under-representation of marginal farmers and women, negligible realisation of payments and substantial disadoption. The accessible evidence therefore supports carbon farming as a soil health and resilience strategy with genuine co-benefits, but does not yet support its treatment as a reliable source of fungible mitigation units at smallholder scale. Priorities include long-term regionally stratified field networks, standardised and independently validated verification architectures, systematic ex post evaluation of operating projects, and payment designs calibrated to measured opportunity costs.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.9734/jeai/2026/v48i104519first seen 2026-09-19 05:09:37