新興アグリビジネスとしてのカーボンファーミング：市場・ビジネスモデル・リスク・農家の価値獲得

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

🔬研究者:カーボンファーミングの契約・所有権・リスク配分と農家純収益の実証研究ギャップを整理する枠組みとして有用。

🏢実務担当者:農業サプライチェーン企業や食品企業が、Scope 3削減やインセット設計で農家と結ぶ契約条件・データ共有・支払い設計を見直す際のチェックリストになる。

🏛政策担当者:J-クレジットや農業脱炭素支援策の設計において、検証コスト・リバーサル・追加性・紛争解決の制度設計に注意を促す。

Carbon farming is increasingly presented as a means of rewarding land managers for storing carbon, reducing agricultural greenhouse gas emissions and supplying differentiated environmental attributes to buyers. Its agribusiness viability, however, cannot be inferred from biophysical mitigation potential or the existence of tradable credits. This critical narrative review integrates research on soil carbon science, environmental economics, contract design, voluntary carbon markets, farmer behaviour and agricultural value-chain governance. Peer-reviewed evidence and relevant institutional frameworks published through 9 August 2026 were examined with particular attention to methodological strength, conflicting findings and distributional outcomes. The synthesis distinguishes carbon removals from emission reductions, carbon-credit sales from value-chain payments, and gross revenue from the value ultimately retained by farmers. Empirical studies suggest that measurement uncertainty, counterfactual design, reversal exposure, fragmented holdings and costly verification constrain the conversion of agronomic improvements into reliable marketable units. Farmer surveys and choice experiments repeatedly identify delayed payment, repayment liability, unclear terms, data-sharing concerns and uncertainty about additionality as barriers, although stated preferences are not equivalent to observed adoption. Case evidence from Europe, Australia, India, Kenya and the United States shows that finance structure and control over credit rights can matter as much as headline prices for farmer benefit. Action-based, outcome-based and hybrid contracts allocate risks differently, while aggregation offers potential bargaining advantages without guaranteed cost savings or equitable distribution. The review develops a conditional value-capture framework centred on auditable environmental claims, transparent net-revenue accounting, farmer-controlled options, proportionate risk sharing and independent dispute resolution. It concludes that carbon farming can become a complementary agribusiness activity under credible measurement and inclusive governance, but cannot currently be assumed to deliver dependable stand-alone farm income or interchangeable offsets across practices and locations. Priority research needs concern longitudinal net farm returns, independent verification of environmental outcomes and comparative tests of contract and ownership arrangements.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.9734/jabb/2026/v29i114553first seen 2026-10-16 04:58:25
• semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.9734/jabb/2026/v29i114553first seen 2026-10-17 05:08:56 · last seen 2026-11-06 05:16:58