Soil Carbon Markets in the Making: Power Relations and Matters of Concern in Offsetting and Insetting

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

🔬研究者:Provides a novel framework for analyzing power relations in emerging carbon markets, useful for scholars of environmental governance and carbon accounting.

🏢実務担当者:Offers insights into the risks and governance gaps in insetting arrangements, relevant for companies considering soil carbon offsets in their supply chains.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights the need for regulation to address insetting opacity and ensure procedural justice, informing policy design for carbon market integrity.

ABSTRACT This paper investigates emerging soil carbon markets and seeks to identify the groups of actors and power relations that constitute their structure and function. Voluntary soil carbon markets (VSCMs) are emerging globally as a key mechanism for generating carbon removals as part of climate mitigation efforts. Developments are characterised by both carbon offsetting and supply chain insetting for Scope 3 emissions reductions. Despite their increasing prominence, VSCMs remain poorly understood as socio‐technical and political arrangements. This paper examines how UK VSCMs are being implemented, governed, and contested, and how they are shaped by power relations. Drawing on economic sociology and political ecology, we conceptualise VSCMs as ‘markets‐in‐the‐making’, and extend Callon's notion of markets as in vivo experiments by explicitly incorporating power relations. To investigate different groups' influence on market development, we apply an adapted Net‐Map methodology via 17 semi‐structured interviews and a validation workshop with stakeholders involved in UK VSCMs. Our findings reveal a fragmented and experimental governance landscape and identify key matters of concern, including pricing asymmetries, knowledge gaps, opacity in insetting arrangements and reduced agency for tenant farmers. While regulation is widely viewed as necessary to improve market integrity, current frameworks insufficiently address insetting. We argue that without deliberate efforts to ‘civilise’ VSCMs by embedding transparency, procedural justice, and inclusive governance, these arrangements risk reproducing existing inequities within agri‐food systems. The paper contributes methodologically and theoretically by advancing tools for analysing emerging market governance, and highlighting power relations underlying VSCMs.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.70128first seen 2026-08-08 04:59:47