Disentangling the “net” from the “offset”: learning for net-zero climate policy from an analysis of “no-net-loss” in biodiversity

IF 3.3 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Frontiers in Climate Pub Date : 2023-07-06 DOI:10.3389/fclim.2023.1197608
Duncan P McLaren, L. Carver
{"title":"Disentangling the “net” from the “offset”: learning for net-zero climate policy from an analysis of “no-net-loss” in biodiversity","authors":"Duncan P McLaren, L. Carver","doi":"10.3389/fclim.2023.1197608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Net-zero has proved a rapid and powerful convening concept for climate policy. Rather than treating it as a novel development from the perspective of climate policy, we examine net-zero in the context of the longer history and experience of the “no-net-loss” framing from biodiversity policy. Drawing on material from scholarly, policy and activist literature and cultural political economy theory, we interpret the turn to “net” policies and practices as part of the political economy of neoliberalism, in which the quantification and commodification of the environment, and in particular—trading through an offset market, enable continued ideological dominance of economic freedoms. This analysis highlights the ways in which the adoption of a “net” framing reconstructs the goals, processes and mechanisms involved. It is the neoliberal commitment to markets that drives the adoption of net framings for the very purpose of validating offsetting markets. Understanding the making of “net” measures in this way highlights the potential to disentangle the “net” from the “offset”, and we discuss the various obfuscations and perversities this entanglement affords. We argue that the delivery of net outcomes might be separated from the mechanism of offsetting, and the marketization of compensation it is typically presumed to involve, but may yet remain entangled in neoliberal political ideology. In conclusion we suggest some conditions for more effective, fair and sustainable delivery of “net-zero” climate policy.","PeriodicalId":33632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Climate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1197608","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Net-zero has proved a rapid and powerful convening concept for climate policy. Rather than treating it as a novel development from the perspective of climate policy, we examine net-zero in the context of the longer history and experience of the “no-net-loss” framing from biodiversity policy. Drawing on material from scholarly, policy and activist literature and cultural political economy theory, we interpret the turn to “net” policies and practices as part of the political economy of neoliberalism, in which the quantification and commodification of the environment, and in particular—trading through an offset market, enable continued ideological dominance of economic freedoms. This analysis highlights the ways in which the adoption of a “net” framing reconstructs the goals, processes and mechanisms involved. It is the neoliberal commitment to markets that drives the adoption of net framings for the very purpose of validating offsetting markets. Understanding the making of “net” measures in this way highlights the potential to disentangle the “net” from the “offset”, and we discuss the various obfuscations and perversities this entanglement affords. We argue that the delivery of net outcomes might be separated from the mechanism of offsetting, and the marketization of compensation it is typically presumed to involve, but may yet remain entangled in neoliberal political ideology. In conclusion we suggest some conditions for more effective, fair and sustainable delivery of “net-zero” climate policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将“净”与“抵消”脱钩:从生物多样性“无净损失”的分析中学习净零气候政策
事实证明,净零排放是一个快速而有力的气候政策召集概念。我们没有从气候政策的角度将其视为一个新的发展,而是在生物多样性政策“无净损失”框架的长期历史和经验的背景下研究净零。根据学术、政策和活动家文献以及文化政治经济学理论中的材料,我们将转向“网络”政策和实践解释为新自由主义政治经济学的一部分,在新自由主义中,环境的量化和商品化,特别是通过抵消市场进行交易,使经济自由在意识形态上继续占据主导地位。该分析强调了采用“网络”框架重建目标、过程和机制的方式。正是对市场的新自由主义承诺推动了净框架的采用,其目的正是验证抵消市场。以这种方式理解“净”度量的制定突出了将“净”与“偏移”区分开来的潜力,我们讨论了这种纠缠所带来的各种混淆和反常现象。我们认为,净结果的交付可能与抵消机制以及通常认为涉及的补偿市场化分离,但可能仍与新自由主义政治意识形态纠缠在一起。最后,我们提出了一些条件,以更有效、公平和可持续地实施“净零”气候政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Climate
Frontiers in Climate Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Consumption-based emission inventories in Nordic municipalities—a quest to develop support for local climate action Transnational governance standards in ensuring sustainable development and operation of hydropower projects in transboundary basins Modeling the measurement of carbon dioxide removal: perspectives from the philosophy of measurement How well can we predict climate migration? A review of forecasting models Treatment of uncertainty in determining the UK's path to Net Zero
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1