What to expect from carbon pricing – and what not Commentary Carbon pricing has been dominating the public debate in recent months like hardly any other climate protection instrument. Stefanie Groll comments on the role of carbon pricing for ambitious climate protection. By Dr. Stefanie Groll
'Public coffers are empty. This makes it all the more important to mobilise private capital for nature conservation.' Do market-based instruments actually bring in that much money for nature conservation?
'Offsetting is better than doing nothing at all.' Does offsetting contribute to climate protection or does it obscure the view of the real solutions?
'Economic valuation of nature strengthens the 'polluter pays' principle.' Does the valuation of nature really mean that those who destroy nature are forced to pay for it?
'REDD+ payments make forests more valuable standing than cut.' So why does REDD+ not prevent deforestation?
'A mix of policy instruments is important to resolve environmental crises. Regulation will not be abolished just because emissions trading is also being used.' Does emissions trading work in a mix of environmental policy instruments?
'Conventional regulatory instruments of nature conservation have failed. It is therefore important to give market-based instruments such as emissions trading a chance.' Can market-based instruments replace conventional regulation in nature conservation?
Emissions trading: Strong players, feeble instruments Trading in pollution permits has blossomed into a big business. The system has produced little benefit for the climate. Even so, the alternatives are barely discussed. A chapter from the Coal Atlas. By Eva Mahnke
Madness by Design: A Voluntary Climate Fee with No Climate Effect It’s really gone that far: Sigmar Gabriel’s already minimal attempt to save Germany’s 2020 climate target of reducing emissions by 40% compared with those of 1990 has been so watered down that it is barely recognizable as a climate policy. By Lili Fuhr
