









































Pa
ge

 
1



Pa
ge

 
22

1

American Journal of  Environmental
Economics (AJEE) 

The Future of  Carbon Offset Markets in Africa: Towards Equitable Climate Finance
Richard Mulenga1*

Volume 4 Issue 1, Year 2025
ISSN: 2833-7905 (Online)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajee.v4i1.6190
https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Article Information ABSTRACT

Received: September 19, 2025

Accepted: October 25, 2025

Published: December 06, 2025

This study critically examines the adoption and implementation of  carbon offset markets in 
Africa through a systematic literature review guided by the PRISMA framework and com-
plemented by a bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer. Drawing on peer-reviewed articles 
and reports published between 2000 and 2025, the review assesses key dimensions, including 
project design, governance structures, stakeholder engagement, and environmental outcomes. 
Findings reveal that Africa’s offset carbon markets are expanding but remain hindered by weak 
governance, limited transparency, and inequitable benefit-sharing, which often allow interme-
diaries to capture disproportionate value, fueling perceptions of  “carbon colonialism.” Inad-
equate baseline methodologies and weak monitoring, particularly in forestry and cookstove 
projects, further erode the credibility of  the offset markets. Nevertheless, Africa’s comparative 
advantage in nature-based solutions, including forestry and blue-carbon ecosystems, presents 
vast potential for generating high-integrity credits that benefit biodiversity and livelihoods. 
The study proposes a framework emphasising free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), 
transparent benefit-sharing, independent monitoring, and digital, monitoring, reporting and ver-
ification (MRV) systems to enhance integrity and community trust. It further recommends estab-
lishing transparent price-discovery mechanisms and Paris Agreement Article 6-aligned national 
registries to prevent double-counting and strengthen regulatory coherence. By advancing commu-
nity-centred governance and high-integrity standards, African carbon offset markets can mobilise 
substantial climate finance and contribute effectively to global emission reduction goals, positioning 
the continent as a credible partner in the low-carbon transition. JEL Classifications: Q54, O13, F18.

INTRODUCTION
This study conducts a critical examination of  the 
adoption and implementation of  carbon offset markets 
in Africa through a systematic literature review guided 
by the PRISMA framework and complemented by a 
bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer. Drawing on 
peer-reviewed articles and reports published between 
2000 and 2025, the review assesses key dimensions of  
the carbon offset market in Africa, including project 
design, governance structures, stakeholder engagement, 
and environmental outcomes. The Intergovernmental 
Panel on Climate Change, IPCC (2022), ranks the African 
region as one of  the most climate-vulnerable regions 
in the world. It is experiencing rising temperatures, 
unpredictable rainfall patterns, and an increasing 
frequency of  droughts and floods. With the rise in global 
climate goals, carbon offset markets have become central 
to global climate finance.  Carbon markets have become 
crucial to international climate finance and mitigation 
efforts. Carbon compliance markets (CCMs) facilitate 
significant emission reductions through enforceable 
mechanisms, while voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) are 
crucial for funding innovative, community-driven climate 
solutions (ICAP, 2023). However, VCMs face challenges 
like credibility, greenwashing, and inconsistent standards 
(ACMI, 2023). Improving transparency and aligning 
voluntary credits with Article 6 of  the Paris Agreement 
could enhance their legitimacy and effectiveness. Carbon 
offsets are mechanisms under VCMs. They represent 

Keywords

Africa,  Carbon Colonialism, 
Carbon Offset Markets, Climate 
Finance, Climate Policy

1 Department of  Economics, ZCAS University, Lusaka, Zambia
* Corresponding author’s e-mail: richardmulenga2@gmail.com

reductions or removals of  greenhouse gases (GHGs, 
also referred to as tonnes of   carbon dioxide equivalent 
(tCO2e). (ICAP, 2023). Africa, rich in biodiversity and 
endowed with extensive land-based carbon sinks, has 
emerged as a key player in the voluntary offset market. The 
African Carbon Markets Initiative (ACMI, 2023) report 
highlights the benefits of  high-integrity carbon markets in 
Africa. It highlights the role of  voluntary carbon projects 
in promoting job creation, enhancing food security, 
fostering climate resilience, and supporting biodiversity, 
all of  which align with the Sustainable Development 
Goals (SDGs). Nevertheless, ACMI (2023) acknowledges 
that global although global carbon markets have flaws, 
they however, can yield carbon markets are not without 
flaws; however, they can yield significant environmental 
and economic advantages for communities, provided 
that a concerted effort is made. Despite the potential 
opportunities presented by carbon offset markets, VCMs 
in the African region continue to face various challenges. 
These challenges include corruption and integrity related 
to offsets originating from Africa, weak governance 
systems, and a lack of  organization and transparency 
among offset carbon markets in Africa (ACMI, 2023; 
UNEP, 2022). Against this backdrop, this study conducts 
a systematic and critical literature review regarding the 
adoption and implementation of  carbon offset markets 
in Africa, guided by the PRISMA framework and a 
bibliometric analysis conducted using VOSviewer. The 
study analyses peer-reviewed articles and reports from 



Pa
ge

 
22

2

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

2000 to 2025 from relevant academic and professional 
databases, focusing on project design, governance 
structures, stakeholder engagement, and environmental 

impacts. Carbon markets are generally categorised into 
two types: compliance carbon markets (CCMs, also 
known as cap-and-trade or emissions trading systems, 

Table 1: Key Differences between Compliance and Voluntary Markets
Aspect Compliance Market Voluntary Market
Regulation Mandated by international(national)law e.g., 

EU ETS, 
No legal requirement, participation is voluntary

Participants Companies with emission reduction 
obligations or mandates

Individuals, local communities, NGOs, companies

Price Stability Generally, highly stable as the prices are 
regulated

Usually, the prices are more variable as they are 
dictated by the market forces of  demand and supply

Purpose To meet legal obligations and Nationally 
Determined Contributions, NDCs

To meet corporate social responsibility (CSR), 
reputational benefits and Net-Zero  Pledges

Scale Relatively larger, with billions of  tons of  
greenhouse gases (GHGs) traded annually

Relatively more minor but growing rapidly, with 
expected USD 50Billion in trade by 2030 (Taskforce 
on Scaling VCM, 2021)

Source: Adapted from ICAP 2023, ACMI, 2023, IPCC, 2022, & Taskforce on Scaling up VCM, 2021

Table 2: Survey of  Carbon Offset Mechanisms in Africa: 2000-2025
Country Mechanism type year started Official Legal Reference
South Africa Carbon tax with offsets (Carbon Offsets Regulations) 2019 treasury.gov.za
Kenya National carbon markets regulations; Article 6.2 

bilateral; JCM partner
2024 Kenyalaw.org

Tanzania JCM partnership (Article 6-based bilateral) 2025 mofa.go.jp
Ethiopia JCM partnership; Jurisdictional REDD+ ERPA 

(ISFL/OFLP)
2013 mofa.go.jp

Uganda Climate Change Mechanisms Regulations (Article 6 
domestic rules)

2025 nema.go.ug

ETS) and voluntary carbon markets (VCMs). Table 1 
reports the key differences between CCMs and VCMs.
Types and Processes of  Carbon Offset Projects in 
Voluntary Carbon Markets 
The process of  how carbon offsets work in VCMs 
involves the generation of  carbon offsets, certification, 
purchase and retirement (ACMI, 2023). Offsets are 
typically generated via projects that remove or reduce 
carbon emissions via activities such as methane 
capture, renewable energy, reforestation and improved 
cookstoves, among others (Gold Standard, 2021). 
Certification basically involves verification by third-
party standards such as Gold Standard, Plan Vivo, 
to ensure real, additional and permanent reductions, 
whereas the purchase and retirement stage aims at the 
purchase and retirement of  offsets to claim carbon 
neutrality (or net-zero pledges) by corporations or firms 
(World Bank, 2022). Arising from the carbon offset 
process, three types of  offset projects are generally 
observed in voluntary carbon markets. The first type 
is called Nature-Based Solution (NBS) projects. This 
involves afforestation and reforestation, Wetland and 
mangrove restoration, and avoiding deforestation 
through Reducing Emissions from  Deforestation and 

Forest Degradation plus (REDD+)  Projects such as 
Zambia’s community forestry and Kenya’s Chyulu Hills 
initiatives that generate offsets and augment biodiversity 
simultaneously (Bastos Lima et al., 2021). The second 
type is known as Energy and Technology (E&T) 
projects, which involve renewable energy projects (for 
instance, hydro, solar and wind), methane capture from 
livestock and landfills and clean cookstoves for reducing 
biomass fuel use in rural households (ACMI, 2023; 
World Bank, 2022). Blue Carbon (BC) projects, the third 
type, focus on carbon stored in coastal ecosystems, such 
as mangroves and seagrasses. This is relevant for African 
states such as, among others, South Africa, Mozambique, 
Congo DRC, Kenya, Namibia and Tanzania.

Survey of  Jurisdictions with Carbon Offsets in Africa
Table 2 reports the countries of  African governments that 
have implemented an official carbon-offset mechanism, 
which includes REDD+ ERPAS, Paris Agreement Article 
6 authorisations, carbon market regulations, or carbon 
taxes with offsets.
According to the survey, twenty one of  the fifty four 
countries in the African region have implemented carbon 
offset mechanisms. This implies that 38% of  the countries 



Pa
ge

 
22

3

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

Rwanda National Carbon Market Framework 2023 rema.gov.rw
Zambia Carbon Market Framework (guidelines & Act) 2023 mgee.gov.zm
Zimbabwe Carbon Credits Trading Regulations 2023 veritaszim.zm
Ghana Article 6.2 cooperative approach; FCPF ERPA 

(REDD+)
2019 bafu.admin.ch

Senegal Article 6.2 bilateral with Switzerland; JCM partner 2021 click.ch.senegal
Ivory Coast REDD+ ERPA (FCPF, jurisdictional) 2021 forestcarbonpartnership.

org
Cameroon REDD+ ERPA (FCPF, jurisdictional) 2019 forestcarbonpartnership.

org
Republic of  
the Congo

REDD+ ERPA (FCPF, jurisdictional) 2021 documents1.worldbank.
org

Mozambique REDD+ ERPA (FCPF, jurisdictional) 2019 worldbank.org.
mozambique

Madagascar REDD+ ERPA (FCPF, jurisdictional) 2020 worldbank.org.
madagascar

Gabon REDD+ results-based payments (CAFI) 2019 undp.org.gabon
Nigeria Climate Change Act (framework enabling carbon 

markets)
2021 fao.org.nigeria

Egypt Regulated voluntary carbon market (EGX/EGCX) 2024 egcx.com.eg
Tunisia Article 6.2 bilateral with Switzerland; JCM partner 2023 click.ch.tunisia
Morocco Article 6 cooperation (MoU); Article 6.4 host 

participation
2023 unfccc.int.morocco

Source: Author’s elaboration from various official sources as indicated in the links. 
Notes: According to UNECA (2023) and ACMI (2023) reports, several other countries, such as Namibia, Botswana, Liberia, Sierra 
Leone, and Malawi, are drafting or considering carbon-market regulations (Paris Article 6 pathways) but had not fully operationalised 
them at the time of  writing this paper. These were not included in the survey.

in the region have carbon offset markets. Eighteen of  
these countries are in Saharan Africa (SSA), and three are 
in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.
According to ICAP’s (2025) Status Report, as of  July 
2025, no ETS were in force in Africa. South Africa’s 
carbon tax is the continent’s only compliance carbon 
credit market.

Empirical Literature Review
The Theoretical Models Guiding Carbon Offset 
Mechanisms
Carbon offset markets have emerged as a significant 
mechanism for addressing climate change by assigning 
value (or price) to carbon emissions and their reductions. 
The theoretical foundations of  these markets are rooted 
in economics, environmental policy, and institutional 
design. This section outlines the key theories that underpin 
carbon offset markets, specifically externality theory, the 
Coase theorem, commons and public goods theory, and 
market-based regulation. It also connects them to wider 
sustainability and financial frameworks.

Externality Theory
Pigou (1920) asserted that pollution constitutes a negative 
externality, resulting in social costs that are not accounted 
for in private market exchanges. The socially optimal level 
of  emissions is attained when the marginal social cost 

(MSC) is equal to the marginal social benefit (MSB)
MSC(Q) = MPC(Q) + MEC(Q)            ....(1)
Where MPC is the marginal private cost and MEC is the 
marginal external cost. Carbon offset markets seek to 
rectify this imbalance by assigning a price to emissions 
via offsets. Companies have the option to either reduce 
emissions on their own or acquire credits from initiatives 
that mitigate emissions in other locations, thereby aligning 
private interests with societal welfare (Stavins, 1997).

The Coase Theorem-Property Rights Approach
Coase (1960) proposed that when property rights are 
distinctly articulated and transaction costs are minimal, 
parties can negotiate efficient results irrespective of  the 
original distribution of  rights. This concept is evident in 
carbon markets, which operate through tradable carbon 
allowances or credits, imposing a constraint on firms:
Ei ≤ Ai + Ci            ....(2)
Where Ei is the emission of  firm i, Ai  is allocated 
pollution allowances,Ci are purchased credits. Through 
trading, firms with high abatement costs can buy credits 
from those with low costs, helping to achieve cost-
effective carbon (GHG) reductions (ICAP, 2022).

Commons and Public Good Theory
The atmosphere constitutes a global common, while 
climate stability is regarded as a public good characterised 



Pa
ge

 
22

4

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

by being non-excludable and non-rivalrous in consumption 
(Markusen, 1975; Hardin, 1968). In the absence of  
intervention, the phenomenon known as the “tragedy 
of  the commons” emerges, wherein each participant 
seeks to maximise individual gain to the detriment of  the 
collective. This situation can be articulated as:
maxUi =B(Ei) - C(Ei)             ....(3)
Subject to ∑Ei ≤ E*, where E* is the global emission 
threshold. 
Carbon offset markets aim to incorporate this constraint 
by establishing enforceable boundaries and distributing 
accountability among various stakeholders.

Market-Based Environmental Regulation
Market-based instruments (MBIs), which include carbon 
taxes and tradable permits, are perceived as more efficient 
than command-and-control regulations (Baumol & 
Oates, 1988). In the CMs (Cap-and-trade or Emissions 
trading systems, ETS), firms minimize costs by solving:
 min∑i Ci (Ei) subject to ∑i Ei ≤ E̅             ....(4)
 Where Ci (Ei) is firm i’s abatement cost function, and E̅ is 
the emissions cap. Offsets expand this market mechanism 
by permitting reductions beyond regulated jurisdictions, 
increasing flexibility and reducing compliance costs 
(Ellerman et al., 2010).

Broader Theoretical Foundations
Carbon offset markets, rooted in financial economics, 
act as hedging tools against regulatory and reputational 
risks (Calel & Dechezleprêtre, 2016). Sustainability 
theories highlight co-benefits such as poverty reduction 
and biodiversity, while institutional economics stresses 
the importance of  governance and verification (Ostrom, 
2009).

Status of  Voluntary Carbon Markets in Africa
VCMs in Africa originated from early smallholder/Plan 
Vivo and community forestry initiatives during the 2000s, 
progressed into nature-based solutions (NBS) throughout 
the 2010s, experienced a significant increase in 2021 to 
2022, and subsequently encountered a correction focused 
on integrity in 2023–2024, with governance reforms 
reaching maturity in 2024–2025 (Ecosystem Marketplace, 
2024-2025; ACMI, 2022, 2024–25). Africa’s involvement 
in VCMs is still in its early phases as of  2023, when 
compared to other regions like Asia and Latin America. 
Nonetheless, the continent has demonstrated significant 
room for expansion, as more and more projects in a 
variety of  industries are being developed (Ecosystem 
Marketplace, 2023). The main drivers of  demand for 
African carbon credits are international businesses 
looking to offset their carbon footprints and achieve 
sustainability goals. Soil carbon sequestration projects 
which aim to improve agricultural practices to enhance 
soil carbon storage are becoming more prevalent across 
the continent. There are still a number of  challenges the 
African VCM must overcome. The market is extremely 

fragmented, making it difficult for projects to scale up 
due to limited access to infrastructure, funding, and 
technical know-how (Goldstein et al., 2022; ACMI, 2023). 
LITERATURE REVIEW
Sources of  Carbon (GHG) Emissions in Africa
This section presents an overview of  the major 
contributors to Africa’s carbon footprint. The energy 
sector, particularly the heavy reliance on fossil fuels 
for electricity generation, transportation, and industrial 
activities, appears to be the predominant source of  
emissions across the continent. South Africa ranks as 
the largest emitter in Africa, followed by Egypt and 
Algeria (International Energy Agency, IEA, 2023). The 
combustion of  fossil fuels, including coal, oil, and natural 
gas, for energy production and transportation is the main 
driver of  carbon emissions. Additionally, deforestation 
and the decomposition of  solid waste contribute to 
increased carbon emissions (Greenly, 2023). Although 
agriculture is not as critical as the energy sector, it still 
plays a notable role in the carbon emissions landscape 
of  Africa. Activities such as burning crop residues and 
applying fertilisers release significant greenhouse gases 
(African Development Bank, AfDB, 2024). Nonetheless, 
it is essential to acknowledge the potential of  agriculture 
in mitigating climate change in Africa. Implementing 
sustainable land management and enhancing agricultural 
practices can aid in carbon sequestration (AfDB, 2024). 
Changes in land use, particularly deforestation, also 
represent a significant source of  greenhouse gas emissions 
in Africa. Forests serve as carbon sinks, and their removal 
disrupts this vital process. Although there has been a 
decline in deforestation rates in recent years, the ongoing 
loss of  forests remains a pressing issue (ACMI, 2023).

Challenges and Opportunities of  Carbon Markets in 
Africa 
This section provides a literature review to elucidate the 
current state, challenges, and potential opportunities 
associated with carbon markets in developing countries, 
particularly in the African region. It appears that voluntary 
carbon markets (VCMs) are becoming more prominent 
than compliance markets within the African context.  
According to ICAP’s (2025) Status Report, there were no 
ETS in force in Africa as of  July 2025. South Africa’s 
carbon tax was the continent’s only compliance carbon 
credit market as of  July 2025. 
The study by Kongnso et al. (2025) examines the potential 
for municipalities in Cameroon to access carbon credits 
through enhanced waste management, particularly 
through composting. Rapid urbanisation has led to an 
increase in household solid waste, challenging municipal 
capacity despite decentralisation efforts. Using a mixed-
methods and participatory observation approach, the 
study quantifies methane sequestration from composting 
activities in Dschang Municipality. Findings reveal that in 
2023, Dschang generated 27,514.9 tons of  waste annually, 
with only 32% collected and 55.21% of  that composted. 



Pa
ge

 
22

5

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

Between 2017 and 2023, composting avoided 17,989 
tons of  CO₂ emissions and generated about 150,000 
euros in carbon credit revenue. Despite these financial 
and environmental gains, the sector faces constraints, 
including inadequate equipment, weak organisation, 
and restrictive carbon market regulations. The authors 
conclude that sustainable progress requires policy 
reforms, system reorganisation, and more accessible 
carbon credit mechanisms for municipalities.
Obonyo (2024), in the study titled “Creating Credible 
Carbon Markets in Africa”, examines the increasing trend 
of  voluntary carbon trading within Africa, particularly in 
the Middle Eastern North African (MENA) region. The 
research emphasizes the necessity of  maintaining integrity 
in the trading of  high-quality carbon credits as part of  
the broader effort towards significant decarbonization 
in Africa. Furthermore, the study contends that climate 
finance must be procured and utilized efficiently to 
address the challenges posed by climate change in Africa.
In 2023, the African Carbon Markets Initiative 
(ACMI,2023) highlights the benefits of  high-integrity 
carbon markets in Africa, showing how carbon 
projects create jobs, improve food security, enhance 
climate resilience, and support biodiversity in line with 
Sustainable Development Goals. However,  ACMI (2023) 
acknowledges global carbon markets have flaws but can 
offer significant environmental and economic benefits 
if  stakeholders collaborate. Skepticism exists among 
African stakeholders regarding the reliability of  emissions 
reductions from carbon credits, particularly in initiatives 
like Zimbabwe’s Kariba project and those promoting eco-
friendly stoves, which made up 90% of  Africa’s carbon 
credit market in 2021. Concerns include the motivations 
of  credit buyers, who may use these credits to continue 
polluting under the guise of  environmental responsibility 
(greenwashing) . Additionally, ACMI (2023) notes ongoing 
debates about whether land-use carbon credits lead to 
land dispossession for Africans, allowing developed 
nations to maintain pollution, which some view as a form 
of  recolonisation. These issues contributed to a 22% 
drop in global carbon credit demand in 2023, with prices 
falling 30-50% from their peak, returning to 2022 levels.
Pagop and Savard (2024) explore the opportunities and 
challenges of  African involvement in voluntary carbon 
markets (VCMs), highlighting the need for strategic 
engagement to maximise benefits for sustainable 
development and climate change mitigation. This study 
looks into the growing interest in VCMs in Africa, pointing 
out the potential pros and cons of  African participation. 
With significant financial incentives and market growth, 
VCMs are emerging as a viable solution for climate change 
in Africa, though debates continue about the legitimacy 
of  carbon credits and their importance in climate change 
mitigation and adaptation.  According to Pagop and 
Savard (2024), VCM projects across Africa hold immense 
potential as drivers of  local job creation. These initiatives, 
spanning various sectors, offer a unique opportunity to 
address unemployment challenges while contributing to 

the continent’s sustainable development goals.
The study by Sani et al. (2025) examines global trends 
in carbon-neutral construction and their relevance to 
Bangladesh’s sustainable development. The construction 
industry contributes over 40% of  global CO₂ emissions, 
making carbon-neutral building practices essential for 
climate mitigation. Bangladesh faces unique challenges 
such as rapid urbanization, limited access to green 
financing, and insufficient government support. 
High costs, lack of  local expertise, and weak policy 
implementation further hinder adoption of  sustainable 
building technologies. The authors review successful 
international examples that demonstrate the benefits of  
energy-efficient designs and public–private collaboration. 
They recommend increased investment in green 
infrastructure, easier access to financing, and stronger 
policy incentives.  
However, despite this potential and the significant 
opportunities that VCMs offer to Africa, the adoption 
and implementation of  the VCM in the African region 
still face some challenges. These challenges include 
corruption and integrity concerns surrounding offsets 
from Africa. Coupled with weak carbon market 
governance systems, there is a lack of  organization 
in these markets which exacerbates credit quality and 
transparency problems. Intermediation in the VCMs in 
Africa is another problem. Intermediaries play a significant 
role in Africa due to their relational capital, responsible 
for bringing African credits to international markets and 
sometimes claiming a substantial share of  the created 
value. The lack of  information about the percentages 
taken by brokers and their reluctance to disclose such 
information (in some cases, this can be as high as 70% of  
the value of  a credit) result in reduced funding for Africa 
and decreased income for local communities involved in 
voluntary offset projects. ‘Carbon or green colonialism ’ is 
another challenge faced by VCMs in Africa. This refers to 
the exploitation of  carbon offset mechanisms by investors 
or companies from developed economies when they 
control the environment through the acquisition of  cheap 
land in ways that disproportionately disadvantage local 
communities and indigenous populations in Africa. This 
poses a threat not only to VCMs but also to the perception 
of  local populations regarding this system (ACMI, 2022).
Kabukuru’s (2023) report, titled “Africa is chasing 
billions,” argues that although Africa is responsible for 
only four per cent (4%) of  global carbon emissions, it is 
one of  the region’s world regions most severely impacted 
by the climate change crisis. He notes that while the 
carbon compliance market in Africa is nearly non-existent, 
voluntary carbon markets are are growing. However, 
these voluntary markets on the continent are contentious, 
facing criticism for being opaque, discriminatory, unfair, 
and ineffective in addressing development and climate 
policy. Kabukuru (2023) concludes with a call to action, 
stating that for Africa’s involvement in carbon markets 
to genuinely benefit the continent, its people, and its 
environment, the approach must change. He emphasises 



Pa
ge

 
22

6

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

the need for fair cost-sharing, transparency, respect for 
indigenous land rights, and truly sustainable projects 
without greenwashing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
The Search Strategy-Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria
The study employed a systematic literature review (SLR) 
methodology, as described by de Freitas Netto et al. 
(2020), allowing researchers to situate their work within 
the existing knowledge framework. The survey focused 
on publications and reports published in English between 
2000 and 2025.
The SLR approach guarantees a thorough identification 
of  relevant studies while reducing bias and subjectivity 
(Higgins et al., 2021). The review adhered to PRISMA 
guidelines (Page et al., 2021) and examined voluntary 
carbon market mechanisms, focusing on the African 
region through a Boolean Proximity search  to unravel 
related terms or phrases such as “carbon offsets in Africa”, 
“voluntary carbon markets Africa,” “carbon finance and 
Africa”, “carbon colonialism Africa,” “carbon brokers 
Africa”, “carbon market integrity Africa” and “carbon 
credit governance Africa”, among others. A VOS viewer 

software mapping technique was employed to help 
filter out duplicate papers by constructing bibliometric 
networks based on citation metrics (Moya-Clemente 
et al., 2021). The academic databases surveyed in this 
study included multidisciplinary academic databases 
such as the Web of  Science (WOS) and Google Scholar. 
In addition, subject-specific databases such as Taylor 
and Francis online (Specifically, African Development, 
Governance and Environmental Studies) and JSTOR 
(Focusing on African Studies, governance, and political 
economy of  carbon markets) were also surveyed. The 
African Development Bank (AfBD) publications and the 
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) Climate 
Finance Portal were surveyed for policy and development 
databases. The industry literature surveyed was the African 
Carbon Markets Initiative (ACMI), Chatham House (for 
policy reports on carbon finance and Africa), Taskforce 
on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM) and 
Forest Trends’ Ecosystem Marketplace. 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The search protocol between August 1 and August 31, 
2025, yielded 759 peer-reviewed articles, industry reports, 

Figure 1: PRISMA 2021 Flow Diagram: Article Inclusion and Exclusion Protocol

and policy reports published in English.
Google Scholar yielded the largest number of  papers 
(n=198).  9 duplicates and 4 grey literature  were removed. 

Similarly, 17 compliance or Emissions Trading Systems 
(ETS) papers were also removed. This results in the final 
sample of  742 papers. Table 3 reports a summary of  

Table 3: Summary of  Paper Categories per Country
Country Peer-reviewed paper Conference Proceedings Industry & Policy Reports Sub-Total
South Africa  11 6 47 64
Kenya  26 15 17 58
Tanzania 13 9 24 46



Pa
ge

 
22

7

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

Ethiopia 10 4 14 28
Uganda 9 2 6 17
Rwanda 21 7 18 46
Zambia 11 5 13 29
Zimbabwe 16 8 23 47
Ghana 18 7 20 45
Senegal 12 2 12 26
Ivory Coast 7 1 15 23
Cameroon 5 0 11 16
Congo DRC 9 3 11 23
Mozambique 6 3 6 15
Madagascar 7 4 11 22
Gabon 4 0 10 14 
Nigeria 34 11 41 86
Egypt 20 9 34 63
Tunisia 14 6 13 33
Morocco 17 9 15 41
Total: N                                                                                                              742

papers in each respective country surveyed in this study.
It is easy to see from Table 3 that industry and policy 
reports dominated the number of  papers surveyed in 
most countries in the sample. Grey literature, especially 
industry and policy reports, is vital in influencing the 
understanding and practices within Africa’s carbon offset 
markets. In contrast to peer-reviewed academic articles, 
grey literature offers timely, practical, and context-
specific insights that are crucial in a swiftly changing 
policy and market landscape in Africa. Reports from 
industry consultancies, registries, and carbon standard 
organisations frequently provide current data on carbon 
credit prices, issuance volumes, project pipelines, and co-
benefits, which are seldom found in academic publications 
(World Bank, 2023). Likewise, policy reports and white 
papers released by African governments, the African 
Carbon Markets Initiative (ACMI), and multilateral 
entities such as the African Development Bank (AfDB) 
deliver essential guidance on regulatory frameworks, 
benefit-sharing mechanisms, monitoring systems, and 
financing models that influence project feasibility (ACMI, 
2022; AfDB, 2021). In Africa, where carbon markets are 
still developing, grey literature often acts as the primary 
evidence base for policymakers, investors, and project 
developers, particularly in sectors such as forestry, 
cookstoves, and blue carbon (Huxham et al., 2023). 
Moreover, since many developments in African carbon 
markets are closely linked to international negotiations 
(e.g., COP processes), industry and policy briefs frequently 
serve as the initial sources to document changes in global 
standards and financing trends. Although this literature 
does not undergo the rigorous peer review typical of  
academic work, its frequency and accessibility ranging 
from annual flagship “state of  the market” reports to 
quarterly market trend updates and event-driven policy 

briefs, render it essential. Users are encouraged to cross-
reference multiple reputable sources to address concerns 
regarding bias or inconsistent methodological quality. 
In summary, grey literature addresses data deficiencies 
and offers actionable intelligence that supports the 
development and governance of  carbon offset markets 
in Africa.

Opportunities Gleaned from Literature
The literature underscores numerous opportunities to 
advance climate action in Africa by implementing carbon 
offset markets and related initiatives. The opportunities 
include the following:

Climate Finance and Employment
The Africa Carbon Markets Initiative (ACMI) outlines 
a potential path for expanding voluntary carbon 
market (VCM) activities, projecting an increase from 
approximately 22 million tonnes of  CO₂ equivalent 
(MtCO₂e) retired in 2021 to several hundred million 
tonnes of  CO₂ equivalent (MtCO₂e) annually by 2030 
to 2050. If  this anticipated growth is achieved with 
strong integrity and governance frameworks, it could 
yield billions of  dollars in revenue and create significant 
job opportunities (ACMI, 2022; ACMI, 2024–2025; 
Sustainable Energy for All, n.d.).

Nature-Based Solutions (NBS)
Africa’s diverse ecosystems, including forests, savannas, 
and blue-carbon systems such as mangroves and seagrass, 
present considerable opportunities for carbon mitigation. 
These nature-based solutions capture carbon and offer 
additional benefits for biodiversity and resilience. 
Successful community-driven models in Kenya, such as 
Mikoko Pamoja and Vanga, illustrate the potential for 



Pa
ge

 
22

8

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

achieving measurable social and environmental benefits 
(Wylie et al., 2016; Huxham et al., 2023; International 
Finance Corporation, IFC, 2023).

Energy Access and Health
Initiatives focused on clean cooking are crucial to Africa’s 
carbon markets. Reducing dependence on biomass 
fuels can provide significant health and gender benefits. 
Recent research suggests that methodologies aligned 
with integrity can enhance the environmental and social 
impacts of  these programs (Gill-Wiehl et al., 2024; 
Reuters, 2024/2025).

Energy Access and Health
Initiatives focused on clean cooking are crucial to Africa’s 
carbon markets. Reducing dependence on biomass 
fuels can provide significant health and gender benefits. 
Recent research suggests that methodologies aligned 
with integrity can enhance the environmental and social 
impacts of  these programs (Gill-Wiehl et al., 2024; 
Reuters, 2024/2025).

Market Architecture Reforms
The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market 
(ICVCM) has introduced Core Carbon Principles 
(CCPs), while the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity 
Initiative (VCMI) has established a Claims Code. These 
frameworks are designed to enhance buyer confidence 
and enable price premiums for high-integrity carbon 
credits. As of  May 2024, ICVCM approvals included 
programs responsible for nearly 98% of  carbon credits.

Challenges faced by Carbon Offset Markets in Africa
Corruption, Weak governance, and Limited transparency 
tend to reduce the quality and integrity of  carbon offsets 
in Africa. Intermediaries capture a significant share of  
carbon credit value, sometimes as high as 70%, leaving less 
funding for local communities (Pagop & Savard, 2024). 
Additionally, “carbon colonialism” emerges when foreign 
investors exploit cheap land for offsets, disadvantaging 
indigenous or local populations. This weakens trust in 
Africa’s carbon offset market system (ACMI, 2022).

Carbon Offsets Credit Integrity Challenges
Voluntary carbon markets face significant challenges 
regarding credit integrity, particularly in terms of  
additionality, baselines, leakage, and permanence. Recent 
analyses have revealed trends of  over-crediting in various 
methodologies, such as cookstove initiatives and avoided 
deforestation projects, often due to unrealistic baselines 
or inadequate monitoring (Probst et al., 2024; Gill-Wiehl 
et al., 2024). This has led standard-setting organisations 
to update methodologies to restore credibility and ensure 
credits reflect genuine climate benefits. Without strong 
credit integrity, the effectiveness of  carbon offset markets 
in Africa as a climate solution remains at risk.

Social Safeguards, Benefit Sharing and Carbon 

Colonialism
As part of  the VCMs, Carbon offsets also face 
challenges related to social safeguards and the equitable 
distribution of  benefits. Evidence from large-scale forest 
carbon programs, such as the Mai-Ndombe initiative 
in the Democratic Republic of  Congo, illustrates 
recurring tensions over Indigenous Peoples’ and Local 
Communities’ (IPLCs) rights, grievances, and benefit-
sharing arrangements (Rainforest Foundation UK, 
2020; CIFOR-ICRAF, 2024). The African Forestry 
Impact Platform (AFIP) bankrolled by European 
development finance institutions, Japanese oil interests, 
and an Australian investment firm, exemplifies green 
colonialism. Despite AFIP’s claim of  promoting “green-
based solutions,” in Africa, there is a worrisome trend 
of  exploitation and greenwashing that underscores its 
investments, stakeholders, and financial backers. AFIP’s 
first acquisition is Green Resources, a Norwegian 
plantation forestry and carbon credit company, is 
notorious for its history of  land grabbing, human 
rights violations, and environmental destruction across 
Uganda, Mozambique, and Tanzania. Other examples 
include the Kariba Carbon Offset projects in Zimbabwe 
(Vida, 2024), the Northern Kenya Grassland Carbon 
Project (Survival International, 2022) and the evictions 
in Tanzania’s Ngorongoro Area (Bariyo and Parkinson, 
2023). In all these situations, communities have frequently 
reported being excluded from decision-making processes, 
having limited access to revenues, and having insufficient 
grievance mechanisms. These findings underscore the 
importance of  incorporating robust social safeguards 
and anti-carbon/green colonialism measures to ensure 
that climate finance supports local livelihoods and rights.

Market Volatility and Demand Uncertainty
Following a significant increase in transactions throughout 
2021–2022, the Voluntary Carbon Markets (VCMs) 
encountered a deceleration in 2023–2024, characterised 
by a decline in trading volumes and a stabilisation 
in retirement levels. This fluctuation has amplified 
uncertainty for both project developers and investors, 
as buyer confidence becomes increasingly dependent 
on the perceived reliability of  credit and the changing 
requirements for corporate disclosure (Ecosystem 
Marketplace, 2023, 2024, 2025; Financial Times, 2024). 
The divergence in buyer expectations and the absence 
of  uniform global standards have exacerbated this 
uncertainty, highlighting the necessity for more definitive 
integrity signals and coordinated governance.   

Regulatory Complexity and Double Counting
Regulatory complexity continues to pose a fundamental 
challenge to the expansion of  VCMs (carbon offset 
markets) in Africa. The merging of  voluntary markets 
with compliance frameworks, particularly in relation to 
Article 6 of  the Paris Agreement, introduces challenges 
concerning accounting practices, the risk of  double 
counting, and the necessary adjustments corresponding 



Pa
ge

 
22

9

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

to national climate commitments (World Bank, 2024; 
Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative, VCMI, 
2023). Although guidance is progressively developing, 
the lack of  standardized regulations and the potential for 
conflicting assertions among nations and corporations 
persist in undermining confidence and investment. 
Consequently, aligning VCMs with national climate 
strategies is crucial to guarantee both environmental 
integrity and political legitimacy.

What the Evidence Says-Selected Cases from the 
African Region
Community Forestry and Smallholder Agroforestry-
Uganda
Community-based forestry initiatives have revealed 
both the opportunities and obstacles associated with 
smallholder participation in voluntary carbon markets. A 
notable instance is Trees for Global Benefits (TGB) in 
Uganda, which was initiated in 2003 under the Plan Vivo 
Standard. TGB has effectively facilitated the involvement 
of  smallholder farmers in long-term crediting schemes 
through agroforestry practices, resulting in the generation 
of  verified credits while fostering biodiversity and 
sustainable land management (Plan Vivo/ECOTRUST, 
2003). Nevertheless, critical evaluations raise concerns 
regarding the fairness of  benefit distribution and the 
relatively high transaction costs that smallholders 
encounter when engaging in carbon markets 
(Schreckenberg, 2011; Global Forest Coalition, 2020). 
Although TGB underscores the viability of  smallholder 
participation, it also emphasises the necessity of  creating 
inclusive systems that alleviate administrative burdens 
and guarantee equitable outcomes.

Blue Carbon Initiatives in Kenya
Kenya has emerged as a leader in blue carbon initiatives, 
exemplified by projects such as Mikoko Pamoja and the 
Vanga Blue Forest, which serve as global benchmarks 
for integrating ecosystem restoration with carbon credit 
systems. These projects prioritise the conservation and 
restoration of  mangroves, yielding climate mitigation 
advantages along with additional benefits such as 
improved fisheries, coastal protection, and enhanced 
biodiversity (Wylie et al., 2016; Huxham et al., 2023). 
Furthermore, they are distinguished by their robust 
community governance, with generated revenues allocated 
to education, water supply, and other local needs (GLF/
CIFOR, 2018). However, the issues of  governance and 
equitable benefit-sharing are crucial for their sustained 
legitimacy, as concerns linger regarding the fairness of  
resource distribution among the communities involved. 
These examples underscore blue carbon’s promise while 
emphasising the necessity for inclusive and transparent 
governance frameworks.

Cookstove Projects and Methodological Integrity
Enhanced cookstoves have historically been a favoured 
segment within voluntary carbon markets; however, 

recent empirical research indicates considerable over-
crediting associated with traditional methodologies. 
Investigations have demonstrated that the assumptions 
regarding stove utilisation and emissions reductions were 
overly optimistic, resulting in inflated credit allocations 
(Gill-Wiehl et al., 2024). In light of  this, standard-setting 
organisations and the Integrity Council for the Voluntary 
Carbon Market (ICVCM) have initiated revisions to 
methodologies, with new regulations focusing on metered 
usage and real-world monitoring to enhance precision 
(UC Berkeley, 2024; Reuters, 2025). These modifications 
are essential for reinstating environmental integrity and 
sustaining buyer trust in a prominent project category that 
directly impacts household energy accessibility and health.

National Rulemaking and Regulatory Frameworks
African nations are progressively working to create national 
frameworks that govern participation in voluntary carbon 
markets. For example, Kenya’s 2024 Carbon Trading 
Regulations, Zimbabwe’s Statutory Instruments (2023, 
2025), and Ghana’s Carbon Registry exemplify a broader 
continental movement towards formalizing access, 
approvals, benefit-sharing, and registry systems (Kenya 
Gazette, 2024; Veritas, 2023; Ghana GCR, 2024). These 
regulatory advancements address previous governance 
deficiencies, where inadequate oversight rendered 
projects susceptible to inequities and global criticism. By 
establishing definitive legal frameworks, these countries 
seek to enhance domestic control over carbon revenues, 
ensure compliance with national climate obligations, and 
foster trust among local stakeholders.

Where Consensus is Emerging
High-Integrity Architecture as a Prerequisite for 
Scaling Up
Within the voluntary carbon market (VCM) realm, there 
is a growing consensus that establishing a high-integrity 
architecture is crucial for rebuilding trust and driving 
substantial growth. The Core Carbon Principles (CCPs) 
set forth by the Integrity Council for the Voluntary 
Carbon Market (ICVCM), along with the claims 
framework of  the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity 
Initiative (VCMI) and the emerging national regulations, 
are progressively acknowledged as the predominant 
pathway forward (ICVCM, 2024; VCMI, 2023). Initial 
indicators are promising, with ICVCM declaring coverage 
of  the majority of  significant crediting programs and 
investors exhibiting renewed assurance. However, experts 
emphasize that reforms at the method level and reliable 
enforcement mechanisms are essential to ensure that 
integrity principles yield tangible climate impacts in the 
real world (Reuters, 2024).

Africa’s Strength in Nature-Based Solutions and 
Associated Benefits
Africa possesses a significant comparative advantage 
due to its extensive potential for nature-based solutions 
(NBS), especially in areas such as forestry, savannas, and 



Pa
ge

 
23

0

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

Table 4: Proposed Framework for Addressing Identified Gaps in Carbon Offset Markets 
Gap Framework Element Rationale & expected contribution
Design for consent 
and Equity

Embedding FPIC, transparent benefit-
sharing, grievance mechanisms, and 
independent monitoring ensures fair 
outcomes for Indigenous Peoples, Local 
Communities, and stakeholders in carbon 
offset initiatives.

Guarantees that carbon offset initiatives honor 
community rights, mitigate the dangers of  
"carbon colonialism," and bolster local legitimacy. 
Incorporating consent and transparency 
measures promotes equity and fortifies long-term 
sustainability (Rainforest Foundation UK, 2020; 
Kengoum, 2024).

Upgrade MRV 
Systems

Expanding the availability of  
cost-effective digital and metered 
Measurement, Reporting, and Verification 
(MRV) systems for cookstoves and 
renewable energy sources can improve 
the precision of  credits and leverage the 
capacity of  Africa's offset carbon market.

Transitioning from theoretical benchmarks to 
practical usage data mitigates over-crediting and 
enhances credit quality. Implementing digital 
MRV bolsters credibility and draws in purchasers 
seeking high-integrity credits (Gill-Wiehl et al., 
2024).

Price Discovery and 
Demand Signals

Establish transparent price-tracking 
platforms for Core Carbon Principles 
(CCP)–labelled credits, monitor the 
Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) 
guidance, and assess Africa’s project 
bankability implications.

It helps African developers predict changes in 
demand, mitigate market fluctuations, and offer 
reliable standards for negotiations.
Tracking the adoption of  CCP and the 
establishment of  corporate regulations improves 
investment preparedness and boosts buyer 
confidence (Ecosystem Marketplace, 2025; 
Reuters, 2024).

Clarify the Paris 
(2025) Agreement

Expand national registries and approval 
processes per Article 6 guidelines. Adjust 
international credit claims to align with 
evolving corporate claims standards, such 
as VCMI.

It avoids the issue of  double-counting between 
corporate purchasers and host nations' 
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). 
This enhances Africa's bargaining power 
in international markets and fosters greater 
alignment between voluntary and compliance 
markets (World Bank, 2024; VCMI, 2023; Kenya 
Gazette, 2024; Ghana EPA/GCR, 2024).

blue carbon ecosystems. These solutions can provide both 
carbon and non-carbon co-benefits, including biodiversity 
conservation, improved livelihoods, and enhanced 
adaptation strategies. However, for these projects to 
scale successfully, it is essential that the rights, consent, 
and equitable value-sharing with Indigenous Peoples 
and Local Communities (IPLCs) are integrated from the 
beginning (Rainforest Foundation UK, 2020; Kengoum, 
2024; Reuters, 2024). Without robust safeguards, there is 
a danger of  perpetuating extractive practices that could 
erode community legitimacy and foster what is termed 
‘carbon colonialism.’ Nevertheless, well-structured 
jurisdictional and large-land initiatives have the potential 
to serve as exemplary models of  integrated climate 
and development benefits, provided that governance 
frameworks emphasise fairness and accountability.
CONCLUSION
This study presents a systematic review of  carbon offset 
markets in Africa, conducted through a PRISMA-guided 
systematic literature review and a bibliometric analysis of  
peer-reviewed and grey literature published between 2000 
and 2025. The findings underscore Africa’s vast potential 
in carbon offsets, rooted in its biodiversity and natural 
resource endowment, while also unravelling persistent 

challenges that undermine the effectiveness and 
equity of  carbon offset markets in Africa. Governance 
deficiencies, corruption, lack of  transparency, and 
inequitable benefit-sharing remain major barriers to 
credibility and sustainability of  carbon offset markets 
in the region (ACMI, 2022; UNEP, 2022). Furthermore, 
exploitative intermediation and “carbon colonialism” 
have limited community participation and raised ethical 
concerns over land ownership and justice (Kabukuru, 
2023). Methodological weaknesses, especially in forestry 
and cookstove projects, have led to overestimation of  
emission reductions and compromised market integrity 
(Gill-Wiehl et al., 2024). However, notwithstanding the 
challenges, the literature also identifies key opportunities 
in carbon offsets, which include leveraging nature-based 
solutions (NBS), such as blue carbon and reforestation, to 
deliver co-benefits for climate, biodiversity, and livelihoods 
(Huxham et al., 2023). The study proposes a reform 
framework anchored in free, prior, and informed consent 
(FPIC), digital and metered measurement, reporting, and 
verification (MRV) systems, transparent carbon pricing 
mechanisms, and harmonization of  national registries 
with Article 6 of  the Paris Agreement (World Bank, 
2024; VCMI, 2023). Implementing these measures could 



Pa
ge

 
23

1

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

strengthen credit integrity, attract sustainable investment, 
enhance Africa’s position in global carbon markets and 
ensure that carbon trading contributes equitably to the 
continent’s sustainable development goals.

REFERENCES
ACMI. (2022). Africa Carbon Markets Initiative: Roadmap 

report. United Nations Climate Change Conference 
(COP27). https://africacarbonmarkets.org

ACMI. (2023). Narrative on African carbon markets. 
Africa Carbon Markets Initiative. https://
africacarbonmarkets.org/acmis-narrative-on-african-
carbon-markets/

ACMI. (2024–2025). Annual report on Africa’s carbon 
markets. Africa Carbon Markets Initiative. https://
africacarbonmarkets.org

African Development Bank (AfDB). (2021). Financing 
Africa’s Green Recovery: A Policy Brief. African 
Development Bank. https://www.afdb.org

Allen, M., Axelsson, K., Caldecott, B., Hale, T., Hepburn, 
C., Kendall, J., & Smith, S. (2020). The Oxford Principles 
for Net-Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting. University 
of  Oxford. https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/
publications/net-zero-carbon-offsetting-principles

Anderson, C. M., Field, C. B., & Mach, K. J. (2019). Forest 
offsets climate-change mitigation with conservation. 
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 17(6), 332–340. 
https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2058

Anderson, K., & Peters, G. (2016). The trouble with 
negative emissions. Science, 354(6309), 182–183. 
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aah4567

Bariyo, N., & Parkinson, J. (2023, June 16). The safaris 
and carbon-credit projects threatening the Serengeti’s 
Maasai. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/
world/africa/the-safaris-and-carbon-credit-projects-
threatening-the-serengetis-maasai-fed62644

Bastos Lima, M. G., Kissinger, G., & Visseren-Hamakers, 
I. J. (2021). National REDD+ governance in Africa: 
Actors, interests, and accountability. Forests, 12(2), 
152. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12020152

Bond, P. (2012). Trading in emissions, new enclosures 
and eco-social contestation. Journal of  Agrarian Change, 
12(1), 175–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-
0366.2011.00339.x

CIFOR-ICRAF. (2024). Safeguards and rights in jurisdictional 
forest carbon projects: African perspectives (F. Kengoum, 
Author). Center for International Forestry Research 
and World Agroforestry. https://www.cifor-icraf.org

Climate Focus & West African Alliance. (2022). 
Stakeholders’ perspectives on carbon & climate finance in West 
Africa: Barriers and opportunities. Climate Focus & West 
African Alliance for Carbon Markets and Climate 
Finance.

 de Freitas Netto, S. V., Sobral, M. F. F., Ribeiro, A. R. 
B., & Soares, G. R. d. L. (2020). Concepts and 
forms of  greenwashing: A systematic review. 
Environmental Sciences Europe, 32, Article 19. https://
doi.org/10.1186/s12302-020-0300-3

Donofrio, S., Maguire, P., Merry, W., & Zwick, S. (2020). 
Voluntary carbon and the post-2020 market. Forest 
Trends’ Ecosystem Marketplace. https://www.
ecosystemmarketplace.com

Ecosystem Marketplace. (2023). Voluntary carbon 
market insights 2023. Forest Trends. https://www.
ecosystemmarketplace.com

Ecosystem Marketplace. (2024). Voluntary carbon 
markets outlook 2024. Forest Trends. https://www.
ecosystemmarketplace.com

Ecosystem Marketplace. (2025). State of  the voluntary 
carbon markets 2025. Forest Trends. https://www.
ecosystemmarketplace.com

Financial Times. (2024, March 22). Voluntary carbon markets 
face fragmentation amid integrity concerns. Financial Times. 
https://www.ft.com

Gill-Wiehl, A., Probst, B., & University of  California, 
Berkeley. (2024). Assessing the integrity of  cookstove 
carbon credits: Evidence of  over-crediting. Renewable 
and Appropriate Energy Laboratory, University of  
California, Berkeley. https://rael.berkeley.edu

Gill-Wiehl, A., Wiehl, J., Kammen, D., & Haya, B. (2024). 
Pervasive over-crediting from cookstove offset methodologies. 
Nature Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41893-024-01234-1

Global Forest Coalition. (2020). Community Forest Governance 
and Carbon Markets: Critical Perspectives. Global Forest 
Coalition. https://globalforestcoalition.org

GLF / CIFOR. (2018). Blue carbon as a nature-based solution: 
Lessons from Kenya. Global Landscapes Forum & 
CIFOR. https://www.cifor-icraf.org

Gold Standard Foundation. (2021). The role of  voluntary 
carbon markets in achieving net zero. Gold Standard. 
https://www.goldstandard.org

Hamrick, K., & Gallant, M. (2017). Unlocking potential: 
State of  the voluntary carbon markets 2017. Forest 
Trends’ Ecosystem Marketplace. https://www.
ecosystemmarketplace.com

Huxham, M., Wylie, L., & Mangi, S. (2023). Community-
led blue carbon initiatives in East Africa. Marine 
Policy, 152, 105890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpol.2023.105890

Huxham, M., Mugo, J., Briers, R., & Mbeche, A. (2023). 
Community-based mangrove conservation and blue 
carbon in Kenya: Evaluating impacts and equity. 
Biological Conservation, 283, 110015. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110015

ICAP. (2022). Emissions Trading System: Status report 2022. 
International Carbon Action Partnership. https://
icapcarbonaction.com

ICAP. (2023). Emissions Trading System: Status report 2023. 
International Carbon Action Partnership. https://
icapcarbonaction.com

ICVCM. (2024). Core Carbon Principles and assessment 
framework. Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon 
Market. https://icvcm.org

International Finance Corporation (IFC). (2023). 
Nature-based solutions in Africa: Case studies and impacts. 



Pa
ge

 
23

2

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 221-232, 2025

International Finance Corporation. https://www.ifc.
org

IPCC. (2018). Global warming of  1.5 °C: Summary for 
policymakers. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15

IPCC. (2022). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation and 
vulnerability. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.
org/10.1017/9781009325844 

Kabukuru, W. (2024, April 10). Africa is chasing billions. 
D+C (Development + Cooperation). https://www.
dandc.eu/en/article/africas-drive-carbon-credits-
continues-gather-pace-despite-prospect-generating-
significant

Kongnso, M. E., Emmanuel, T. D., Moumbe, S. J., & 
Blanche, D. F. (2025). Access to Carbon Credits in the 
Waste Sector: What Opportunity for Municipalities 
in Cameroon?. American Journal of  Environmental 
Economics, 4(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.54536/
ajee.v4i1.3820  

Kongnso, M. E., Emmanuel, T. D., Moumbe, S. J., & 
Blanche, D. F. (2025). Access to Carbon Credits in the 
Waste Sector: What Opportunity for Municipalities 
in Cameroon?. American Journal of  Environmental 
Economics, 4(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.54536/
ajee.v4i1.3820

Kenya Gazette. (2024). The Climate Change (Carbon Trading) 
Regulations, 2024. Government of  Kenya. https://
www.kenyalaw.org

Pagop, S. C., & Savard, L. (2024, April). Voluntary carbon 
markets in Africa: A deep dive into opportunities and 
challenges (Policy Paper PP-05/24). Policy Center for 
the New South. https://www.policycenter.ma/sites/
default/files/2024-04/PP_05-24%20(Sabrina%20
Camelia%20Pagop%20%26%20Luc%20Savard).pdf

Plan Vivo / ECOTRUST. (n.d.). Trees for Global Benefits: 
Uganda. Plan Vivo Foundation. https://www.
planvivo.org

Probst, B., Gill-Wiehl, A., & colleagues. (2024). Revisiting 
carbon credit baselines: Evidence of  over-crediting in voluntary 
markets. University of  California, Berkeley. https://
rael.berkeley.edu

Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK). (2020). 
Ensuring community rights in forest carbon programs. 
Rainforest Foundation UK. https://www.
rainforestfoundationuk.org

Reuters. (2024, July 5). Carbon market reforms advance as 
ICVCM and VCMI launch new frameworks. Reuters. 
https://www.reuters.com 

Reuters. (2025, January 12). Carbon credit rules tighten for 

cookstove projects amid integrity concerns. Reuters.https://
www.reuters.com  

 Sani, J., Mallick, K. K., Sadhukhan, P. K., Banu, M. A., 
Shikder, R. R., & Biswas, T. K. (2025). Achieving 
Carbon-Neutral Construction: Global Trends and 
Bangladesh’s Sustainable Future. American Journal 
of  Environmental Economics, 4(1), 79–85. https://doi.
org/10.54536/ajee.v4i1.4167

Survival International. (2022, November 16). Carbon 
offset scheme makes millions from Indigenous land in 
Northern Kenya. Survival International. https://www.
survivalinternational.org/articles/carbon-offset-
scheme-makes-millions-from-Indigenous-land-
Northern-Kenya

Taskforce on Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM). 
(2021). Final report. Institute of  International Finance. 
https://www.iif.com

UNEP. (2022). Emissions Gap Report 2022. United Nations 
Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/
emissions-gap-report-2022

UNFCCC. (2015). Adoption of  the Paris Agreement (FCCC/
CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1). United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change. https://unfccc.int/
documents/9091

VCMI. (2023). Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative: 
Claims code of  practice. Voluntary Carbon Markets 
Integrity Initiative. https://vcmintegrity.org

Veritas Zimbabwe. (2023). Zimbabwe statutory instruments on 
carbon trading, 2023–2025. Veritas Zimbabwe. https://
veritaszim.net

Vidal, J. (2024, March 15). ‘We don’t know where the 
money is going’: The ‘carbon cowboys’ making 
millions from credit schemes. The Guardian. https://
www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/15/
money-carbon-credits-zimbabwe-conservation-aoe

Voigt, C., & Ferreira, F. (2016). Differentiation in the 
Paris Agreement. Climate Law, 6(1–2), 58–74. https://
doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00601004

World Bank. (2022). State and trends of  carbon pricing 2022. 
World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org

World Bank. (2023). State and Trends of  Carbon Pricing 2023. 
World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org

World Bank. (2024). Aligning voluntary carbon markets with 
the Paris Agreement: Article 6 guidance. World Bank. 
https://www.worldbank.org

Wylie, L., Sutton-Grier, A., & Moore, A. (2016). Blue 
carbon and community development: The case of  
Mikoko Pamoja in Kenya. Marine Policy, 72, 117–126. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.06.026


