In November 2024, at the COP29 climate conference in Baku, countries concluded nine years of negotiations that finalised the rulebook for United Nations carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. This framework for international carbon trading will remain unchanged until a scheduled review in 2028.

At its core, Article 6 was designed to enhance climate ambition by enabling countries1 to cooperate through the voluntary trading of carbon credits. In theory, such cooperation is meant to facilitate greater emissions reductions than countries can achieve independently. In practice, there are many factors at play which undermine this objective. This report examines the STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES of the Article 6 rulebook and considers its implications for carbon markets under the Paris Agreement.

The report evaluates the effectiveness of the Article 6 rulebook against four key criteria: the quality, transparency, accountability, and equity. These interrelated categories collectively define the robustness and credibility of Article 6 carbon markets and their effectiveness as tools to drive down global emissions.

This assessment finds that the Article 6.2 rulebook sets out a weak framework, scoring poorly across most of the evaluation criteria. Article 6.4 performs better overall than Article 6.2. Nevertheless, it still scores badly on permanence and equity. As the rules stand now, the Article 6 framework is simply not robust enough to ensure the transparent trade of high-quality carbon credits, with troubling ramifications for global climate action and, given the growing reliance on the crutch of carbon markets, our collective ability to tackle the climate crisis.

It is critical that the gaps and loopholes identified in this report are eliminated and resolved. For Article 6.2, these revisions must occur when the Article 6 rulebook is up for official review in 2028, which is the next time Article 6.2 rules will be negotiated. For Article 6.4, these revisions can already take place given the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body can continually make changes to its rules. Developed countries must prioritise domestic emission reductions without using Article 6 as a means to achieve their climate targets on paper: not only because developed countries bear a significant responsibility for historical, and ongoing, emissions that require domestic action first, but also in light of how poorly Article 6 carbon markets score.