Comparison of the Article 6.4 grievance process and the UN Green Climate Fund’s Independent Redress Mechanism

To illustrate the differences between the Article 6.4 grievance process and the UN Green Climate Fund’s Independent Redress Mechanism, we compared these two avenues for remediation with the UN Human Rights Council’s seven effectiveness criteria for grievance mechanisms as outlined in its Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. From this overview, the contrast becomes clear: the Article 6.4 grievance process performs significantly less well on all seven effectiveness criteria. The Article 6.4 Supervisory Body must therefore urgently rethink its approach to this crucial component of the 6.4 mechanism.

​​Recommendations for the key topics under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement ​

Prepared for the Bonn Climate Change Conference 5-15 June 2023 Carbon Market Watch welcomes the opportunity to provide input to the discussions on matters relating to Article 6.2 (plus one in 6.4) of the Paris Agreement ahead of the UNFCCC’s 58th session of the subsidiary bodies. Sequencing and timing ● A step-wise process consisting of clearly …

Blocked avenues for redress: Shedding light on carbon market grievance mechanisms

The standards bodies operating in the voluntary carbon market must ensure that climate projects take the rights and concerns of local and indigenous communities into account and offer them avenues for redress. A review conducted on behalf of Carbon Market Watch found that only one standard body, Gold Standard, provides appropriate recourse to file grievances …

The lengthened and stony road to Glasgow

A reminder of the tricky issues of agreement on global carbon market rules in the context of ratcheting up climate ambition Raising ambition is the primordial task for governments ahead of and at the next UN climate conference. But it will also be essential to finally agree on the rules that will govern global carbon …