sergeogrИзвестия Российской академии наук. Серия географическаяIzvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya2587-55662658-697510.31857/S2587556623040040UJEAGEsergeogr-2308Research ArticleЭкономика и рынки результатов использования природных решенийEconomy and Markets of Natural-Based SolutionsПриродно-климатические проекты в России: ключевые проблемы и условия успехаNature-Based Offsets in Russia: Key Challenges and Conditions for SuccessКуричевН. К.KurichevN. K.

Москва

Moscow

nkurichev@hse.ruПтичниковА. В.PtichnikovA. V.

Москва

Moscow

ШварцЕ. А.ShvartsE. A.

Москва

Moscow

КренкеА. Н.KrenkeA. N.

Москва

Moscow

Национальный исследовательский университет “Высшая школа экономики”; Институт географии РАНРоссияNational Research University Higher School of Economics; Institute of Geography RASRussian Federation202318122023874Специальный выпуск: Роль природных и антропогенных экосистем в реализации стратегии низкоуглеродного развития РФ и декарбонизации экономики страны619–636Copyright © Куричев Н.К., Птичников А.В., Шварц Е.А., Кренке А.Н., 20232023Куричев Н.К., Птичников А.В., Шварц Е.А., Кренке А.Н.Kurichev N.K., Ptichnikov A.V., Shvarts E.A., Krenke A.N.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://izvestia.igras.ru/jour/article/view/2308

В статье рассматриваются ключевые проблемы и условия успешного развития отрасли природноклиматических проектов (ПКП) в России. С учетом состояния и перспектив развития внешних рынков углеродных единиц, получаемых в рамках ПКП (добровольные углеродные рынки, национальные углеродные рынки, реализация проектов в рамках статей 6.2 и 6.4 Парижского соглашения) определены условия успешного выхода углеродных единиц от российских ПКП на мировой рынок. Представлены ключевые ограничения для внутреннего рынка углеродных единиц российских ПКП: отсутствие внутренних экономических стимулов для компаний к приобретению углеродных единиц и к инвестициям в российские ПКП, отсутствие национальных методологий реализации ПКП, правовые ограничения, отсутствие доступных инструментов оценки потенциала территорий для реализации ПКП, недостатки регулирования углеродного рынка на примере Сахалинского эксперимента. Показаны ограничения ведомственного подхода к развитию сферы ПКП, который приводит к несогласованным и непоследовательным решениям, не соответствующим реальным условиям на мировых рынках. Для снятия указанных ограничений необходимо создание центра компетенций по всему спектру вопросов, связанных с реализацией ПКП – от конкретных методологий отдельных проектов до научно обоснованных оценок их потенциала на уровне России. Рассмотрены два сценария использования ПКП для декарбонизации российской экономики: 1) преимущественно продажа российских углеродных единиц ПКП на внешних рынках с максимизацией экспортных доходов в среднесрочной перспективе; 2) развитие сферы ПКП преимущественно для внутреннего рынка для достижения углеродной нейтральности к 2060 г. Реалистичная и сбалансированная стратегия предполагает, что ключевыми покупателями углеродных единиц от российских ПКП на первом этапе должны стать экспортно-ориентированные российские компании, которые смогут использовать эти единицы для снижения углеродного следа своей продукции и выполнения корпоративных климатических стратегий.

The article discusses the key problems and conditions for the successful development of the nature-based offset projects (NBOPs) in Russia. The conditions for the successful entry of verified carbon units from Russian nature-based offset projects into the global market were determined considering the state and prospects for development of global carbon markets. The key limitations for the national carbon market for offsets are presented: the lack of internal economic incentives for companies to buy carbon units and to invest in Russian NBOPs; the lack of national methodologies for the NBOPs; legal restrictions for land-use; lack of available tools for assessing costs and profitability of NBOPs on given land plots; failures of carbon market regulation under the Sakhalin experiment. The limitations of the narrow agency-based approach to the development of NBOPs are shown. These limitations result in inconsistent decisions that do not fit real conditions in the global market. It is necessary to create a competence center to solve the issues of the NBOPs from specific methodologies of individual projects to science-based assessments of their total potential in Russia. Two scenarios of the use of NBOPs for decarbonization of the Russian economy are analyzed. Scenario 1 assumes large-scale sale of carbon units generated in Russian in foreign markets in order to maximize mid-term profit. Scenario 2 assumes the use of carbon units generated in Russian NBOPs mainly by Russian companies to achieve net zero by 2060. A realistic and balanced strategy assumes that the key buyers of carbon credits from Russian NBOPs in the first stage should be export-oriented Russian companies that can use these credits to reduce the carbon footprint of their products and implement corporate climate strategies.

природно-климатический проектуглеродные рынкистратегия низкоуглеродного развитияnatural climate projectcarbon marketslow-carbon development strategyВ данной научной работе использованы результаты проекта “Разработка методов долгосрочного анализа взаимосвязи социально-экономического развития России, климатических изменений, мер государственной политики за рубежом и внутри страныˮ, выполненного в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований НИУ ВШЭ в 2022 г.This work/article is an output of a research project implemented as part of the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University).ReferencesШварц Е.А., Кокорин А.О., Птичников А.В., Кренке А.Н. Трансграничное углеродное регулирование и леса России: от ожиданий и мифов к реализации интересов // Экономическая политика. 2022. Т. 17. № 5. С. 54–77. https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2022-5-54-77Arcusa S., Sprenkle-Hyppolite S. Snapshot of the Carbon Dioxide Removal certification and standards ecosystem (2021–2022). Clim. Policy, 2022, vol. 22, no. 9–10, pp. 1319–1332.Шварц Е.А., Птичников А.В. Стратегия низкоуглеродного развития России и роль лесов в ее реализации // Научные труды Вольного экономического общества России. 2022. Т. 236. № 4. С. 399–426. https://doi.org/10.38197/2072-2060-2022-236-4-399-426Blaufelder C., Levy C., Mannion P., Pinneret D. A blueprint for scaling voluntary carbon markets to meet the climate challenge. McKinsey Rep., 2021.Юлкин М.А., Дьячков В.А., Самородов А.В., Кокорин А.О. Добровольные системы и стандарты снижения выбросов парниковых газов. М.: Всемирный фонд дикой природы (WWF), 2013. 100 с.Buchner B., Clark A., Falconer A., Macquarie R., Meattle C., Tolentino R., Wetherbee C. Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2019. CPI, 2019.Arcusa S., Sprenkle-Hyppolite S. Snapshot of the Carbon Dioxide Removal certification and standards ecosystem (2021–2022) // Climate Policy. 2022. Vol. 22. № 9–10. P. 1319–1332.Conant R.T. Sequestration through forestry and agriculture. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change, 2011, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 238–254.Blaufelder C., Levy C., Mannion P., Pinneret D. A blueprint for scaling voluntary carbon markets to meet the climate challenge // McKinsey Report, 2021.Fan L., Wigneron J.P., Ciais P., Chave J., Brandt M., Sitch S., Yue Ch., Bastos A., Li X., Qin Yu., Yuan W., Schepaschenko D., Mukhortova L., Li X., Liu X., Wang M., Frappart F., Xiao X., Chen J., Ma M., Wen J., Chen X., Yang H., van Wees D., Fensholt R. Siberian carbon sink reduced by forest disturbances. Nat. Geosci., 2023, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-022-01087-xBuchner B., Clark A., Falconer A., Macquarie R., Meattle C., Tolentino R., Wetherbeeet C. Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2019. Climate Policy Initiative (CPI). 2019.Falkner R., Nasiritousi N., Reischl G. Climate clubs: politically feasible and desirable? Clim. Policy, 2022, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1967717Conant R.T. Sequestration through forestry and agriculture // Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. 2011. Vol. 2. № 2. P. 238–254.Girardin C.A., Jenkins S., Seddon N., Allen M., Lewis S.L., Wheeler C.E., Griscom B.W., Malhi V. Nature based solutions can help cool the planet – if we act now. Nature, 2021, vol. 593, no. 7858, pp. 191–194. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01241-2Fan L., Wigneron J.P., Ciais P. et al. Siberian carbon sink reduced by forest disturbances // Nature Geosci. 2023. Vol. 16. № 1. P. 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-022-01087-xGriscom B. Natural Climate Solutions. What are the natural sinks, what capacity they offer, how they can be maximized? In ECCB2018: 5th European Congress of Conservation Biology. Jyväskylä: Open Science Centre Publ., 2018. https://doi.org/10.17011/conference/eccb2018/108188Falkner R., Nasiritousi N., Reischl G. Climate clubs: politically feasible and desirable? // Climate Policy. 2022. Vol. 22. № 4. P. 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1967717Guizar-Coutiño A., Jones J.P., Balmford A., Carmenta R., Coomes D.A. A global evaluation of the effectiveness of voluntary REDD+ projects at reducing deforestation and degradation in the moist tropics. Conserv. Biol., 2022, vol. 36, no. 6, p. e13970.Girardin C.A., Jenkins S., Seddon N., Allen M., Lewis S.L., Wheeler C.E., Griscom B.W., Malhi V. Nature based solutions can help cool the planet – if we act now // Nature. 2021. Vol. 593. № 5878. P. 191–194. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01241-2IUCN. Global Standard for Nature-Based Solutions: a userfriendly framework for the verification, design and scaling up of NbS. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Publ., 2020.Griscom B. Natural Climate Solutions. What are the natural sinks, what capacity they offer, how they can be maximized? // ECCB2018: 5th European Congress of Conservation Biology. 12th–15th of June 2018, Jyväskylä, Finland. https://doi.org/10.17011/conference/eccb2018/108188Julkin M.A., D’jachkov V.A., Samorodov A.V., Kokorin A.O. Dobrovol’nye sistemy i standarty snizheniya vybrosov parnikovykh gazov [Voluntary Systems and Standards for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions]. Moscow: WWF Publ., 2013. 100 p.Guizar-Coutiño A., Jone J.P., Balmford A., Carmenta R., Coomes D.A. A global evaluation of the effectiveness of voluntary REDD+ projects at reducing deforestation and degradation in the moist tropics // Conservation Biology. 2022. Vol. 36. № 6. P. e13970.Michaelowa A., Censkowsky P., Espelage A., Singh A., Betz R., Kotsch R., Dzukowski T. Volumes and types of unused Certified Emission Reductions (CERs): lessons learned from CDM transactions under the Kyoto Protocol, transparency gaps and implications for post-2020 international carbon markets. Freiburg: Perspectives Climate Group Publ., 2021.IUCN. Global Standard for Nature-Based Solutions: a user-friendly framework for the verification, design and scaling up of NbS // IUCN: Gland, Switzerland. 2020.Müller B., Michaelowa A. How to operationalize accounting under Article 6 market mechanisms of the Paris Agreement. Clim. Policy, 2019, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 812– 819. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1599803Michaelowa A., Censkowsky P., Espelage A., Singh A., Betz R., Kotsch R., Dzukowski T. Volumes and types of unused Certified Emission Reductions (CERs): lessons learned from CDM transactions under the Kyoto Protocol, transparency gaps and implications for post-2020 international carbon markets. 2021.Overland I., Huda M.S. Climate clubs and carbon border adjustments: a review. Environ. Res. Lett., 2022, vol. 17, no. 9, p. 093T005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac8da8Müller B., Michaelowa A. How to operationalize accounting under Article 6 market mechanisms of the Paris Agreement // Climate Policy. 2019. Vol. 19. № 7. P. 812–819. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1599803Pan C., Shrestha A., Innes J.L., Zhou G., Li N., Li J., He Y., Sheng Ch., Niles J.-O., Wang G. Key challenges and approaches to addressing barriers in forest carbon offset projects. J. For. Res., 2022, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 1109–1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-022-01488-zOverland I., Huda M.S. Climate clubs and carbon border adjustments: a review // Environ. Res. Lett. 2022. Vol. 17. № 9. P. 093005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac8da8Paulsson E. A review of the CDM literature: from fine-tuning to critical scrutiny? Int. Environ. Agreem.: Politics Law Econ., 2009, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 63–80.Pan C., Shrestha A., Innes J.L. et al. Key challenges and approaches to addressing barriers in forest carbon offset projects // J. of Forestry Research. 2022. Vol. 33. № 4. P. 1109–1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-022-01488-zPitman N. Social and Biodiversity Impact Assessment Manual for REDD+ Projects: Part 3 – Biodiversity Impact Assessment Toolbox. Washington, DC: Forest Trends, Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance, Rainforest Alliance and Fauna & Flora International, 2011. 50 p.Paulsson E. A review of the CDM literature: from fine-tuning to critical scrutiny? // Int. Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. 2009. Vol. 9. № 1. P. 63–80.Qui K. The future of the Clean Development Mechanism under a new regime of higher climate ambition. New York: EDF, 2018. 27 p.Pitman N. Social and Biodiversity Impact Assessment Manual for REDD+ Projects: Part 3 – Biodiversity Impact Assessment Toolbox // Forest Trends, Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance, Rainforest Alliance and Fauna & Flora Int. USA, Washington, DC. 2011.Rautio P., Lideskog H., Bergsten U., Karlberg M. Lean forestry – A paradigm shift from economies of scale to precise and sustainable use of ecosystem services in forests. For. Ecol. Manag., 2023, vol. 530, p. 120766.Qui K. The future of the Clean Development Mechanism under a new regime of higher climate ambition // Environmental Defense Fund. 2018.Richards M. Social and Biodiversity Impact Assessment (SBIA) Manual for REDD+ Projects: Part 2 – Social Impact Assessment Toolbox. Washington, DC: Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance and Forest Trends with Rainforest Alliance and Fauna & Flora International, 2011. 71 p.Rautio P., Lideskog H., Bergsten U., Karlberg M. Lean forestry–A paradigm shift from economies of scale to precise and sustainable use of ecosystem services in forests // Forest Ecology and Management. 2023. Vol. 530. P. 120766.Richards M., Panfil S.N. Social and Biodiversity Impact Assessment (SBIA) Manual for REDD+ Projects: Part 1 Version 2 – Core Guidance for Project Proponents. Washington, DC: Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance, Forest Trends, Fauna & Flora International, and Rainforest Alliance, 2011. 89 p.Richards M. Social and Biodiversity Impact Assessment (SBIA) Manual for REDD+ Projects: P. 2 – Social Impact Assessment Toolbox // Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance and Forest Trends with Rainforest Alliance and Fauna & Flora Int. Washington, DC. 2011.Schepaschenko D., Moltchanova E., Fedorov S., Karminov V., Ontikov P., Santoro M., See L., Kositsyn V., Shvidenko A., Romanovskaya A., Korotkov V., Lesiv M., Bartalev S., Fritz S., Shchepashchenko M., Kraxner F. Russian forest sequesters substantially more carbon than previously reported. Sci. Rep., 2021, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92152-9Richards M., Panfil S.N. Social and Biodiversity Impact Assessment (SBIA) Manual for REDD+ Projects: Part 1 – Core Guidance for Project Proponents // Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance, Forest Trends, Fauna & Flora Int., and Rainforest Alliance. Washington, DC. 2011.Schneider L., La Hoz Theuer S., Howard A., Kizzier K., Cames M. Outside in? Using international carbon markets for mitigation not covered by nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. Clim. Policy, 2020, vol. 20, no. 1. pp. 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1674628Schepaschenko D., Moltchanova E., Fedorov S. et al. Russian forest sequesters substantially more carbon than previously reported // Scientific Reports. 2021. Vol. 11. № 1. P. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92152-9Scott N., Fitzgerald S., Keshav S. Cambridge Zero Policy Forum Discussion Paper: Carbon Offsetting and Naturebased Solutions to Climate Change. Cambridge Open Engage, 2021. https://doi.org/10.33774/coe-2021-gwq9wSchneider L., La Hoz Theuer S., Howard A., Kizzier K., Cames M. Outside in? Using international carbon markets for mitigation not covered by nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement // Climate Policy. 2020. Vol. 20. № 1. P. 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1674628Seddon N., Sengupta S., García-Espinosa M., Hauler I., Herr D., Rizvi A.R. Nature-based Solutions in Nationally Determined Contributions: Synthesis and recommendations for enhancing climate ambition and action by 2020. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Publ.; Oxford, UK: OUP, 2019.Scott N., Fitzgerald S., Keshav S. Cambridge Zero Policy Forum Discussion Paper: Carbon Offsetting and Nature-based Solutions to Climate Change // Cambridge Open Engage. WP. 2021. https://doi.org/10.33774/coe-2021-gwq9wShvarts E.A., Kokorin A.O., Ptichnikov A.V., Krenke A.N. Cross-Border Carbon Regulation and Forests in Russia: From Expectations and Myth to Realization of Interests. Ekonom. Politika, 2022, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 54–77. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2022-5-54-77Seddon N., Sengupta S., García-Espinosa M., Hauler I., Herr D., Rizvi A.R. Nature-based Solutions in Nationally Determined Contributions: Synthesis and recommendations for enhancing climate ambition and action by 2020. Gland, Switzerland and Oxford, UK: IUCN and Univ. of Oxford, 2019.Shvarts E.A., Ptichnikov A.V. Low-carbon development strategy of Russia and the role of forests in its implementation. Nauch. Tr. Vol’n. Ekonom. Obshch. Rossii, 2022, vol. 236, no. 4, pp. 399–426. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.38197/2072-2060-2022-236-4-399-426Verkerk P.J., Costanza R., Hetemäki L., Kubiszewski I., Leskinen P., Nabuurs G.J., Potočnik J., Palahí M. Climatesmart forestry: the missing link // Forest Policy and Economics. 2020. Vol. 115. P. 102164.Verkerk P.J., Costanza R., Hetemäki L., Kubiszewski I., Leskinen P., Nabuurs G.J., Potočnik J., Palahí M. Climate-smart forestry: the missing link. For. Policy Econ., 2020, vol. 115, p. 102164.Walker W.S., Gorelik S.R., Cook-Patton S.C., Baccini A., Farina M.K., Solvik K.K., Ellis P.W., Sanderman J., Houghton R.A., Leavitt S.M., Schwalm C.R., Griscom B.W. The global potential for increased storage of carbon on land // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2022. Vol. 119. № 23. P. e2111312119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2111312119Walker W.S., Gorelik S.R., Cook-Patton S.C., Baccini A., Farina M.K., Solvik K.K., Ellis P.W., Sanderman J., Houghton R.A., Leavitt S.M., Schwalm C.R.,Weatherall A., Nabuurs G.J., Velikova V. et al. Defining Climate-Smart Forestry. In: Climate-Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions. 2022. P. 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80767-2_2Griscom B.W. The global potential for increased storage of carbon on land. PNAS, 2022, vol. 119, no. 23, p. e2111312119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2111312119West T.A., Börner J., Sills E.O., Kontoleon A. Overstated carbon emission reductions from voluntary REDD+ projects in the Brazilian Amazon // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2020. Vol. 117. № 39. P. 24T188–24T194.Weatherall A., Nabuurs G.J., Velikova V., Santopuoli G., Neroj B., Bowditch E., Temperli Ch., Binder F., Ditmarová L., Jamnická G., Lesinski J., La Porta N., Pach M., Panzacchi P., Sarginci M., Serengil Yu., Tognetti R. Defining Climate-Smart Forestry. In Climate-Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions. Tognetti R., Smith M., Panzacchi P., Eds. New York, Cham: Springer, 2022, pp. 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80767-2_2West T.A., Wunder S., Sills E.O., Börner J., Rifai S.W., Neidermeier A.N., Kontoleon A. Action needed to make carbon offsets from tropical forest conservation work for climate change mitigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.03354. 2023.West T.A., Börner J., Sills E.O., Kontoleon A. Overstated carbon emission reductions from voluntary REDD+ projects in the Brazilian Amazon. PNAS, 2020, vol. 117, no. 39, pp. 24188–24194. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004334117West T.A., Wunder S., Sills E.O., Börner J., Rifai S.W., Neidermeier A.N., Kontoleon A. Action needed to make carbon offsets from tropical forest conservation work for climate change mitigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.03354, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.03354West T.A., Wunder S., Sills E.O., Börner J., Rifai S.W., Neidermeier A.N., Kontoleon A. Action needed to make carbon offsets from tropical forest conservation work for climate change mitigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.03354, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.03354

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.