Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Prior to implementation of California’s cap-and-trade policy the U.S. had no compliance market for management and mitigation of GHG emissions featuring offsets as a significant mechanism for compliance. The ARB’s offset program and protocols were developed based largely on lessons learned and methodologies developed in the Climate Action Reserve’s voluntary market offset program. Although the ARB has successfully adapted these voluntary market mechanisms for use in California’s compliance market, the transition from a voluntary market to a compliance-based market presents an opportunity to formalize a substantially increased role for forest-based biogenic carbon sequestration in GHG mitigation and management policies.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Albu M, Griffith A. Mapping the market: participatory market-chain development in practice. Small Enterpr Develop. 2006;17(2):12–22. CrossRef
Ascui F, Lovell H. As frames collide: making sense of carbon accounting. Account Audit Account J. 2011;24(8):978–99. CrossRef
Beach RH, Pattanayak SK, Yang J-C, Murray BC, Abt RC. Econometric studies of non-industrial private forest management: a review and synthesis. Forest Policy Econ. 2005;7(3):261–81. CrossRef
Buchholz T, Prisley S, Marland G, Canham C, Sampson N. Uncertainty in projecting emissions from bioenergy. Nat Clim Chang. 2014;4:1045–7. CrossRef
Butler BJ. Family forest owners of the United States, 2006. General Technical Report NRS-27. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 2008. http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr_nrs27.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr 2015.
California ARB. Compliance Offset Protocol U.S. Forest Offset Projects, California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. 2015b. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/protocols/usforest/forestprotocol2015.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2015.
CCR. California Code of Regulations. “California Cap on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Market-Based Compliance Mechanism”. California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter 10, Article 5. 2016. http://ccr.oal.ca.gov.
Charnley S, Diaz D, Gosnell H. Mitigating climate change through small-scale forestry in the USA: opportunities and challenges. Small Scale Forest. 2010;9:445–62. CrossRef
Ernst & Young. Tax Implications of GHG Emission Allowances. 2016. http://www.ey.com/US/en/Industries/Oil---Gas/Carbon-market-readiness---8---Tax-implications-of-GHG-emission-allowances. Accessed 18 May 2016.
Galik C, Murray BC, Mercer DE. Where is the carbon? Carbon sequestration potential from private forestland in the Southern United States. J Forest. 2013;111(1):17–25. CrossRef
Kaiser International Corporation v. Hearing Board of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, et al. Cal App LEXIS 3135. 2006.
Kerchner CD, Keeton WS. California’s regulatory forest carbon market: viability for Northeast landowners. Forest Policy Econ. 2015;50:70–81. CrossRef
Korhonen K, Hujala T, Kurttila M. Diffusion of voluntary protection among family forest owners: decision process and success factors. Forest Policy Econ. 2013;26:82–90. CrossRef
Lee CM, Lazarus M, Smith GR, Todd K, Weitz M. A ton is not always a ton: a road test of landfill, manure, and afforestation/reforestation protocols in the U.S. carbon market. Environ Sci Pol. 2013;32:53–62. CrossRef
Majumdar I, Laband D, Teeter L, Butler B. Motivations and land-use intentions of nonindustrial private forest landowners: comparing inheritors to noninheritors. Forest Sci. 2009;55(5):423–32.
Markowski-Lindsay M, Stevens T, Kittredge DB, Butler BJ, Catanzaro P, Dickinson BJ. Barriers to Massachusetts forest landowner participation in carbon markets. Ecol Econ. 2011;71:180–90. CrossRef
Marland ES, Stellar K, Marland G. A distributed approach to accounting for carbon in wood products. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang. 2010;15:71–91. CrossRef
McDermott C. Certification and equity: applying an ‘equity framework’ to compare certification schemes across product sectors and scales. Environ Sci Pol. 2013;33:428–37. CrossRef
Minton M, Weingart C. Legal and Tax Issues of Carbon Credit Trading, Environmental Services, Inc. 2016. http://www.esicarbon.com/Resources/legal-and-tax-issues-of-carbon-credit-trading.html. Accessed 3 June 2016.
Roseland Plantation, LLC v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29334, 9–10 (W.D. La. 2006).
Smith G. Forest Offset Projects on Federal Lands. Climate Action Reserve, Forest Protocol White Papers. 2012. http://www.climateactionreserve.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Forest_Offset_Projects_on_Federal_Lands.pdf.
US IRS. Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act. 2006. https://www.irs.gov/irm/part4/irm_04-061-012.html.
US IRS. U.S. Internal Revenue Service. 2008. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/0825009.pdf.
USSC, 1992. Wyoming v. Oklahoma 502 U.S. 437, U.S. Supreme Court. (1992). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/502/437/case.html.
- Challenging Issues
Tatyana B. Ruseva
- Chapter 5