Search

Avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management (AD/SFM) offset projects have developed piecemeal, lacking consensus standards and receiving only quite low carbon prices. The diverse forces project developers face have led to a complex geography of different offsetting standards and funding sources adopted by various projects. Combining and updating existing AD/SFM pilot project databases, we produce – to our knowledge – the largest publicly available dataset of such projects' approximate locations, containing nearly 800 worldwide. Using Cox proportional hazards models, we analyze the geography of these AD/SFM offset projects to understand better how different pressures project developers face in this weakly consolidated field have shaped where projects are more and less likely to be undertaken. We find that, at a fifty-kilometre-per-side hexagonal resolution, both AD/SFM projects tend to be located in areas with high above-ground biomass and high IUCN Red List species richness. Additionally, AD projects tend to be located in areas with stronger deforestation drivers. There is also a clear geographic specialization, with over 85% of the SFM projects in our dataset located in the United States. In contrast, AD projects have generally been established in countries that have engaged with the United Nations Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (UN-REDD) Programme or the World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. While AD/SFM projects may not be avoiding emissions at levels estimated in existing offset systems, they might still have a role to play in climate and habitat protection. Key policy insights Voluntary avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management offset projects tend to be located in areas of high biodiversity and carbon sequestration value, with avoided deforestation projects also located in areas with higher deforestation risks. When selecting project locations, voluntary avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management offset project developers face several constraints, in addition to the tradeoff between carbon values and opportunity costs. There may be further opportunities to incentivize biodiversity conservation in these projects, as they already appear to respond positively to relatively weak market signals encouraging threatened species protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The escalating annual increase in carbon emissions has posed a significant threat to the environment and human life. In recent years, numerous countries have implemented carbon trading schemes to combat climate change, encourage global cooperation, and promote reductions in emissions. Here, we aimed to explore and delve into the evolving landscape of carbon trading research through in-depth bibliometric and content analysis methods, identifying promising avenues for future research. We identified and retrieved publications on carbon trading and offset from 1993 to 2023 from the Scopus database. By examining 1, 994 articles indexed with the keywords 'carbon trading' or 'carbon offsets, ' this study offers valuable insights for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners working to mitigate climate change. Our findings revealed four primary clusters: Cluster 1 entailed carbon management and climate change mitigation, cluster 2 entailed innovations and policies in carbon management and sustainable energy, cluster 3 was related to policies related to carbon trading and markets, and cluster 4 was related to integrated energy systems, carbon trading mechanisms, and strategies for achieving a low-carbon economy. Globally, China stands out as a dominant contributor in carbon trading research, followed by the USA, UK, Australia, and Canada. Moreover, Indonesia (as the authors' country) demonstrates increasing involvement, evidenced by 19 publications and collaborations with 12 countries. These findings underscore the need for further, more in-depth research to identify the most effective carbon trading mechanisms specific to Indonesia's unique context. Thematic evolution analysis revealed that carbon sequestration and neutrality were prominent research topics in 2023. A new topic that has emerged is carbon trading policy, which indicates that much research on carbon trading is needed to regulate this matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to a new research model, adding iron to fish farms could capture at least 100 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, in aquaculture-intensive countries. This could be enough [...]

Corporate carbon neutrality pledges have been criticized for their lack of integrity, especially when they are primarily based on the simple purchase of carbon offsets without making any significant emission reductions. Neutrality pledges that are consistent with the goal of the ISO corporate net zero guidelines should be based on the reduction of all but the so-called unavoidable or residual emissions. The residual emissions should be neutralized not through reduction offsets but by actually removing the equivalent amount of emissions from the atmosphere. In this paper, I analyze whether climate pledges of 115 large companies, which cover all eleven Global Industry Classification Standards' sectors, follow the aforementioned net zero definition. The assessed criteria are (i) the type of pledge made, (ii) the definition of residual emissions employed and (iii) whether the company commits to neutralize its emissions exclusively with removals. Secondly, the assessment involves evaluating the companies' commitment to their net zero pledges by examining the residual emission level provided and determining if their climate goal extends to absolute scope 3 emissions. From the companies that had a net zero target (69) only 22% aimed to reduce emissions to a residual level and compensate with removals. The residual emission levels in the target year is specified by 29 companies and ranges between 0 and 80% (mean = 19.3%, median = 10%, n = 29). More than half of the residual emissions that exceed the median of 10% are claimed by sectors that are not classified as hard-to-abate such as information technology or communication companies. Key policy insights: Corporate net-zero goals appear more ambitious than the reduction and compensation commitments that companies are making Residual emission levels that determine the reduction obligations under a net-zero pledge should not be determined by corporates or technical experts alone Involvement of governments and civil society actors in participatory processes at national and international level is needed to determine residual emissions 'Fair contributions' and thus residual emissions should be informed by companies' impact on fulfilling the needs of the most vulnerable [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Energy-inefficient buildings are a major driver of climate change. The aging, energy inefficient housing occupied by low-income households in the US and other high-income countries is a driver of notable environmental and health disparities as well. Public policies for alleviating the financial and health burdens of energy inefficient housing have existed for decades, but fallen short of reaching most households in need. This paper proposes a promising new approach to filling gaps left by public programs -- one that relies on mobilizing the tools of private governance, carbon offsetting and the voluntary carbon market (VCM) to finance energy upgrades for low-income households. We develop a new and readily applicable methodology for calculating energy and carbon savings from efficiency upgrades based on readily accessible publicly available data. Tailored to the needs of estimating energy and carbon savings from efficiency upgrades to low-income units, rentals in particular, this methodology can be fruitfully deployed in monetizing the carbon savings from efficiency driven reductions in household energy use. Specifically, we propose packaging the emission reductions generated through energy savings as carbon offsets, then selling these offsets on the voluntary carbon market to generate financing for energy upgrades to low-income homes not served by public energy efficiency programs. Given the multiple economic and health co-benefits from low-income energy upgrades, we expect that carbon offsets generated through such upgrades will be attractive to many corporate and institutional offset buyers, particularly those who seek to fulfill climate commitments while also advancing economic and human development in their host communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nature-based climate solutions are a vital component of many climate mitigation strategies, including California's, which aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. Most carbon offsets in California's cap-and-trade program come from improved forest management (IFM) projects. Since 2012, various landowners have set up IFM projects following the California Air Resources Board's IFM protocol. As many of these projects approach their 10th year, we now have the opportunity to assess their effectiveness, identify best practices, and suggest improvements toward future protocol revisions. In this study, we used remote sensing-based datasets to evaluate the carbon trends and harvest histories of 37 IFM projects in California. Despite some current limitations and biases, these datasets can be used to quantify carbon accumulation and harvest rates in offset project lands relative to nearby similar "control" lands before and after the projects began. Five lines of evidence suggest that the carbon accumulated in offset projects to date has generally not been additional to what might have otherwise occurred: (1) most forests in northwestern California have been accumulating carbon since at least the mid-1980s and continue to accumulate carbon, whether enrolled in offset projects or not; (2) harvest rates were high in large timber company project lands before IFM initiation, suggesting they are earning carbon credits for forests in recovery; (3) projects are often located on lands with higher densities of low-timber-value species; (4) carbon accumulation rates have not yet increased on lands that enroll as offset projects, relative to their pre-enrollment levels; and (5) harvest rates have not decreased on most project lands since offset project initiation. These patterns suggest that the current protocol should be improved to robustly measure and reward additionality. In general, our framework of geospatial analyses offers an important and independent means to evaluate the effectiveness of the carbon offsets program, especially as these data products continue improving and as offsets receive attention as a climate mitigation strategy.

In the European Union, greenhouse gas emissions statistics indicate only a slight decreasing trend over the last number of years in emissions from agricultural sources. Unless drastic action is taken in other sectors, the European Union's 2030 and subsequent climate targets are unlikely to be met without greater reductions made in agricultural emissions. The policy instruments aimed at reducing agricultural emissions that are currently in place have proven to be ineffective; therefore, there is a need to look for new approaches towards bringing agricultural emissions down faster and farther. One obvious new approach is to integrate agricultural emissions into the European Union Emissions Trading System, which, so far, has proven very successful in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the energy and industrial sectors. Hardly any attention has been paid in the scholarly legal literature to the question of integrating agricultural GHG emissions into emission trading systems. This article seeks to fill this gap. This paper presents the concluding findings of a Dutch Research Council-funded research project that aimed to assess whether and under what conditions the European Union Emissions Trading System could play a role in compelling the agricultural sector to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. We answered this question by looking at lessons learned from existing examples in the world of market-based approaches to integrating agriculture into emission reduction schemes. To do this, we performed an ex-post assessment of three of the very few examples that exist in the world of such schemes in Canada, California, and Australia, followed by an ex-ante assessment of the prospect of including agricultural emissions under the European Union Emissions Trading System based on the practical experiences of those examples. In the ex-ante study, we evaluated how such inclusion could work, either indirectly, through allowing on-farm offset programs to reward increased carbon sequestration, or directly, by requiring farmers and/or other actors in the agricultural sector to surrender allowances for their direct emissions. As lawyers, we focused mainly on the legal considerations of such a proposition. Having conducted both the ex-ante and ex-post assessments, we conclude that introducing stricter legal instruments of one form or another that will reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon removal on agricultural land seems necessary for the European Union if it is serious about achieving its commitments under the Paris Agreement and meeting its obligations under its own Climate Law. The project makes a novel contribution to the legal scholarship in concluding that the most viable starting point for such stricter legislation would be to include methane and nitrous oxide emissions from livestock keeping and synthetic fertilizer use, respectively, under the European Union Emissions Trading System. To start with, this could be conducted by obliging meat and dairy processors and synthetic fertilizer producers to surrender allowances for the on-farm emissions associated with their products. This could be complemented by introducing a voluntary, but still highly regulated, carbon credits scheme that could encourage and reward farmers for reducing their own emissions and for transitioning to net-zero, and overall, more climate-resilient and environmentally friendly farming practices. Such credits could be offered for sale on the private carbon market as well as to Member State governments and the European Commission (through, for example, the Common Agricultural Policy, State Aid schemes, or the Innovation Fund). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a response to criticisms raised by Kian Mintz-Woo regarding carbon offsets. The author disagrees with Mintz-Woo's arguments and focuses on three main areas of disagreement: factual claims about offsets, justice in determining baseline actions, and individual moral responsibility in addressing climate change. The author defends the use of carbon offsets and emphasizes the need for further research on effective individual actions. The article also provides a list of academic publications by Luke Elson, an Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Reading, whose research interests include rational choice theory and ethics. [Extracted from the article]

Luke Elson defends carbon offsetting on the basis that it is not morally objectionable to shift harms or risks around. As long as emitting and offsetting does not increase the overall harms or risks--and merely shifts them--compared to refraining from emitting, he suggests there is no injustice involved. I respond in several ways, suggesting that the time delay involved in offsetting can increase these risks but, regardless, there is a defensible default which could justify refraining from emitting, even when planning to offset. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Carbon offsets either remove greenhouse gases from the air or prevent emissions thereof. They face questions both economic (is 'net zero' really reached?) and moral. I defend the moral permissibility of offsets. They likely shift climate harms around, but that need not be unjust--and in any case we cannot avoid doing that. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The urgent need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, remove carbon from the atmosphere and stabilize natural carbon sinks has led to the development of many carbon management measures, increasingly including voluntary carbon offsets (VCOs). We studied carbon management in universities, institutions with large carbon footprints and considerable influence in climate science and policy fora. However, concerns that VCOs may deter adopters (including universities) from adopting other carbon reduction measures and limit emissions reductions, for example, through moral hazard, have been raised but understudied. We compared the carbon management characteristics (priorities, policies, practices and emissions) of universities that did and did not adopt VCOs. We found adopters measured carbon emissions for longer, and had set targets to reach net zero earlier than had non-adopters. Adopters of VCOs also undertook more carbon management practices in both 2010 and 2020 than non-adopters. We also found that both adopters and non-adopters significantly increased their carbon management practices over the decade studied, but with no difference between groups. Gross CO2 emissions were reduced significantly over time by adopters of VCOs but not by non-adopters, whereas carbon intensity and percentage annual emissions reductions did not relate to adoption status. Consequently, our study showed no indication of mitigation deterrence due to adoption of VCOs at the universities studied. Rather, greater emissions reductions correlated with earlier net zero target dates, and a higher number of policies and carbon management practices. However, our study was constrained to universities that were affiliated with a national environmental network, so research beyond these organizations, and with individuals, would be useful. The survey was voluntary, exposing the study to potential self-selection bias so the findings may not be generalized beyond the study group. Finally, we found the carbon accounting method currently required of universities for scope 1 and 2 emissions may underestimate emissions reductions, particularly for adopters of VCOs. Augmenting the current location-based accounting method with market-based carbon accounts may overcome this. Adopters of voluntary carbon offsets (VCOs) undertook more carbon management practices than non-adopters. Evidence for mitigation deterrence was therefore not found (e.g. via moral hazard). Both adopters and non-adopters of carbon offsets used mitigation hierarchies found in carbon management literature (measure, reduce then offset). However, clarity on reducing emissions to as low as reasonably practicable is lacking in the literature. Reductions in scope 1 and 2 emissions may be underestimated, especially for adopters of VCOs who adopted more practices not included in current carbon reporting (e.g. purchasing renewable energy). This may be overcome by reporting market-based emissions alongside location-based emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Managing coastal wetlands is one of the most promising activities to reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases, and it also contributes to meeting the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. One of the options is through blue carbon projects, in which mangroves, saltmarshes, and seagrass are managed to increase carbon sequestration and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, other tidal wetlands align with the characteristics of blue carbon. These wetlands are called tidal freshwater wetlands in the United States, supratidal wetlands in Australia, transitional forests in Southeast Asia, and estuarine forests in South Africa. They have similar or larger potential for atmospheric carbon sequestration and emission reductions than the currently considered blue carbon ecosystems and have been highly exploited. In the present article, we suggest that all wetlands directly or indirectly influenced by tides should be considered blue carbon. Their protection and restoration through carbon offsets could reduce emissions while providing multiple cobenefits, including biodiversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nature‐based climate solutions (NCS) are championed as a primary tool to mitigate climate change, especially in forested regions capable of storing and sequestering vast amounts of carbon. New England is one of the most heavily forested regions in the United States (>75% forested by land area), and forest carbon is a significant component of climate mitigation policies. Large infrequent disturbances, such as hurricanes, are a major source of uncertainty and risk for policies relying on forest carbon for climate mitigation, especially as climate change is projected to alter the intensity and extent of hurricanes. To date, most research into disturbance impacts on forest carbon stocks has focused on fire. Here, we show that a single hurricane in the region can down between 121 and 250 MMTCO2e or 4.6%–9.4% of the total aboveground forest carbon, much greater than the carbon sequestered annually by New England's forests (16 MMTCO2e year−1). However, emissions from hurricanes are not instantaneous; it takes approximately 19 years for downed carbon to become a net emission and 100 years for 90% of the downed carbon to be emitted. Reconstructing hurricanes with the HURRECON and EXPOS models across a range of historical and projected wind speeds, we find that an 8% and 16% increase in hurricane wind speeds leads to a 10.7‐ and 24.8‐fold increase in the extent of high‐severity damaged areas (widespread tree mortality). Increased wind speed also leads to unprecedented geographical shifts in damage, both inland and northward, into heavily forested regions traditionally less affected by hurricanes. Given that a single hurricane can emit the equivalent of 10+ years of carbon sequestered by forests in New England, the status of these forests as a durable carbon sink is uncertain. Understanding the risks to forest carbon stocks from disturbances is necessary for decision‐makers relying on forests as a NCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Businesses are increasingly declaring their operations to be "carbon neutral" or "net-zero". But how real are these claims? We investigated the climate mitigation efforts of the eight leading universities in Australia and discovered that the actual emission reductions lag behind the net-zero rhetoric. In the last ten years, most universities increased energy consumption, while reported emissions plateaued. The energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of Group-of-Eight (Go8) universities were influenced by size and population growth, climate of the campus location, and energy efficiencies. The Go8 universities experienced, on average, a 25% increase in student numbers in the last decade, and most increased their energy consumption. However, Scope 1 (direct emissions) and Scope 2 (emissions from electricity consumption) remained stable for most universities from 2011 to 2019 and decreased on a per-capita basis, indicating some level of improved efficiencies. Almost all Go8 universities have net-zero commitments and aim to achieve this by similar measures: power purchase agreements (PPAs) for electricity consumption, and carbon offsets for remaining emissions. Most universities lack a strategy for direct or measurable targets regarding energy or emissions reductions along their value chain. Unlike the UK or other countries, Australia has no standardised emission reporting requirements for Scope 3 emissions (other indirect emissions). This has led to rudimentary and haphazard reporting, limiting comparability between universities. Only one university had a more complete Scope 3 inventory, and these Scope 3 emissions were five times greater than their combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions, indicating a potential for substantial under-reporting of emissions. This highlights the need for more rigorous, consistent, and sector-specific emissions accounting, especially on indirect emissions, and for an overhaul of net-zero accreditation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Energy-inefficient buildings are a major driver of climate change. The aging, energy inefficient housing occupied by low-income households in the US and other high-income countries is a driver of notable environmental and health disparities as well. Public policies for alleviating the financial and health burdens of energy inefficient housing have existed for decades, but fallen short of reaching most households in need. This paper proposes a promising new approach to filling gaps left by public programs — one that relies on mobilizing the tools of private governance, carbon offsetting and the voluntary carbon market (VCM) to finance energy upgrades for low-income households. We develop a new and readily applicable methodology for calculating energy and carbon savings from efficiency upgrades based on readily accessible publicly available data. Tailored to the needs of estimating energy and carbon savings from efficiency upgrades to low-income units, rentals in particular, this methodology can be fruitfully deployed in monetizing the carbon savings from efficiency driven reductions in household energy use. Specifically, we propose packaging the emission reductions generated through energy savings as carbon offsets, then selling these offsets on the voluntary carbon market to generate financing for energy upgrades to low-income homes not served by public energy efficiency programs. Given the multiple economic and health co-benefits from low-income energy upgrades, we expect that carbon offsets generated through such upgrades will be attractive to many corporate and institutional offset buyers, particularly those who seek to fulfill climate commitments while also advancing economic and human development in their host communities.

Abstract Background Two major factors that determine the efficiency of programs designed to mitigate greenhouse gases by encouraging voluntary changes in U.S. agricultural land management are the effect of land use changes on producers’ profitability and the net sequestration those changes create. In this work, we investigate how the interaction of these factors produces spatial heterogeneity in the cost-efficiency of voluntary programs incentivizing tillage reduction and cover-cropping practices. We map county-level predicted rates of adoption for each practice with the greenhouse gas mitigation or carbon sequestration benefits expected from their use. Then, we use these bivariate maps to describe how the cost efficiency of agricultural mitigation efforts is likely to vary spatially in the United States. Results Our results suggest the combination of high adoption rates and large reductions in net emissions make reduced tillage programs most cost efficient in the Chesapeake Bay watershed or the Upper Mississippi and Lower Missouri sub-basins of the Mississippi River. For programs aiming to reduce net emissions by incentivizing cover-cropping, we expect cost-efficiency to be greatest in the areas near the main stem of the Mississippi River within its Middle and Lower sections. Conclusions Many voluntary agricultural conservation programs offer the same incentives across the United States. Yet spatial variation in profitability and efficacy of conservation practices suggest that these uniform approaches are not cost-effective. Spatial targeting of voluntary agricultural conservation programs has the potential to increase the cost-efficiency of these programs due to regional heterogeneity in the profitability and greenhouse gas mitigation benefits of agricultural land management practices across the continental United States. We illustrate how predicted rates of adoption and greenhouse gas sequestration might be used to target regions where efforts to incentivize cover-cropping and reductions in tillage are most likely to be cost -effective.

Two types of perennial grasses offer the greatest global potential for producing lower-carbon aviation fuels, according to a new analysis. The study provides some of the most comprehensive evidence yet [...]

Carbon offsets are widely used by individuals, corporations, and governments to mitigate their greenhouse gas emissions on the assumption that offsets reflect equivalent climate benefits achieved elsewhere. These climate-equivalence claims depend on offsets providing real and additional climate benefits beyond what would have happened, counterfactually, without the offsets project. Here, we evaluate the design of California's prominent forest carbon offsets program and demonstrate that its climate-equivalence claims fall far short on the basis of directly observable evidence. By design, California's program awards large volumes of offset credits to forest projects with carbon stocks that exceed regional averages. This paradigm allows for adverse selection, which could occur if project developers preferentially select forests that are ecologically distinct from unrepresentative regional averages. By digitizing and analyzing comprehensive offset project records alongside detailed forest inventory data, we provide direct evidence that comparing projects against coarse regional carbon averages has led to systematic over-crediting of 30.0 million tCO2 e (90% CI: 20.5-38.6 million tCO2 e) or 29.4% of the credits we analyzed (90% CI: 20.1%-37.8%). These excess credits are worth an estimated $410 million (90% CI: $280-$528 million) at recent market prices. Rather than improve forest management to store additional carbon, California's forest offsets program creates incentives to generate offset credits that do not reflect real climate benefits.

The article offers an overview of China’s national cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas emissions launched in July 2021. Although generally in line with the design of similar systems (e.g., EU ETS) at their early stages (focus on coal- and gasfired power plants, free allocation of allowances), China’s ETS features a few distinctions. Notably, regulations provide for an increase in allocated allowances in certain cases and a fixed fine on installations emitting in excess of 120% of their allowance, while gas-fired plants are not sanctioned at all. The article presents the bottom-up allowance calculation method used by the regulator for various types of installations and engages with the China Certified Emission Reductions scheme, suspended in 2017 and expected to be relaunched in the near future – if with a limited industry scope covering forestry, renewable energy and methane utilization projects. The prospects of China launching an international carbon exchange and granting access to foreign buyers and sellers are also discussed.

Hydrogen is the gas of the moment: an abundant element that can be created using renewable energy, transported in gaseous or liquid form, and offering the ability to provide energy with only water vapour as an emission. Hydrogen can also be used in a fuel blend in electricity generation gas turbines providing a low carbon option for providing the peak electricity to cover high demand and firming. While the electricity grid is itself transforming to decarbonising, hard-to-abate industries such as cement and bauxite refineries are slower to reduce emissions, constrained by their high temperature process requirements. Hydrogen offers a solution allowing onsite production, process heat, with waste heat recovery supporting blended gas turbine generation for onsite electricity supply. This article builds on decarbonisation pathway simulation results from an ANEM model of the electricity grid identifying the amount of peak demand energy required from gas turbines. The research then examines the quantity, flow rate, storage requirements and emissions reduction if this peak generation were supplied by open cycle hydrogen capable gas turbines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Two major factors that determine the efficiency of programs designed to mitigate greenhouse gases by encouraging voluntary changes in U.S. agricultural land management are the effect of land use changes on producers' profitability and the net sequestration those changes create. In this work, we investigate how the interaction of these factors produces spatial heterogeneity in the cost-efficiency of voluntary programs incentivizing tillage reduction and cover-cropping practices. We map county-level predicted rates of adoption for each practice with the greenhouse gas mitigation or carbon sequestration benefits expected from their use. Then, we use these bivariate maps to describe how the cost efficiency of agricultural mitigation efforts is likely to vary spatially in the United States. Results: Our results suggest the combination of high adoption rates and large reductions in net emissions make reduced tillage programs most cost efficient in the Chesapeake Bay watershed or the Upper Mississippi and Lower Missouri sub-basins of the Mississippi River. For programs aiming to reduce net emissions by incentivizing cover-cropping, we expect cost-efficiency to be greatest in the areas near the main stem of the Mississippi River within its Middle and Lower sections. Conclusions: Many voluntary agricultural conservation programs offer the same incentives across the United States. Yet spatial variation in profitability and efficacy of conservation practices suggest that these uniform approaches are not cost-effective. Spatial targeting of voluntary agricultural conservation programs has the potential to increase the cost-efficiency of these programs due to regional heterogeneity in the profitability and greenhouse gas mitigation benefits of agricultural land management practices across the continental United States. We illustrate how predicted rates of adoption and greenhouse gas sequestration might be used to target regions where efforts to incentivize cover-cropping and reductions in tillage are most likely to be cost -effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Civil aviation's contribution to the increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is well established. Similarly, the tourism or leisure travel sector is known as the major driver of commercial air travel. While mitigation efforts to reduce the sector's impact, such as carbon offsetting, are available, availing of such efforts has cost implications for the traveler. This present research combined the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and the value-beliefnorm (VBN) theory to determine the influences on air travelers' willingness-to-pay (WTP) for green air travel. A total of 305 respondents were surveyed for this paper. The findings were generally consistent with literature on the applicability of TPB and VBN as influences on pro-environmental behavior. Results showed that attitudes and subjective norms significantly influence WTP. The results also established that attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control significantly mediated the effects of egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric values on air travelers' WTP for green air travel. Businesses may consider the findings in designing green products, crafting messaging calling for increased pro-environmental behavior, and evaluating the premium that customers are willing to pay to patronize green products or behave pro-environmentally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]