In this interview, GGKP spoke with Sohna Ngum, Senior Officer for Gender, Conflict Management and Social Development at GGGI, to unpack how Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) is being integrated into carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.
Drawing on GGGI’s report “Perception and Readiness for Gender & Social Inclusion in Article 6”, this conversation explores current practices, key gaps, and practical steps to align carbon market activities with the Paris Agreement’s safeguard and GESI obligations.
1.To what extent does Article 6 under the Paris Agreement support gender equality and social inclusion?
At the global level, the Paris Agreement acknowledges in its preamble that climate action should respect human rights and promote gender equality and social inclusion. This creates a foundation for integrating these considerations into carbon market cooperation.
However, in practice, these principles are not consistently implemented. While the Article 6.4 mechanism includes a mandatory Sustainable Development Tool (SDT) to guide safeguards, Article 6.2 lacks a unified international framework or clear operational guidance.
As a result, different standards are applied, leading to fragmented and inconsistent approaches to GESI integration.
2.What challenges do seller and buyer countries face to integrate GESI considerations into carbon market mechanisms?
Seller countries often face a gap between policy and implementation. The safeguards measures are usually in place to meet donor’s requirements or minimum standards. For example, in Zambia, Article 6 practitioners highlighted that safeguards are compliance-driven and mandated through international standards or national requirements of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
Capacity constraints are another major barrier. Stakeholders frequently report limited expertise, tools, and institutional support to integrate GESI proactively.
On the buyer side, priorities tend to focus on environmental integrity such as emissions accounting and transparency. While GESI is generally recognized as important, it is often treated as a secondary element rather than a core requirement.
3.Are there positive signs of change regarding better integration of GESI in national climate finance policies and projects?
Yes, there are early signs of progress, particularly among some buyer countries.
A few countries are starting to integrate GESI into their climate finance strategies and explore incentives for projects that deliver stronger social outcomes. For example, the United Kingdom has incorporated GESI considerations into its international climate finance approach, and New Zealand has supported gender-responsive carbon projects
While these efforts are still limited in scale, they indicate growing awareness that carbon markets can deliver both climate and social benefits.
4.How can dialogue between buyers and sellers be improved to achieve tangible GESI outcomes in Article 6 cooperation?
The research highlights misalignment in expectations and understanding between buyers and sellers.
GESI is treated as a voluntary co-benefit rather than a legal obligation under the Paris Agreement. This leads to a shared tendency to settle for minimum “do no harm” safeguards instead of aiming for more inclusive and transformative outcomes.
Stronger and more consistent dialogue is essential. Both sides need to agree on and convey a common message: GESI is not optional, but fundamental to sustainable carbon market outcomes.
5.What practical steps can buyer and seller countries take to bridge the existing gaps toward an inclusive and high-integrity Article 6 cooperation?
Closing the current gaps will require more coordinated and deliberate action from both buyer and seller countries. A useful starting point is to move toward a shared baseline for safeguards. In practice, this could mean applying existing tools developed under Article 6.4 as a common reference for Article 6.2 cooperation.
For seller countries, progress will depend on strengthening national systems so that social and gender considerations are treated as part of standard procedures. This involves integrating safeguards into authorization processes, improving institutional coordination, and investing in skills and capacities. Establishing dedicated focal points or units to oversee these aspects can also help ensure that commitments translate into results on the ground.
Buyer countries have a role in shaping expectations. By embedding social and gender-related provisions into bilateral agreements, they can signal that these elements are not subsidiary. They can also support implementation by providing targeted technical assistance, capacity-building support, and incentives that encourage higher ambition.
An example of how these issues are being addressed can be found in the GGGI’s Carbon Transaction Facility, and especially its Article 6 Readiness Facility. The readiness Facility is a multi-donor fund designed to improve the capacity of host countries to participate in international carbon trading. The Readiness Facility provides support in four key areas:
– Strengthening Capacity: Enhancing awareness and confidence in Article 6 activities among seller governments.
– Improving Governance Frameworks: Establishing robust institutional arrangements for engaging in Article 6.
– Mitigation Activity Development: Originating high-quality, high-integrity mitigation activities aligned with both climate and development goals.
– Knowledge Sharing: Facilitating exchange of knowledge and experience between buyer and seller countries.
This research on GESI in Carbon Markets was made possible thanks to funding from the GGGI Article 6 Readiness Facility, supported by New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment, the Swedish Energy Agency, and the United Kingdom’s Department of Energy Security and Net-Zero.
