Geographies of Carbon Trading: Spatial Planning Strategies for Equitable Offset Projects = carbon trading systems, environmental justice, climate colonization, spatial planning

Environmental justice and neocolonial practices are deeply intertwined with the historical resource exploitation and ongoing inequities that take their roots from the global environmental challenges. As one of the contemporary challenges all countries suffer from, climate change is an urgent challenge of our time, causing disproportionate harm to both nature and human lives (IPCC, 2023). Aiming to overcome these inequalities, the United Nations (UN) introduced several frameworks, principles, and tools, and the carbon market mechanism is one of them. Carbon accounting mechanism is a financial tool that aims to balance the carbon emission of countries and compensate severe impacts of climate change on developing countries by channeling climate finance to help them implement adaptation and mitigation projects. The mechanism was introduced by the Kyoto Protocol, expanded through the private market actors, and recently advanced with the Paris Agreement’s Article 6. Even though the projects provided social and economic benefits for the developing countries by channeling foreign investment to their countries, on the flip side, considering their market-based nature, the carbon offset projects also have been criticized for perpetuating inequalities, having the risk of neocolonialism, and excluding local communities. Aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of carbon trading mechanisms, this research examines the context of Uganda. With favorable bureaucratic processes that are influenced by its colonial legacy and conducive natural environment, Uganda has become a hotspot for carbon trading projects over the last 20 years. In order to understand the operationalization processes, three different methodologies have been employed. Firstly, policy analysis has been conducted to understand how carbon markets have been integrated into land and environment management policies and spatial planning documents. Secondly, two contrasting case studies have been examined: the Kachung Forest Project (KFP) and the Trees for Global Benefits (TGB) Project. While the former is a top-down approach from supranational levels, the latter is considered a grassroots activity initiated by a local NGO, and their comparison presents vastly different outcomes of two different approaches. Lastly, semi-structured interviews are conducted with experts and researchers to understand the operationalization processes better. Drawing the lessons from the Ugandan experiences, this research examines how spatial planning tools can enhance the operationalization of carbon markets to deliver environmental justice and avoid colonial practices. The findings highlight the importance of policy-making processes on the multilevel structure, the need for inclusive stakeholder participation, and equitable land use policies.