As we approach the end of COP30, the promise of a global carbon market under the Paris Agreement is taking shape—but slowly. After negotiators agreed to the Article 6 rulebook at COP29 in Baku, many expected COP30 in Belém to mark the start of large-scale implementation. Yet the mood remains cautious.
“It really felt a lot more like a COP of getting into execution,” says Frédéric Gagnon-Lebrun, Global Director of Climate Policy and Finance at South Pole, a leading carbon asset developer and climate consultancy, who attended the talks.
“2025 is the year during which the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM) became real… we now have the standards and the first methodology we can start using.” Still, he warned, “a lot of it lies with host country readiness,” pointing specifically to a lack of administrative capacity to issue authorizations for trades.
Under Article 6.4, a centralized UN crediting system is expected to become fully operational next year. But its success may depend on how it overcomes the controversies that plagued voluntary carbon markets. “Finding the right balance between methodological rigor and workability” is crucial, he said, arguing that excessive complexity could deter developing countries from participating.
A more delicate challenge is fairness. Under Article 6.2 (where countries strike bilateral carbon deals) the host nation cannot count exported credits toward its own climate targets. For poorer nations hoping to scale up their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the loss of claimable reductions raises equity concerns. Article 6 only delivers benefits if finance outweighs foregone mitigation. “The strategy around how to use Article 6 needs to be fully articulated around a very strong and robust plan for implementing the NDC,” Gagnon-Lebrun stressed.
Demand remains another uncertainty. “Over the long term, demand is the biggest challenge,” he said, citing a lack of post-2030 purchasing commitments. Aviation’s CORSIA program is currently the main buyer, and the EU has signaled future eligibility of Article 6 credits—“a strong vote of confidence,” he said. But large-scale investment requires long-term clarity.
Beyond markets, transparency itself may be standing in the way. The Supervisory Body’s meetings are livestreamed and open for public input. Yet, as a recent blog post from Finn Geis-Grundmann, Member to the Article 6.4 Roster of Experts notes on the new COP30 Information Integrity Initiative, “transparency is never neutral.” The author warns that calls for ever-more visibility risk paralyzing governance: “More transparency is like racing a scale of infinite degrees.”
It seems that for Article 6 to work, negotiators will need not only to ensure integrity, but also keep their sights on the end goal—a functioning carbon market that doesn’t need to be perfect to have a positive effect.
Read more: COP30: Negotiators Move To Retire Kyoto-Era Carbon Market By Late 2026
