Author
Listed:
- Ashley Colby
(University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
- McKenzie F. Johnson
(University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
- Courtney Hammond Wagner
(USDA Agricultural Research Service, Food Systems Research Unit)
- Chloe B. Wardropper
(University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
Abstract
Carbon capture and storage technologies are increasingly part of society’s multi-pronged approach to climate change mitigation. Sequestering soil organic carbon (SOC) through credits for voluntary markets has received recent attention as an avenue for carbon storage on agricultural lands. Similar to other payment for ecosystem services programs, technical and market uncertainties—in particular, estimating and measuring how much carbon is sequestered in a given location—create challenges for farm operators and investors. In the last five years, numerous startups, agricultural corporations, and nonprofit organizations have emerged as project developers aiming to enroll farmers in their programs to create and sell SOC credits via the adoption of soil conservation practices on farms. In this evolving context, we examine how project developers conceptualize the importance and validity of voluntary markets for SOC as a tool to address climate change. Drawing on interviews with 22 actors across 19 different organizations, with a primary focus on carbon sequestration project developers in the United States, we find that some respondents acknowledge concerns over cost, quality of carbon measurements, and barriers to inclusion. However, the majority invoke neoliberal market assumptions regarding market maturation and technology innovation to justify and reinforce the importance of voluntary carbon markets for SOC. We employ neo-Polanyian theory to argue that these responses demonstrate competing environmental discourses through which project developers promote market solutions while simultaneously providing points of resistance against them. Taken together, these perspectives are critical to highlight the contradictions within voluntary markets. Further, our results suggest that as constructed, voluntary carbon markets are unlikely to internally resolve issues of credit uncertainty and inequity in resource access.
Suggested Citation
Ashley Colby & McKenzie F. Johnson & Courtney Hammond Wagner & Chloe B. Wardropper, 2025.
"Market approaches to sequester soil organic carbon on farms: justifications and suggested transformations from embedded market actors,"
Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 42(3), pages 1553-1575, September.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:42:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-024-10694-w
DOI: 10.1007/s10460-024-10694-w
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:42:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-024-10694-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.