COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, proved a landmark moment in the development of a global carbon market. Agreements were made on finalising a rulebook that would allow organisations to offset their carbon emissions by buying carbon credits from entities that are actively reducing emissions.
Our COP29 delegate, Issi Steeley, followed the progress of carbon markets through Article 6.4 closely. Since then she was invited to attend the United Nations Global DNA Forum as a virtual delegate. Here she talks about her experience and explains more about the history and challenges of carbon markets.
At first glance, international climate negotiations might seem all about complex rules and technical jargon – but behind the scenes, they’re deeply human. That was clear at the recent United Nations Global DNA Forum, where I joined as a virtual delegate representing the RINGO constituency (Research and Independent Non-Governmental Organisations). As a carbon removal scientist, I’ve been closely following Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement – a mechanism designed to build a credible global carbon market that can channel climate finance and drive real climate action.
This blog reflects on my experience at the Forum: the significance of carbon markets, the importance of building national capacity, and the moments of connection and solidarity that reminded me why inclusive, human-centred approaches matter just as much as strong policy design.
To meet the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C, global emissions must fall dramatically. But countries differ in capacity, resources, and timelines. Carbon markets, if well-designed, can help nations collaborate more efficiently: one country can fund mitigation elsewhere and count the resulting emissions reductions toward its own targets, provided these trades are robust, transparent, and avoid double-counting. That’s where Article 6 comes in:
The Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM), created under Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, is designed to establish a central, UN-managed carbon market. Its goal is to ensure environmental credibility, encourage international collaboration, and generate funding, especially for developing countries, to help fight climate change. Building on lessons learned from an earlier system called the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), PACM includes stronger rules, better oversight, and more safeguards to improve how the market works.
The CDM did help bring private investment into projects that reduced emissions in developing countries. However, it faced serious criticism for allowing projects that didn’t lead to new emissions cuts, for failing to consult affected communities, and for focusing investments within only a few countries and industries. PACM aims to fix these problems by introducing a Supervisory Body to oversee the system, requiring host countries to formally authorise and track projects, and making sure projects support each country’s climate goals.
PACM is designed to work in both voluntary carbon markets, where companies offset emissions by choice, and compliance markets like aviation’s CORSIA program or national carbon tax systems. This flexibility gives PACM the potential to raise significant funding for climate action. But for it to succeed, it needs strong participation from the private sector and, importantly, from governments in countries where projects take place.
Unlike the CDM, PACM gives host countries more responsibility and power to decide which projects are approved. This allows countries to align projects with their own climate and development goals. But it also creates challenges – many low and middle-income countries don’t yet have the tools, trained staff, or systems in place to properly review, track, and approve these projects. Without support, this could create a system where wealthier countries benefit the most, while others are left behind or are forced to rely on outside consultants.
Building capacity was a key topic at the first Global DNA Forum. This forum took place in Panama during the United Nations Climate Week and brought together Designated National Authority’s (DNA’s- are a government body or organisation designated by a country to oversee and manage the implementation of Article 6.4’s mechanisms) and constituency delegates (like me!) to discuss how to make PACM work in practice. Building capacity isn’t just a technical task, it’s central to whether the system works. Governments and stakeholders need access to training, funding, and tools to make sure projects are truly reducing emissions and that all countries can participate on equal terms. If this doesn’t happen, PACM risks repeating the mistakes of the CDM, where countries were pressured to approve low-quality projects just to receive funding.
In the end, PACM can only succeed as a trustworthy and fair system for climate finance if all countries have the chance to participate fully. That means integrity, fairness, and ambition must remain at the heart of the global carbon market.
While the Forum was focused on technical and policy details, there were powerful reminders throughout of the human side of diplomacy and of the deep relationships that underpin years of multilateral cooperation. Many of the delegates attending the DNA Forum have been working on Article 6 negotiations since as far back as 2016. Over nearly a decade, they’ve come to know one another not just as colleagues, but as collaborators united by a shared mission: to build a robust and credible global carbon market that can support real climate action.
One especially heartwarming moment came when the delegate from Colombia paused the formal discussions to acknowledge that it was the co-chair’s birthday. She invited everyone to sing Happy Birthday and the entire room joined in! A cake was even brought out! It was a simple gesture, but deeply meaningful in a space more often filled with legal clauses and policy debate. It reminded us that at the heart of these negotiations are people who have committed years of their careers and their passion to solving a global problem together.
Another touching example of this solidarity emerged during two separate interventions when delegates struggled to express themselves in English, the forum’s working language. Without any formal interpretation services available, another delegate stepped in both times to translate from French to English, allowing their peers to contribute fully to the discussion. These moments of spontaneous support were moving and illustrated the mutual respect among participants, but they also revealed the need for improved accessibility within these international forums. If participation in shaping the rules, and reporting grievances, of global carbon markets is limited by language, we risk excluding the very voices and communities on the frontlines of climate impact and mitigation efforts.
For me, the Global DNA Forum was a powerful reminder that the future of Article 6.4 isn’t just about technical frameworks or policy language, it’s about people. Building a fair and effective carbon market means creating space for trust, shared learning, and genuine collaboration. The small moments of solidarity I witnessed- whether it was someone stepping in to translate or a room full of delegates singing Happy Birthday- made it clear that real progress depends on connection. If we want global carbon markets to drive real climate action, we must ensure that all countries and voices are empowered to shape them.
Author: Issi Steeley, Carbon Removal Scientist & RINGO Delegate