Every year, we spend a lot of money on electronic gadgets, meat, clothes, and much more.
The voluntary carbon market has a total size of less than two billion USD. The global market for electronic gadgets is around 500 times bigger. The global meat market is more than 700 times bigger. The clothes market is 900 times bigger. (Not to mention the global fossil fuels market, which is more than 3000 times bigger.)
Many of these massive markets wreak havoc on the planet. But while people tend to shrug off the damage caused, the relatively tiny market for carbon credits, designed to help the planet, gets slammed.
Why? It’s the size paradox.
As long as a market is tiny, nobody cares. In the decade between 2010 and 2020, the voluntary carbon market size stayed within half a billion, hardly growing. Critical voices were scarce.
When a market grows, it gets noticed and sparks the interest of analysts and journalists.
Once a market is mature, it gets properly regulated. Governments set clear standards to address their paradoxes. Since the economic interest of market participants is high, a lot of money is invested in seasoned lobbyists and polished PR teams.
Carbon credits, by contrast, are stuck between small and large size. The market has become large enough to excite the public – but it is still way too small for serious investments in proper regulation and seasoned PR professionals to defend it.
How do we break this paradox and give carbon credits the structure they need to grow responsibly?
Leave a Reply