Box ES.

1 / Carbon pricing in numbers

61 carbon pricing initiatives

implemented/scheduled

31 ETS and
30 carbon taxes

46 national,
32 subnational
jurisdictions

Covering 12 GtCO2e
(22% of global GHG emissions)

US$45 billion raised in

carbon pricing revenues in 2019

More than 14,500 registered crediting

projects to date, generating almost
4 billion tCO2e of cumulative carbon credits

Forestry sector credits make up 42%

of all credits issued in last five years
 Figure ES.1 / Carbon pricing initiatives implemented, scheduled for implementation and under consideration
(ETS and carbon tax)

Sweden Beijing
Newfoundland
Alberta and Labrador Norway
Finland Tianjin Saitama
Den­mark Tokyo
Germany
Shanghai
The Netherlands Hubei
Manitoba UK Chongqing
Estonia
Latvia Fujian
Ireland
Poland Guangdong Taiwan
Québec Ukraine
Luxembourg Shenzhen
Saskatchewan
Ontario RGGI Spain
Montenegro
Pennsylvania TCI Portugal
Prince ­
Virginia Edward Island France
Austria
Nova Scotia Slovenia
Catalonia Singapore
New Brunswick Liechtenstein
Massachusetts Switzerland

Northwest
Territories Canada

Iceland EU
British Republic
­Columbia Kazakhstan of Korea
Washington
Oregon
Japan
California
China
Turkey

Mexico

Senegal Thailand Vietnam

Colombia
Côte d’Ivoire
Indonesia

Brazil

Rio de Janeiro
São Paulo Australia

Chile Argentina South Africa

New
Zealand

ETS implemented or scheduled for implementation ETS and carbon tax implemented or scheduled
Carbon tax implemented or scheduled for implementation Carbon tax implemented or scheduled, ETS under consideration
ETS or carbon tax under consideration ETS implemented or scheduled, ETS or carbon tax under consideration
ETS and carbon tax implemented or scheduled, ETS or carbon tax under consideration

The large circles represent cooperation initiatives on carbon pricing between subnational jurisdictions. The small circles represent carbon pricing initiatives in cities.
Note: Carbon pricing initiatives are considered “scheduled for implementation” once they have been formally adopted through legislation and have an official, planned start date.
Carbon pricing initiatives are considered “under consideration” if the government has announced its intention to work towards the implementation of a carbon pricing initiative
and this has been formally confirmed by official government sources. The carbon pricing initiatives have been classified in ETSs and carbon taxes according to how they operate
technically. ETS not only refers to cap-and-trade systems, but also baseline-and-credit systems as seen in British Columbia and baseline-and-offset systems as seen in Australia. The
authors recognize that other classifications are possible.
 Figure ES.2 / Share of global emissions covered by carbon pricing initiatives (ETS and carbon tax)

25%
Share of global annual GHG emissions

61

20%

59
57

15% 46 48
41
38
37

32
10%
24

21
9 10 15 16 19
5% Number of
implemented initiatives

4 5 6 7 8
2
0%
1991

2001

2011

2021
1997

2007

2017
1995

2005

2015
1992

2002

2012
1996

2006

2016
1993
1994

2003
2004

2013
2014
1998
1999

2008
2009

2018
2019
1990

2000

2010

2020
Finland carbon tax (1990 ) Japan carbon tax (2012 ) Ontario CaT (2017 - 2018)
Poland carbon tax (1990 ) Australia CPM (2012 - 2014) Alberta carbon tax (2017 )
Norway carbon tax (1991 ) Québec CaT (2013 ) Chile carbon tax (2017 )
Sweden carbon tax (1991 ) Kazakhstan ETS (2013 ) Colombia carbon tax (2017 )
Denmark carbon tax (1992 ) UK carbon price floor (2013 ) Massachusetts ETS (2018 )
Slovenia carbon tax (1996 ) Shenzhen pilot ETS (2013 ) Argentina carbon tax (2018 )
Estonia carbon tax (2000 ) Shanghai pilot ETS (2013 ) Canada federal OBPS (2019 )
Latvia carbon tax (2004 ) Beijing pilot ETS (2013 ) Singapore carbon tax (2019 )
EU ETS (2005 ) Guangdong pilot ETS (2013 ) Nova Scotia CaT (2019 )
Alberta TIER (2007 ) Tianjin pilot ETS (2013 ) Saskatchewan OBPS (2019 )
Switzerland ETS (2008 ) France carbon tax (2014 ) Newfoundland and Labrador carbon tax (2019 )
New Zealand ETS (2008 ) Mexico carbon tax (2014 ) Newfoundland and Labrador PSS (2019 )
Switzerland carbon tax (2008 ) Spain carbon tax (2014 ) Canada federal fuel charge (2019 )
Liechtenstein carbon tax (2008 ) Hubei pilot ETS (2014 ) Prince Edward Island carbon tax (2019 )
BC carbon tax (2008 ) Chongqing pilot ETS (2014 ) South Africa carbon tax (2019 )
RGGI (2009 ) Korea ETS (2015 ) Northwest Territories carbon tax (2019 )
Iceland carbon tax (2010 ) Portugal carbon tax (2015 ) Mexico pilot ETS (2020 )
Tokyo CaT (2010 ) BC GGIRCA (2016 ) Virginia ETS (2020 )
Ireland carbon tax (2010 ) Australia ERF Safeguard Mechanism New Brunswick carbon tax (2020 )
Ukraine carbon tax (2011 ) (2016 ) Germany ETS (2021 )
Saitama ETS (2011 ) Fujian pilot ETS (2016 ) China national ETS (2021 )
California CaT (2012 ) Washington CAR (2017 )

Note: Only the introduction or removal of an ETS or carbon tax is shown. Emissions are presented as a share of global GHG emissions from (EDGAR) version 5.0 including biofuels
emissions. Annual changes in GHG emissions are not shown in the graph from 2015 onwards. In 2020, the Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction Regulation (TIER) replaced
the Alberta Carbon Competitiveness Incentive Regulation, which in 2018 had replaced the Alberta Specified Gas Emitters Regulation. The information on the China national ETS
represents early unofficial estimates based on the announcement of China’s National Development and Reform Commission on the launch of the national ETS of December 2017.
 Figure ES.3 / Prices in implemented carbon pricing initiatives

120 119 Sweden carbon tax Note: Nominal prices on April 1, 2020, shown for illustrative purpose
Carbon price (US$/tCO2e)

only. The British Columbia GGIRCA, Canada federal OBPS, Kazakhstan

ETS, Mexico pilot ETS, Nova Scotia CaT, Newfoundland and Labrador
PSS, Saskatchewan OBPS and Washington CAR are not shown in this
graph as price information is not available for those initiatives. Prices
are not necessarily comparable between carbon pricing initiatives
110 because of differences in the sectors covered and allocation methods
applied, specific exemptions, and different compensation methods.

100 Switzerland carbon tax,

99
Liechtenstein carbon tax
Denmark carbon tax
26 (fossil fuels),
Portugal carbon tax

90

UK carbon price floor,

Denmark carbon tax
80 22
(F-gases), Ireland carbon
Alberta TIER, tax (other fossil fuels)
Canada federal fuel charge, 21
Prince Edward Island carbon tax

Slovenia carbon tax

70 Finland (fossil fuels),
19
68 carbon tax Switzerland ETS,
(transport fuels) EU ETS

60 Finland carbon tax

58 (other 16 Spain carbon tax
fossil fuels)
Québec CaT,
15 Newfoundland and
Norway carbon California CaT
53 Labrador carbon tax,
tax (upper)
14 New Zealand ETS,
50 France Northwest Territories
49
carbon tax carbon tax

Beijing pilot ETS 12

40

10 Latvia carbon tax

33 Korea ETS Iceland carbon tax

9
(F-gases)
30 30 Iceland carbon tax (fossil fuels)
8 Massachusetts ETS
28 Ireland carbon tax (transport fuels),
BC carbon tax
South Africa carbon tax 7
Argentina carbon tax
(most liquid fuels),
6
Chongqing pilot ETS, Saitama ETS
20 Tokyo CaT
RGGI,
5
Shanghai pilot ETS, Colombia carbon tax,
Chile carbon tax Guangdong pilot ETS,
4
Hubei pilot ETS,
Norway carbon tax (lower), Singapore carbon tax
Tianjin pilot ETS, 3
10 Japan carbon tax Mexico carbon tax (upper),
2 Shenzhen pilot ETS,
Argentina carbon tax (fuel oil, Estonia carbon tax
mineral coal and petroleum coke)
1
Fujian pilot ETS, Ukraine carbon tax,
Kazakhstan ETS <1 Mexico carbon tax (lower),
0 Poland carbon tax
 Figure ES.4 / Carbon price, share of emissions covered and carbon pricing revenues
of implemented carbon pricing initiatives

130
Carbon price (US$/tCO2e)

120

Sweden
110 carbon tax

Switzerland
Liechtenstein carbon tax
carbon tax
100

90

80

Finland
70 carbon tax

60 France carbon tax

Norway
50 carbon tax

Denmark
carbon tax
Switzerland
40 ETS
UK carbon Alberta TIER Korea ETS
price floor Iceland
carbon tax
Canada Ireland carbon tax
30 federal
fuel BC carbon tax
charge
Spain Portugal Newfoundland
Québec CaT
carbon tax carbon Prince and Labrador Northwest
20
tax Edward carbon tax Territories
Island carbon tax
Latvia Slovenia
Estonia carbon carbon tax carbon tax New Zealand ETS
carbon tax EU ETS
tax Japan
10 Argentina Chile carbon tax California CaT
Massachusetts ETS carbon tax carbon
tax Hubei pilot ETS
Poland Mexico Ukraine carbon tax
carbon tax Colombia
RGGI carbon tax carbon tax
0

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ETS Carbon tax Share of GHG emissions covered in the jurisdiction

Note: Government revenues from carbon taxes, auctioned allowances and direct payments to meet compliance obligations. The size of the circles is proportional
to the amount of government revenues except for initiatives with government revenues below US$100 million in 2019; the circles of these initiatives have an equal
size. For illustrative purposes only, the nominal prices on April 1, 2020 and the coverages in 2020 are shown. The carbon tax rate applied in Argentina, Finland,
Ireland, Mexico and Norway varies with the fossil fuel type and use. The carbon tax rate applied in Denmark and Iceland varies with the GHG type. The graph
shows the average carbon tax rate weighted by the amount of emissions covered at the different tax rates in those jurisdictions. The middle point of each circle
corresponds to the price and coverage of that initiative.
 Figure 2.1 / Carbon pricing initiatives implemented, scheduled for implementation and under consideration
(ETS and carbon tax)

Sweden Beijing
Newfoundland
Alberta and Labrador Norway
Finland Tianjin Saitama
Den­mark Tokyo
Germany
Shanghai
The Netherlands Hubei
Manitoba UK Chongqing
Estonia
Latvia Fujian
Ireland
Poland Guangdong Taiwan
Québec Ukraine
Luxembourg Shenzhen
Saskatchewan
Ontario RGGI Spain
Montenegro
Pennsylvania TCI Portugal
Prince ­
Virginia Edward Island France
Austria
Nova Scotia Slovenia
Catalonia Singapore
New Brunswick Liechtenstein
Massachusetts Switzerland

Northwest
Territories Canada

Iceland EU
British Republic
­Columbia Kazakhstan of Korea
Washington
Oregon
Japan
California
China
Turkey

Mexico

Senegal Thailand Vietnam

Colombia
Côte d’Ivoire
Indonesia

Brazil

Rio de Janeiro
São Paulo Australia

Chile Argentina South Africa

New
Zealand

ETS implemented or scheduled for implementation ETS or carbon tax under consideration Carbon tax implemented or scheduled, ETS under consideration
Carbon tax implemented or scheduled for implementation ETS and carbon tax implemented or scheduled ETS implemented or scheduled, ETS or carbon tax under consideration
ETS and carbon tax implemented or scheduled, ETS or carbon
The large circles represent cooperation initiatives on carbon pricing between subnational jurisdictions. tax under consideration
The small circles represent carbon pricing initiatives in cities.
Note: RGGI = Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. TCI = Transportation and Climate Initiative. Carbon pricing initiatives are considered “scheduled for implementation” once they have been formally
adopted through legislation and have an official, planned start date. Carbon pricing initiatives are considered “under consideration” if the government has announced its intention to work towards the
implementation of a carbon pricing initiative and this has been formally confirmed by official government sources. The carbon pricing initiatives have been classified in ETSs and carbon taxes according
to how they operate technically. ETS not only refers to cap-and-trade systems, but also baseline-and-credit systems as seen in British Columbia and baseline-and-offset systems as seen in Australia. The
authors recognize that other classifications are possible.
Initiatives implemented or scheduled for implementation: National ETSs: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Kazakhstan,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Romania, and Slovakia. National carbon taxes: Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Japan, Singapore, South Africa, and Ukraine.
Both national ETSs and carbon taxes: Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the
United Kingdom. Subnational ETSs: Beijing, California, Chongqing, Connecticut, Delaware, Fujian, Guangdong, Hubei, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Nova Scotia, Québec,
Rhode Island, Saitama, Saskatchewan, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Tianjin, Tokyo, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington State. Subnational carbon tax: New Brunswick, Northwest Territories, Prince Edward Island.
Both subnational ETSs and carbon taxes: Alberta, British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador. Initiatives under consideration: National ETS or carbon tax: Austria, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire,
Indonesia, Japan, Luxembourg, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Senegal, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and Vietnam. Subnational ETS and/or carbon tax: Catalonia, Manitoba, Ontario, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Rio de Janeiro, São Paolo, and Taiwan, China.
 Figure 2.2 / Share of global emissions covered by carbon pricing initiatives (ETS and carbon tax)

25%
Share of global annual GHG emissions

61

20%

59
57

15% 46 48
41
38
37

32
10%
24

21
9 10 15 16 19
5% Number of
implemented initiatives

4 5 6 7 8
2
0%
1991

2001

2011

2021
1997

2007

2017
1995

2005

2015
1992

2002

2012
1996

2006

2016
1993
1994

2003
2004

2013
2014
1998
1999

2008
2009

2018
2019
1990

2000

2010

2020
Finland carbon tax (1990 ) Japan carbon tax (2012 ) Ontario CaT (2017 - 2018)
Poland carbon tax (1990 ) Australia CPM (2012 - 2014) Alberta carbon tax (2017 )
Norway carbon tax (1991 ) Québec CaT (2013 ) Chile carbon tax (2017 )
Sweden carbon tax (1991 ) Kazakhstan ETS (2013 ) Colombia carbon tax (2017 )
Denmark carbon tax (1992 ) UK carbon price floor (2013 ) Massachusetts ETS (2018 )
Slovenia carbon tax (1996 ) Shenzhen pilot ETS (2013 ) Argentina carbon tax (2018 )
Estonia carbon tax (2000 ) Shanghai pilot ETS (2013 ) Canada federal OBPS (2019 )
Latvia carbon tax (2004 ) Beijing pilot ETS (2013 ) Singapore carbon tax (2019 )
EU ETS (2005 ) Guangdong pilot ETS (2013 ) Nova Scotia CaT (2019 )
Alberta TIER (2007 ) Tianjin pilot ETS (2013 ) Saskatchewan OBPS (2019 )
Switzerland ETS (2008 ) France carbon tax (2014 ) Newfoundland and Labrador carbon tax (2019 )
New Zealand ETS (2008 ) Mexico carbon tax (2014 ) Newfoundland and Labrador PSS (2019 )
Switzerland carbon tax (2008 ) Spain carbon tax (2014 ) Canada federal fuel charge (2019 )
Liechtenstein carbon tax (2008 ) Hubei pilot ETS (2014 ) Prince Edward Island carbon tax (2019 )
BC carbon tax (2008 ) Chongqing pilot ETS (2014 ) South Africa carbon tax (2019 )
RGGI (2009 ) Korea ETS (2015 ) Northwest Territories carbon tax (2019 )
Iceland carbon tax (2010 ) Portugal carbon tax (2015 ) Mexico pilot ETS (2020 )
Tokyo CaT (2010 ) BC GGIRCA (2016 ) Virginia ETS (2020 )
Ireland carbon tax (2010 ) Australia ERF Safeguard Mechanism New Brunswick carbon tax (2020 )
Ukraine carbon tax (2011 ) (2016 ) Germany ETS (2021 )
Saitama ETS (2011 ) Fujian pilot ETS (2016 ) China national ETS (2021 )
California CaT (2012 ) Washington CAR (2017 )

Note: Only the introduction or removal of an ETS or carbon tax is shown. Emissions are presented as a share of global GHG emissions from (EDGAR) version 5.0 including biofuels
emissions. Annual changes in GHG emissions are not shown in the graph from 2015 onwards. In 2020, the Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction Regulation (TIER) replaced
the Alberta Carbon Competitiveness Incentive Regulation, which in 2018 had replaced the Alberta Specified Gas Emitters Regulation. The information on the China national ETS
represents early unofficial estimates based on the announcement of China’s National Development and Reform Commission on the launch of the national ETS of December 2017.
 Figure 2.3 / Prices in implemented carbon pricing initiatives

120 119 Sweden carbon tax Note: Nominal prices on April 1, 2020, shown for illustrative purpose
Carbon price (US$/tCO2e)

only. The British Columbia GGIRCA, Canada federal OBPS, Kazakhstan

ETS, Mexico pilot ETS, Nova Scotia CaT, Newfoundland and Labrador
PSS, Saskatchewan OBPS and Washington CAR are not shown in this
graph as price information is not available for those initiatives. Prices
are not necessarily comparable between carbon pricing initiatives
110 because of differences in the sectors covered and allocation methods
applied, specific exemptions, and different compensation methods.

100 Switzerland carbon tax,

99
Liechtenstein carbon tax
Denmark carbon tax
26 (fossil fuels),
Portugal carbon tax

90

UK carbon price floor,

Denmark carbon tax
80 22
(F-gases), Ireland carbon
Alberta TIER, tax (other fossil fuels)
Canada federal fuel charge, 21
Prince Edward Island carbon tax

Slovenia carbon tax

70 Finland (fossil fuels),
19
68 carbon tax Switzerland ETS,
(transport fuels) EU ETS

60 Finland carbon tax

58 (other 16 Spain carbon tax
fossil fuels)
Québec CaT,
15 Newfoundland and
Norway carbon California CaT
53 Labrador carbon tax,
tax (upper)
14 New Zealand ETS,
50 France Northwest Territories
49
carbon tax carbon tax

Beijing pilot ETS 12

40

10 Latvia carbon tax

33 Korea ETS Iceland carbon tax

9
(F-gases)
30 30 Iceland carbon tax (fossil fuels)
8 Massachusetts ETS
28 Ireland carbon tax (transport fuels),
BC carbon tax
South Africa carbon tax 7
Argentina carbon tax
(most liquid fuels),
6
Chongqing pilot ETS, Saitama ETS
20 Tokyo CaT
RGGI,
5
Shanghai pilot ETS, Colombia carbon tax,
Chile carbon tax Guangdong pilot ETS,
4
Hubei pilot ETS,
Norway carbon tax (lower), Singapore carbon tax
Tianjin pilot ETS, 3
10 Japan carbon tax Mexico carbon tax (upper),
2 Shenzhen pilot ETS,
Argentina carbon tax (fuel oil, Estonia carbon tax
mineral coal and petroleum coke)
1
Fujian pilot ETS, Ukraine carbon tax,
Kazakhstan ETS <1 Mexico carbon tax (lower),
0 Poland carbon tax
 Figure 2.4 / Carbon price and emissions coverage of implemented carbon pricing initiatives

130 Poland carbon tax Sweden carbon tax

Carbon price (US$/tCO2e)

Ukraine carbon tax Liechtenstein carbon tax

Kazakhstan ETS Switzerland carbon tax
Argentina carbon tax (fuel oil, mineral coal and petroleum coke) Finland carbon tax
120
Fujian pilot ETS France carbon tax
Mexico carbon tax Norway carbon tax
Estonia carbon tax Korea ETS
110 Shenzhen pilot ETS BC carbon tax
Japan carbon tax Iceland carbon tax
Tianjin pilot ETS Denmark carbon tax
Singapore carbon tax Portugal carbon tax
100
Hubei pilot ETS Ireland carbon tax
Guangdong pilot ETS UK carbon price floor
Colombia carbon tax Alberta TIER
90 Chile carbon tax
Shanghai pilot ETS
RGGI
Chongqing pilot ETS
80
Saitama ETS
Tokyo CaT
Argentina carbon tax (most liquid fuels)
70 South Africa carbon tax
Massachusetts ETS
Latvia carbon tax
Australia ERF Safeguard Mechanism
60
Beijing pilot ETS
Northwest Territories carbon tax
Newfoundland and Labrador carbon tax
50 New Zealand ETS
Québec CaT
California CaT
Spain carbon tax
40
EU ETS
Prince Edward Island carbon tax
Canada federal fuel charge
Slovenia carbon tax
30
Switzerland ETS

20

10

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000

Cumulative emissions covered (MtCO2e)

Note: The British Columbia GGIRCA, Canada federal OBPS, Kazakhstan ETS, Nova Scotia CaT, Newfoundland and Labrador PSS, Saskatchewan OBPS, and Washington
CAR are not shown in this graph as price information is not available for those initiatives. The carbon tax rate applied in Argentina, Finland, Ireland, Mexico and Norway
varies with the fossil fuel type and use. The carbon tax rate applied in Denmark and Iceland varies with the GHG type. The graph shows the average carbon tax rate ETS Carbon tax
weighted by the amount of emissions covered at the different tax rates in those jurisdictions.
 Figure 2.5 / Carbon price, share of emissions covered and carbon pricing revenues
of implemented carbon pricing initiatives

130
Carbon price (US$/tCO2e)

120

Sweden
110 carbon tax

Switzerland
Liechtenstein carbon tax
carbon tax
100

90

80

Finland
70 carbon tax

60 France carbon tax

Norway
50 carbon tax

Denmark
carbon tax
Switzerland
40 ETS
UK carbon Alberta TIER Korea ETS
price floor Iceland
carbon tax
Canada Ireland carbon tax
30 federal
fuel BC carbon tax
charge
Spain Portugal Newfoundland
Québec CaT
carbon tax carbon Prince and Labrador Northwest
20
tax Edward carbon tax Territories
Island carbon tax
Latvia Slovenia
Estonia carbon carbon tax carbon tax New Zealand ETS
carbon tax EU ETS
tax Japan
10 Argentina Chile carbon tax California CaT
Massachusetts ETS carbon tax carbon
tax Hubei pilot ETS
Poland Mexico Ukraine carbon tax
carbon tax Colombia
RGGI carbon tax carbon tax
0

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ETS Carbon tax Share of GHG emissions covered in the jurisdiction

Note: The size of the circles is proportional to the amount of government revenues except for initiatives with government revenues below US$100 million in 2019;
the circles of these initiatives have an equal size. For illustrative purposes only, the nominal prices on April 1, 2020 and the coverages in 2020 are shown. The carbon
tax rate applied in Argentina, Finland, Ireland, Mexico and Norway varies with the fossil fuel type and use. The carbon tax rate applied in Denmark and Iceland varies
with the GHG type. The graph shows the average carbon tax rate weighted by the amount of emissions covered at the different tax rates in those jurisdictions. The
middle point of each circle corresponds to the price and coverage of that initiative.
 2 | Regional, national and subnational carbon pricing initiatives 45

Figure 2.6 / Carbon pricing initiatives implemented or scheduled for implementation, with sectoral coverage
and GHG emissions covered

Washington Massachusetts Virginia EU** Kazakhstan

2%

20% 18% 30%

41% 33%
49% 50% 70%
67% 11% 71% 65%
34%

Switzer- Republic of
Canada**** RGGI land 8% Ukraine Korea Japan***

4%

33% New
Mexico Chile South Africa Singapore Zealand

20%
24%
37% 39%
50% 51%
85% 80%
46% 80%

California Colombia Argentina China* Australia

ETS implemented or scheduled for implementation Industry Buildings All fossil fuels (tax only)
Carbon tax implemented or scheduled for implementation Power Waste Solid fossil fuels
ETS and carbon tax implemented or scheduled Transport Forestry Liquid fossil fuels
% Estimated coverage Aviation Agriculture Shipping
Note: The size of the circles reflects the volume of GHG emissions in each jurisdiction. Symbols show the sectors and/or fuels covered under the r­ espective carbon pricing
initiatives. The largest circle (China) is equivalent to 13.2 GtCO2e and the smallest circle (Switzerland) to 0.05 GtCO2e. The carbon pricing initiatives have been classified in
ETSs and carbon taxes according to how they operate technically. ETS does not only refer to cap-and-trade systems, but also baseline-and-credit systems such as British
Columbia and baseline-and-offset systems such as in Australia. Carbon pricing has evolved over the years and they do not necessarily follow the two categories in a strict
sense. The authors recognize that other classifications are possible.
* The coverage includes the China national ETS and eight ETS pilots. The coverage represents early unofficial estimates based on the announcement of China’s National
Development and Reform Commission on the launch of the national ETS of December 2017 and takes into account the GHG emissions that will be covered under the
national ETS and are already covered under the ETS pilots. The sector symbol refers to the covered sectors in the national ETS or (one of the) ETS pilots. The national ETS
will initially cover the power sector only. The covered sectors vary per ETS pilot.
** Also includes Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. Carbon tax emissions are the emissions covered under various national carbon taxes; the scope varies per tax.
*** ETS emissions are the emissions covered under the Tokyo CaT and Saitama ETS.
**** The coverage includes both components of the Canada federal backstop system and the subnational carbon pricing initiatives.
Figure 3.1 / High-level example of how carbon crediting works

Business as
usual (BAU)

Emissions
Waste water BAU
emissions
plant, methane
is being vented

Time

Implementation of emission reduction project

Emission
reduction project Emission

Emissions
BAU levels
Methane captured reductions
eligible for
and combusted crediting
to generate Remaining
electricity emissions

Time

Issuance of carbon credits

Carbon credits
generation Crediting Carbon credits can
Emissions

Creation of carbon mechanism Carbon be sold as offsets

credits or to determine
credits equal to the RBCF payments
emissions reduced
in tCO2

Time
Figure 3.2 / Total credit issuance volumes by registry, sector, and region as of December 31, 2019

Industrial
gases
East Asia
& Pacific
CDM

Renewable
energy

Europe &
Central Asia
JI
Fugitive
emissions

VCS
North America
Forestry

CaliforniaA

GS
Energy
efficiency South Asia
Australia ERF

ACR
CAR Waste
Alberta B Latin America &
the Caribbean
China C
Fuel switch
SwitzerlandD
Republic of KoreaE Agriculture
J-Credit Scheme East Asia
& Pacific
British ColumbiaF Transport
JCM
QuébecG
Sub-Saharan
GuangdongH Manu­facturing Africa
FujianI
RGGI CCS/CCU
Middle East &
Beijing J North Africa
Other land use

A California Compliance Offset Program E Republic of Korea Offset H Guangdong Pu Hui Offset Crediting Note: To ensure consistency between the information presented from the different crediting mechanisms, the cut-off date for the data on the crediting mechanisms is December 31, 2019.
B Alberta Emission Offset Credit Mechanism Mechanism Only the largest independent carbon crediting mechanisms which issue credits that can be used for compliance obligations have been considered in this report. The authors recognize that
C China GHG Voluntary Emission Reduction Program F British Columbia Offset I Fujian Forestry Offset Crediting Mechanism numerous other independent crediting mechanisms exist that generate credits sold on the voluntary carbon market. Credits generated under the Saitama crediting mechanism, the Saitama
D Switzerland CO2 Attestations Crediting Mechanism G Québec Offset Crediting J Beijing Forestry Offset Mechanism forest absorption certification system, the Switzerland CO2 attestation crediting mechanism and Tokyo offset mechanism are not shown due to data limitations.
 Figure 3.3 / Annual number of projects and issuances of covered crediting mechanisms
for 2002–2019134

4,000 1,000,000
Number of projects

Volume (kton CO2e)

800,000
3,000

600,000

2,000

400,000

1,000
200,000

0 0
2011
2007

2017
2005

2015
2002

2012
2006

2016
2003

2004

2013

2014
2008

2009

2018

2019
2010

Annual number of registered projects Annual volume of credit issuances

134 Historical trends do not include mechanisms where chronological data on crediting activities are not available. These mechanisms are those under the
Chinese pilot ETS’s (Beijing, Fujian and Guangdong), Tokyo ETS and Saitama ETS. The volume of credits involved are small and their exclusion does not
impact the overall trends shown.
 Figure 3.4 / Annual volume of issuances by crediting mechanism for 2015–2019

250,000
Number of projects

200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0
2017
2015

2016

2018

2019
0
2017
2015

2016

2018

CDM China GHG Voluntary Emission Reduction Program 2019

JI Republic of Korea Offset Credit Mechanism
VCS British Columbia Offset Program
J-Credit Scheme
California Compliance Offset Program
Fujian Forestry Offset Crediting Mechanism
GS
Guangdong
Australia ERF
Québec Offset Crediting Mechanism
CAR Beijing Forestry Offset Mechanism
Alberta Emission Offset System RGGI
ACR JCM
Figure 3.5 / Issuance volumes in ktonCO2e by sector and type of mechanism for 2015–2019

Forestry

Renewable energy

Waste

Fuel switch

Industrial gases

Fugitive emissions

Energy efficiency

Agriculture

Other land use

Manufacturing

CCS/CCU

Transport

0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000

(kton CO2e)

International Independent Regional, national, subnational

Figure 3.6 / Status of regional, national and subnational crediting mechanisms

British Columbia Alberta Emission Québec Offset Beijing Forestry Saitama crediting
Offset Program Offset System Crediting Mechanism Offset Mechanism mechanism,
Saitama forest
absorption
certification system

Tokyo offset
mechanism

Fujian Forestry Offset

Crediting Mechanism

Guangdong Pu Hui Offset

Crediting Mechanism
Washington State Nova Scotia
crediting mechanism crediting mechanism

RGGI CO2 Offset

Mechanism

Canada GHG Offset System

Switzerland CO2
Attestations Crediting Kazakhstan crediting Republic of Korea Offset
Mechanism mechanism Credit Mechanism

J-Credit Scheme,
JCM
California Compliance
Offset Program

Mexico crediting
mechanism
China GHG Voluntary Emission
Reduction Program

Australia ERF

South Africa
crediting mechanism

Implemented
Under development

Note: The large circles represent cooperation initiatives on crediting between subnational jurisdictions. The small circles represent crediting mechanisms in cities.
JCM = Joint Crediting Mechanism. RGGI = Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
Implemented crediting mechanisms have the required legislative mandate as well as the supporting procedures, emission reduction protocols and registry systems
in place to allow for cediting to take place. Crediting mechanisms are considered to be under development if they have legislature in place allowing for the future
implementation of carbon crediting system but has currently not issued any credits either due to missing components such as registries and protocols. The authors
recognize that numerous other independent crediting mechanisms exist that generate credits sold on the voluntary carbon market.
Crediting mechanisms implemented: National: China GHG Voluntary Emission Reduction Program, J-Credit Scheme, Republic of Korea Offset Credit Mechanism,
Switzerland CO2 Attestations Crediting Mechanism. Subnational: Fujian Forestry Offset Crediting Mechanism, Guangdong Pu Hui Offset Crediting Mechanism, Québec
Offset Crediting Mechanism, Saitama crediting mechanism, Saitama forest absorption certification system, Tokyo offset mechanism. Crediting mechanisms under
development: National: Canada GHG Offset System, Kazakhstan crediting mechanism, Mexico crediting mechanism, South Africa crediting mechanism. Subnational: Nova
Scotia crediting mechanism, Washington State crediting mechanism.
 Figure 4.1 / Status of net zero CO2
emissions targets by country241

Adopted in Achieved
legislation
Den

tan
mar

Bhu
k

Fr e
an am
ce rin
Su

New
Chile
Zealand

Fij
d en i
Swe
King ited

Spa
dom
Un

in

Proposed in
legislation

241 110 countries which, as of April 1, 2020, are developing plans to achieve net zero CO2 emissions are not shown in this figure.
 Figure 5.1 / Objectives for implementing an internal carbon price305

Change internal behavior 50.1% 350 comp

anie
s
Drive energy efficiency 58.4% 4 08

Drive low-carbon investment 61.1% 427

Identify and seize low-carbon opportunities 42.3% 296

Navigate GHG regulations 42.1% 294

Stakeholder expectations 29.5% 20 6

Stress test investments 25.2% 176

Supplier engagement 8.7% 61

Other 9.6% 67

305 CDP, CDP Disclosure 2019, https://www.cdp.net/en/climate/carbon-pricing/carbon-pricing-connect