Dissertation Abstract

Pro-poor agricultural carbon market projects (carbon projects) seek to minimize agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while also reducing poverty. However, little evidence exists on the extent to which projects fulfill their poverty reduction objective. Questions persist about the extent to which projects enable smallholder participation and deliver benefits, the role of developers in bridging the interests of investors and farmers, and the impact of these projects on marginalized groups such as the rural poor and women. These questions fuel a debate, which if left unsettled will severely limit the potential of carbon projects to make a measurable impact on global climate change and poverty alleviation.
This research employed a case study approach to understand the extent to which pro-poor carbon projects met their poverty alleviation objectives. The research is divided into three studies. First, I examined how mismatches between carbon buyers and carbon sellers (farmers) in terms of timing of payments, payment levels, and knowledge of the carbon market affected outcomes for poor farmers and evaluated the strategies developers used to increase benefits to farmers. Second, I used ecosystem services (PES) and rural development frameworks to measure the extent to which the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project (KACP) achieved smallholder participation and livelihood benefits. Third, I examined the equity implications of the KACP, focusing on equity in access, decision-making, and outcomes between men and women. .
The results of the three analyses suggest project developers play a critical role in ensuring that carbon market projects succeed in fulfilling their GHG mitigation and poverty alleviation objectives. Project developers were successful in enabling participation and delivering benefits by providing upfront monetary assistance and technical training for farmers. In addition, they delivered livelihood benefits that were outside the scope of the carbon project. However, carbon projects have a top-down design and are driven by rules that focus on measuring carbon sequestration instead of livelihood benefits, which limits the extent to which they can achieve pro-poor outcomes. For successful carbon projects to become the norm and not the exception, projects must involve and engage smallholders effectively, deliver benefits equitably, and ensure that women and smallholders become key stakeholders, main beneficiaries, and instruments of change in the communities.